TESTING DIFFERENT DECKS AND ARM COMBOS

@lewm I have no problem with any opinion you may foist 😁

I just think that fixing all parameters save a single component may well be quite futile - ie put an SME v on a Linn and it is not good at all whereas say a cheaper Linn Akito does work. Does that make the Akito superior? To the vast majority of us with a semblance of common sense - no - the SME V is on a completely different level. I am taking a fairly extreme example. One of the most unusual set of items are Nordost cables which when you go from room to room at a show you can hear a distinct signature- whether u are a fan or not is another matter.

All of it occurred to me during my own musings and I am coming to a conclusion of sorts that as far as possible march the deck, arm, cartridge, even phono stage then compare to another set up altogether because otherwise one doesn’t maximise each component in its chosen environment. What reviewers may be saying in many cases is that the best component in a direct comparison is arguably that x component is the most versatile. I’m sure many would detract from this approach. I am curious as to whether or not others are perceiving matters this way - whether by choice or practical reality . 

Change of one variable is ideal from a scientific method perspective, but neigh impossible w respect to the cartridge / tonearm / record interface…..

I think chasing a particular combination is fun and even somewhat of a black art….

Enjoy the journey…… 

@lewm I have no problem with any opinion you may foist 😁

I just think that fixing all parameters save a single component may well be quite futile - ie put an SME v on a Linn and it is not good at all whereas say a cheaper Linn Akito does work. Does that make the Akito superior? To the vast majority of us with a semblance of common sense - no - the SME V is on a completely different level. I am taking a fairly extreme example. One of the most unusual set of items are Nordost cables which when you go from room to room at a show you can hear a distinct signature- whether u are a fan or not is another matter.

All of it occurred to me during my own musings and I am coming to a conclusion of sorts that as far as possible march the deck, arm, cartridge, even phono stage then compare to another set up altogether because otherwise one doesn’t maximise each component in its chosen environment. What reviewers may be saying in many cases is that the best component in a direct comparison is arguably that x component is the most versatile. I’m sure many would detract from this approach. I am curious as to whether or not others are perceiving matters this way - whether by choice or practical reality . 

Before covid, it was and is nearly impossible to directly compare alternates to: this TT with that arm with which cartridge.

OEM TT with OEM arm, then comparing different cartridges is far easier.

Break the rules, alternate arm, opens pandora’s box.

I say Hello Pandora. Find 3 physically compatible choices TT/ARM/CART you really want, and expect them to play very nicely. Then off to alternate cartridges in the future.

Always 'think long' if you remember to. I got lucky, bit by bit fell into place.

If for a publication, and if you are comparing A to B, then you ought to keep everything else constant, like you said. If it’s for yourself, then there are no rules. Because you own all the gear, and you would have a sense of how each piece contributes to the total SQ. So you, better than any third party, would be able to assess the effect of a single component, by moving it from one system to another. Also, you don’t have to put your opinion into words; you can do it all in your head and with your own senses.  I have 5 turntables and two completely separate audio systems. By moving cartridges and tonearms around, I have learned a lot about interactions, how a cartridge can be mediocre in one tonearm in one system and then sound exceptional in another setting.  But I wouldn't foist my findings on anyone else, except as a casual observation.

@lewm its more a discussion as to what is a better form of evaluating a component or system 

Lohanimal, what is your question, actually?

Many cars, you can run 'normal' tires/rims or change to mag rims, low profile tires.

Superior handling with the mag/low profile; but watch out for potholes ...the rims damage easily.

Great Plinth; Great Spinner; Great Arm(s); Dust Cover.

Consider if you want a long arm, will table allow it?

Consider if you want multiple arms, i.e. one fixed MC cartridge; One Removable Headshell for several optional cartridges (yours or listen to a friends). If so, then easy arm height adjustment is desirable.

With help here I went from a fairly common table with one arm, removable headshell, to a superior vintage plinth, superior vintage spinner, and started with 2 arms, then squeezed a 3rd arm on:

one 12.5" fixed MC, (not easy height change, 2 allen screws);

2nd 9" removable headshell, extremely easy arm height, several cartridges mounted in their headshells, overhang/null preset.

3rd 9" fixed Mono (I wish it was removable headshell, but it needs very compact counterweight section in order to fit when dust cover is on, Mission/Jelco 774lc just fits.

It would be rare or impossible to find 3 OEM arms to do what I do. A great arm is a great arm.

I've always been a proponent of using a TT from same manufacturer as their arm i.e. Kuzma. Yes many other arms will work on a Kuzma table but I think the best match would be  kuzma arm. Just my 2 cents worth.