... the Goldmund, the Kelch Reference II, the Garrard 501 etc. All this tables had something I liked very much and it was a lot of fun and pleasure testing them in my own chain. I sold all. Don't get me wrong, these are good tables.... No, they aren't. And I know why. But when you didn't discover it, well, then roll the dice again ... |
When I am now investing in a new TT I am more carefully checking the pros and cons beforehand. In the past I owned some tables I got interested in quickly, like the Goldmund, the Kelch Reference II, the Garrard 501 etc. All this tables had something I liked very much and it was a lot of fun and pleasure testing them in my own chain. I sold all. Don't get me wrong, these are good tables but did not fullfill all of my requirements. You need selling otherwise you run out of space and missing the chance of testing new contenders. This week I said goodbuy to my Naka, it will find a fine home in NY. Now what is next? Yes and then you mount the Kuzma Airline on the Goldmund and voila ! |
Thanks a lot Halcro and Audpulse. I was not really away but rather busy, also establishing a small blog ( www.Audio16.com ) regarding walking on some paths in audio I wanted to follow on together with my friend in Paris. I will never forget the fantastic exchanges with you and the other analogue afficiniados on this site. On the other hand I could not develop my Systems Page on Audiogon anymore. I had discussions with the technical people over three months. I see not so many has changed, Raul is still the captain of MM, all Germans in analogue belong to one group of... and we are still a very sensitive group regarding novelties. Maybe the rules on Audiogon have changed a bit, I don't know who is in charge running the 'let it go' or 'delete'? Hopefully tolerance will return. When I am now investing in a new TT I am more carefully checking the pros and cons beforehand. In the past I owned some tables I got interested in quickly, like the Goldmund, the Kelch Reference II, the Garrard 501 etc. All this tables had something I liked very much and it was a lot of fun and pleasure testing them in my own chain. I sold all. Don't get me wrong, these are good tables but did not fullfill all of my requirements. You need selling otherwise you run out of space and missing the chance of testing new contenders. This week I said goodbuy to my Naka, it will find a fine home in NY. Now what is next? Honestly saying no TT of the ones mentioned in this thread draws my real exitement. I am not driven by price only! And maybe some TTs, like the Onedof deserves to stay as one unit at least. I think it is crazy calling for 150.000 bucks for such a design. And we are crazy somehow being pushed into this direction nearly only because of the price tag. I was wondering why Mike Fremer did a test of the Onedof. The Continuums offer much more technology and musicality than most people think. They need to be installed properly, they never were on shows. From my point of view the company missed to bring a smaller version in the 20.000 Dollar region. This is were some people can and will buy, me too. I exchanged many ideas with Halcro on this company topic as he was engaged for a while. Small progress is progress, too. Who is interested may have a look at my blog which also offers some insight into vintage designs, very rare ones - by my friend. and maybe there will be another big table - some day... Only Fun |
In MF's original review of the Onedof, in which he compared it one on one to the Caliburn, I was rather taken aback by some of the "features" of the Onedof. Apparently the whole turntable is based on a novel idea for a platter bearing, and that part of the tt works well. But some of the other aspects of the turntable, e.g., the platter design and build, were not so impressive as the bearing, IMO. It's got the LOOKS of a very expensive turntable, but I did not get the feeling that the maker has been studying turntable design for a long time or that he had other novel ideas besides the one that gave rise to the bearing. In summary, why is the Onedof in this "top 3" at all? Perhaps only because of its audacious asking price. Among tt's of similar conception (separate "pods"), is the Onedof any better than a TOTL Simon Yorke or a Da Vinci or a Transrotor or you name it? |
If one was seriously considering the NVS, Onedof and Caliburn, it seems that the NVS is the best choice simply because I think there is only one Onedof in existence and I read somewhere that the Caliburn is close to going out of production. May just be an internet rumor, and I'm not helping by passing it along, but in terms of production tables, the NVS seems the most viable. I understand that the Technics MK3 is competitive, but that is also very difficult to acquire. Are there any NVS dealers on the East Coast? |
In the other side it is " weird " that every time that appears a thread about NVS TT ( like the one that was deleted. ) the same persons post almost the same trying to diminish the NVS TT. This thread is no exception and obviously as some of us already know exist a specific " agenda " from this group. Yes I'm refering to the German group. Some Agoners already suffered first hand the direct actions coming from a member of that group where between other things are especialist to clone today audio products speaking as his own design: the same cloning speakers that electronics too. After some time we now see them again in Agon, now that " the water return to calm " and that maybe they think: " every thing was forgotten ". Take care all of you. R. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " Thus the Caliburn will win all shoot-outs in his system. " +++++ well you put in the right short words and tha's exactly what I want to express through my posts. The problems he detected with the Onedof and NVS are problems with both TTs but he can't imagine/figure in any way that the real " problems " maybe came from the Caliburn that's not so " perfect " as he thinks. I'm in agreegment with you and with Halcro regarding that almost no one could have the opportunity to have those three TTs in the same system to make an evalutaion but to agree on this fact does not means I have to believe on the " perfect " MF. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Halcro, No one is infallible. Even Fremer. Do you accept as gospel everything he prints? I enjoy his writing and do appreciate his contribution to analog and audio. His reviews are better than most and I like the fact that he compares gear with his reference gear. He is not afraid to write what he thinks either. This does not mean I have to agree with everything he writes. I did not see where anyone disagreed with his conclusions regarding the comparison between those three tables. Not that it matters but I have heard the NVS several times and the Onedof once. It is impossible to make any real comparisons as they were not in the same system. I would like to hear the Continuum. I find it counter productive to put too much stock in one mans opinion. I have been burned before as most of you have I'm sure. Everybody has different tastes and preferences. |
I agree with Halcro's basic sentiments, BUT what I would like to see Fremer do is to use a garden variety but generally well recognized tt as a "control" in his listening experiments. Then perhaps the vast majority of us who cannot and never will hear any of the 3 megabuck tt's in his own system can really appreciate what might be gained by doing so. Or, if he is capable of truly objective opinions, we would find out that one or another of the most expensive turntables in the world is really not up to snuff. I suspect there is a pretender or two among them, but we will never know about it, because S'phile and the audio press in general "protects" them. I once exchanged a few direct emails with Fremer. He is really a nice guy, but he could not see that his owning the Caliburn must make him at least subconsciously biased in its favor. Or, to take the Raul line of argument, he has found in the Caliburn at device that colors the sound in a way that he prefers. Thus the Caliburn will win all shoot-outs in his system. This is perfectly all right on a personal level but does not benefit those who hang on his every word. |
To add my own 2 cents' worth, I'm running a direct rim drive with air bearing linear tracking arm, on a wall shelf. Yes, when I tap the plinth effects can be heard thru the stylus, but overall sound quality is way beyond my previous belt drive/pivoted arm which had much more substantial isolation. What I can say is that speed stability over the course of an lp side is audibly more correct than belt, augmented by lack of arm related tracking errors. "Hearing" accurate unvarying speed is like the music being 'faster' ie more dynamic, and 'slower' ie more relaxed, ALL AT THE SAME TIME! |
Halcro, you are so right! On the other hand Syntax has added a list of hypes I would agree on with the exception of the Continuum. Thanks to MF we are able to share our own experiences with the tables and gear he reviewed. If we do not agree with his findings it may be because of the gear we are prefering, e.g. in the case of the Boulder Phono 2008 many audiophiles prefer tube based phono stages. But the 2008 is a wonderful instrument as is the Continuum as well. Be honest, which writer compares units on his rich experience background and is balancing pros and contras? Of course MF like to pose, why not? There are not many lighthouses left at audio magazines. Fun Only |
Who "bangs" on their TT or any part of their system while listening to music? I own this TT and use the Wave Kinetics base and I can tell you it does an incredible job of isolating the TT from the rest of the environment. I didn't realize that a finger tapping owner needed to be part of the isolation process. The base made a very noticeable improvement in the bass region. Tightened and solidified the bass presentation. |
So how have we reached this point? One of the most respected professional analogue reviewers writing in arguably the pre-eminent audio journal of the day..........compares the Caliburn to the NVS to the Onedorf....all of which were heard in his own system and listening room with identical components including arms and cartridges. Possibly no-one else on earth has done this identical comparison......yet here we have a rabble.......all of whom have never heard the three tables in question and probably never have heard even one of them in their own systems and listening rooms......voicing their doubts on the veracity of Fremer's views? Goes hand in hand I suppose.... with their ability to know the sound of an unheard system in an unknown room.....from a passing knowledge of some of the components? And for those who wish to 'bang' against their turntables whilst listening to music?......please resume normal transmission. |
The Kuzma 4 point is interesting. I have not heard one yet. There seems to be contradictory statements about it's bass performance. The two reviews I've seen both say the bass is it's strong suit. But I seem to remember a couple of posters on this forum say the bass was soft. Maybe they will chime in. As with any piece of gear it is best to hear it for yourself. |
I just reread the review. Fremer does like the turntable and I would love to see one and hear it in person. But I wish these reviews were more critical describing both the strengths and weaknesses of a design. There is no mention of speed adjustability and no discussion about the record clamp and if it sounds better with or without. The record/platter interface is critical. What happens to that energy? Stable/accurate speed and energy(vibration) transfer are the real issues for a turntable. Correct speed is either maintained or it is not. Vibration is either drained, damped (absorbed) or fed back into the system, amplified and heard as distortion. What does Fremer mean by "dry"? And why does he think it sounds that way? I agree with Raul when he writes that a turntable and arm are "slaves" to the cartridge. They should not contribute any sound themselves to the playback and they should simply allow the cartridge to "be what it wants to be" (to paraphrase Louis Kahn talking about bricks). |
Tapping on a section of a turntable that is above the isolation built into the TT and/or platform does not tell you how it isolates from floor born vibrations. Of course precise speed and stability of speed are a good thing. Why would you want to add to the imperfections inherent in vinyl. Less error the better. I completely agree with Dover regarding the VPI Classic. I had a Classic 1 and the motor and belt are the weakest link and far from SOTA. No one is perfect but some of Fremmer's statements just make no sense to me. |
From the manufacturer's comments on the Stereophile review... "The platform has a natural frequency of 3.5Hz. The platform was designed to attenuate low frequency events like footfall near the platform, low frequency music getting passed back through the structure, etc. At this, it attenuates roughly 40dB at 20Hz and gets better with rising frequency. Significantly, the platform has very low initial friction and will attenuate even very small disturbances. The turntable itself is designed to be stiff in order to maximize the pitch clarity the system produces. However, tapping the top of the platform will, as Michael discovered, transmit into the arm because it bypasses the suspension system. Tapping is not relevant to any actual use condition." Perhaps I enjoy my turntable differently from others, but I've found that tapping my turntable doesn't enhance the musical experience. BTW, I don't own an NVS and have no dog in this fight. |
I was very surprised that tapping on the NVS's custom Aigenga got it. Congrats. Yes, this is a sign of inferior construction. When you know why this happens, then you know why there are good turntables out there and bad ones. No matter for what price. And the next is the Start of that unit, sometimes it works, sometimes not. Now we are in the year 2012, the 'super engineering' from that unit was maybe 2010-2011 but honestly, I think, there was not much of it. Mainly in finish but time will tell us what will go on with it. Well, but for some it is a wonder and they list it among the best turntables today, no Panic, Linn LP12 is among those, too :-). In a way depressing for everyone who tries to create something serious. My 25 year old Seiki has an adjustable motor, works like a Swiss watch and when the Timeline is on my unit I can hammer a nail into the wall where the red point hits it. Btw. and i can 'toc' it wherever I want (I can jump in front of it), even beside the Diamond in the groove and my Phonostage is open for the small output of a Lyra Olympos SL and there is silence... I also agree with Dover in his findings. |
I was very surprised that tapping on the NVS's custom base plate produced notable sounds in the speakers. And this is on top of Fremer's TOTL shelf unit.. To me it indicates a potential vibration problem - surprising given the specialty of the manufacturer. I have no such problem on my $1000 TT and shelf. Come to think about it, if you cut the three (rather lovely) legs off this table and stood the center motor housing on brass points it would quite resemble my JVC TT101. Just saying. |
Actus, I often have similar thoughts. Another one, besides the issue of off-center spindle holes, is that many of us acquire the bulk of our LPs in used condition for a couple of bucks, with no knowledge whatever of how they were cared for by the previous owner. Thus one has no way of knowing whether "all" the music remains available for retrieval by one's megabuck phono cartridge and associated components. Then too, there are a myriad of issues relating to how an LP was cut in the first place, by whom and with how much care. However, I think Raul's point is that while we have no control over LP imperfections, we do in theory have control over turntable speed (by choosing a turntable that does its major job of providing a constant speed at all times, i.e., in spite of any effect of stylus drag). Why not eliminate as many variables as we CAN eliminate? Then at least we can be sure that when we are playing well made LPs, the time line will be conserved as the musician interpreted it. I imagine that MF would choose to withdraw his statement, if he could now edit his remarks. That one was too stupid to defend. I've never heard a Caliburn, much less seen one in the flesh, so I can have no opinion of it or of MF's fascination with it. Just from what I have read, I would take the NVS over the Onedof and the Caliburn, and not just because of the lower price. Yet, there are elements of the NVS drive system that I would like to know more about before I would invest in it. I am quite happy with what I have, in any case. |
Well--Raul brought this up from Fremer's review--how about the fact that most records are punched off center? In a way it's almost too funny - you have a piece of equipment costing as much as a high-end sports car only to use it to play records that make equally absurdly expensive tonearm engage in a slalom while trying to extract information from the grooves. Wouldn't that be more important to focus on than an absolutely perfect speed? Or, at least, does this render the obsession with perfect speed somewhat misplaced? |
I think someone did test the NVS with a Timeline. This was mentioned possibly in the previous now banished NVS thread. Perhaps the person who performed this comparison will enlighten us. As to the Onedof, why would one assume it has perfect speed stability a priori? It is made by man; ergo it will have some flaws. What? Did you think it would be flawless in performance, just because it costs $150,000? (Kidding but not kidding.) |
Raul, How do you "know" that the Ondof and the NVS have perfect speed stability and accuracy? I'm not aware of any testing to prove this. Also, does anyone know if their speeds are adjustable? After having a turntable with no speed adjustment and now one with it, this is, IMO, a necessity for all upper level turntables. The Technics SP10 MK3 has it as well as the Walker, The Dobbins Beat, the Trans Fi, etc. |
I have no issue with Fremer stating a turntable sounds dry - it is only an opinion and voiced in the context of his system and room. Where I do have an issue is his statements that the VPI Classic is the most speed stable belt drive The Classic 3 is the fastest, most coherent-sounding VPI turntable I've ever heard. Its measured accuracy and consistency of speed were about as good as a belt-drive turntable can achieveThe Classic may be a great TT but the power supply consists of 1 capacitor between the mains and the motor - any deviation on mains frequency alters the speed. The US grid is split into 4 quadrants and the supply agreements in place with the power providers have delivery standards etc, but there are NO standards in the agreements on frequency stability. The mains frequency will vary with load fluctuations on the grid. I have seen figures of 60hz with an accuracy of plus or minus 5%. As far as I'm concerned the above statements made by Fremer in the Classic review are pure bunkum, and hence I have lost faith in his ability to assess turntables properly. |
IMHO MF Caliburn early unit or not has no single excuse about speed accuracy/stability for those 140K+ dollars!!!!! and he writed what for me has no common sense coming from a " pro " reviewer: " that due to of-centered LP spindle hole the accuracy on speed is not so important ( something like this. )..." How any one but MF could speaks in that way? I forgot, in the constant Caliburn defense he writed on the Onedof review a sentence about the unique Onedof TT bearing: """" A few years ago,MD ( then with Continuum Audio labs, showed me a prototype for a similar bearing designed for Continuum.... ". I don't think that trying to diminish the main Onedof design characteristic is a way to make honest not biased reviews. The Caliburn not needs that kind of " help ", the Caliburn has its own merits with and with out MF " help ". R. |
Dear friends: +++++ " Framer gives the nod to his Caliburn but a close call. " +++++ Reading carefuly the Onedof and NVS reviews IMHO today MF knows for sure that both TTs outperform his Caliburn. He wants that we believe that both TTs have some " trouble " to even the Caliburn that for him is a " perfect " TT!!. Why not to think or see the other way around: that the Onedof and NVS TTs have lower distortion/coloration that he seen as a " trouble " in both when he likes the higher Caliburn distortions becaquse that better dynamic/alive in the Caliburn could be distortions/colorations that are not well damped in the Caliburn design. I don't heard the NVS yet but I don't think for what the owners posted here that the NVS has any kind of dryness as MF wants that we see the NVS quality performance level ( with the Onedof the MF objections seems to me has the same " defense " attitude for the Caliburn. ). Even that the Onedof showed a better speed accuracy/stability than his Caliburn he write a fast excuse about telling: " that his unit is an early one and that he knows that in today units changes were made about ". Onedof and NVS are more accurate than the Caliburn ( at least on spedd. ). Why MF can't think that that critical fact is a problem with the Caliburn performance against " perfect " TTs as the Onedof and NVS? After all those years MF is still writing for rooky/newbie audio readers, his mistake. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Peter, one thing I've found re speed stability/accuracy in belt drive versus DD/idler/rim, is that in belt drive it can fluctuate over the course of a few seconds due to stylus drag/groove modulation, whereas with many of the non belt drives I've auditioned, and esp. my direct rim drive, there appear to be no/minimal fluctuations over the course of quite a few minutes, but some speed drift day to day, perhaps due to enviromental factors which can be eliminated by adjustment of speed at the start of a listening session. Still can't find a link to the NVS review. |
Raul, I see your point. One "truth" is the 25th row center at the Boston Symphony Orchestra. If that is one's reference, we have still quite a way to go with our music reproduction systems. Regarding the NVS turntable: Has anyone tested its speed accuracy with a Timeline? Can one adjust the speed if it is slightly off? It seems that at a minimum, Fremer could do this for his readers. Assuming it is truly a state of the art DD table, it would have to have perfect speed and that would be a huge marketing advantage over other drive types, I would think. But I don't see this stated in reviews or in advertising. This is one objective measurement of turntable performance. |
Dear Peter: Electronic design has several mathematic modeling computarized tools for circuit design and layout circuit design. We used those tools as a tool for our design and to help avoid errors/mistakes on the circuit/layout design but all those tools does not predict how the design will sound but could help to predict how it works at electrical level under different circumstances and how well works the different circuit stages stand alone and as aprt of the whole design. Yes, it is a useful tool to start with an audio item electronic design but as I said it is only to start. The whole electronic design is more complex because it is not only dependent on the designer skills/knowledge but dependent on passive and active parts where even that two similar parts that measure exactly the same performs different and this fact makes " things " a little complex and time consuming. No we don't designed at " blind " we use several tools and made it several tests of almost any kind. Some famous electronic item designers as J.Curl choosed a very wise/clever road to design: he meet/asociated with other persons to design and build audio electronic items. He did it with that CTC Blowtorch phonolinepreamp where he was the circuit designer, C.Thompson the circuit layouts and B.Crump the test and parts selection. Today he did it the same with his new electronic design audio items: Constellation Audio amplifier, line stage and phono stage. He joined other three experts to the whole design, now he only needs a good marketing manager. Try to be surrounded with other designer experts is an alternative to design in better way when we have no " references/tools " about. TT/tonearm design is a mechanical design a " mechanical circuit " against an electronic circuit. I'm not a TT designer or an expert about but from my ignorance level I don't know or I'm unaware of the existence of similar tools as with the circuit electronic design, at least I don't know it. This TT " mechanical circuit " for me is almost unknow and I think that with out those modeling tools is almost impossible to know if the final product meets the design targets in an abjective manner. In electronic circuits we have several kind of references on how any part perform, each circuit part has the whole manufacturer specs with tolerances and limits for the part stay stable under any playback electrical/temperature scenario to performs at its best. In the " mechanical circuit " we have almost nothing about we have almost no references to evaluate the operation and performance design. Examples: which target can we choose on a TT design for S/N ratio or wow&fluter or platter weight or whci build or blend material we must use?, 100db is the right spec for S/N, why not 60db 04 75db? 0.001% on W/F is the right " figure " or is enough 0.28%? which kind of vibrational energy ( coming from every where but mainly inside the TT. ) and at which " output levels " must be avoided in the TT design because the cartridge take it as part of the recorded grooves and will be amplified? how and at what level have we to stop/disappear the self TT vibrational energy feedback, how ? why aluminum or acrilyc or steel or brass or which kind of blend TT build materials are the ones that fulfil the targets at each circuit/stage in the whole TT mechanical circuit? how to handle and stop the vibrational energy generated between the stylus/LP and TT platter and its feedback? 3.0kg. on the TT platter is right or we need 200kgs and why. We really need that crazy weight, in favor of what? is it true that more mass/weight produce or could produce higher vibrational energy to deal with? I think I have more questions than answers. Another problem with mechanical circuits as the TT and tonearm is that are not stand alone circuits but that are " slaves " of the cartridge and it is this intimate relationship the real " trouble " to success. I don't know what you expected from what I could answer to you post. There are several subjects around there almost endless to post about and as I said I'M not an expert on TT but I know some TT experts/designers are reading this thread and could be healthy to everyone that they decide to put some " light " on the whole TT subject posting here. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, In your discourse you could not resist taking a shot at tube amplification vs solid state. There is no doubt that SS gear can easily be built to surpass most tube gear in terms of the commonly made measurements (THD, IMD, etc). However, in contradistinction to that finding we also have the testimony of legions of careful listeners who nevertheless prefer tubes (certain tube amplifiers, that is). Further, there are data to suggest that the commonly collected data used to characterize our amplifiers are wholly inadequate to predict what happens when they are asked to reproduce a true music signal. These two facts may indicate that tubes are doing SOMETHING better than SS. (Talking in generalities here; I concede that there may be some SS amplifiers that can "play" in the league with the best tube amplifiers and are better suited than tube amplifiers to drive some of the awful behemoth multi-driver, low efficiency, low impedance speakers that are on the market precisely because those humongous SS amplifiers are available to the high-end consumer.) My point is, if you are truly working on a higher plane and searching for a better world of music reproduction, it would behoove you to open your mind a bit more. In other words, you may be guilty of the very "head in the sand" thinking that you impute to others. |
Raul, you are a designer of phonolinestage and a tonearm. During the development process, don't you reject ideas that don't work and try to create the best device you are capable of making? Or are you just one more designer going down a blind path? I don't understand from your last post how you propose to improve the process. I did experience real progress when I installed air isolation devices under my turntable and amplifiers. I have the impression that you don't find that valid or even possible. What is AHEE? |
Dear Peterayer: +++++ " sharing these test data for various owners tables if we really want to "know" the truth. " +++++ IMHO the main subject is that almost no one " wants " to know the " true ", audio fun could disappear. The " true " could tell us how wrong we are or how right we are or in between. Right now we are really happy enjoying what we have and we almost don't care if it is wrong or not: " I like it and that's what matters ", this is a common sentence for almost all of us when we are questioned when we are on " serious " doubts about. We always take the " easy " road: " I like it that way..... ". Audio manufacturers know that so they neither care about the " true ". Why to take the risk to know that some of their designs are way wrong and have no answers to fix it?????? So for almost every one it is more " healthy and with more fun " walk on the audio road at BLIND, almost. As with TTs the situation/scenario is almost the same with tonearms or cartridges or electronics or speakers or...or.... Something that makes to know the " true " a little complex with TT is that's a mechanical device where the " results " of a design is not 100% predictable as can be with lectronic designs, at least I don't know and never read of a TT mathematic model that can predict a 100% result or very near to it. Do you know any single person ( manufacturer, reviewer, audiophile, retailer, any. ) that could tell you what to measure and which kind of measures and where to measure and how to measure and how have we to blended those measures to predict TT results through different designs through different build material TT designs through different TT drive designs through different kind of TT bearing designs through a different price targets? Problem is that no one cares about, till today no one took the " bull by its horns " and developed that mathematic TT model that could serve ( at least ) as a preliminar reference for TT designs or for electronic/speaker/cartridge/or whatever audio item designs. Pro.Reviewers does not cares neither: it is a high risk for them that all of us could confirm how wrong they are or not at all. So in absolutely " SILENCE " there is an agreegment already made it inside the AHEE where all we belongs and is sad and pity ( for say the least ) and almost a shame for all of us that are inside the AHEE to stay doing almost nothing about other than closing our ears/mind to suggestions for changes down there in favor of MUSIC in favor to IMPROVE TRUE IMPROVEMENTS on what we are experienced today. Gentlemans, fun does not disappear only will change with those changes. I don't know for all of you but for me thinking to have NEW AUDIO FUN EXPERIENCES ( true new audio experiences. ) is just EXCITING!!!!!!! As I said: shame of the AHEE. I have no doubt that we deserve what we have because all of us help to build it and still do it every day. I know for sure that all in the AHEE are a lot better ARCHITECTS that what we showed till today so: WHY NOT JUST LET IT GO! WHY NOT ADVANCE! WHY TO STAY STICKY WITH THE SAME FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS!. HAVE WE THE RIGHT TO ADVANCE OR WE ALREADY LOSTED? A good Agon friend of mine whom lived in the past for 15+ years with tube electronics changed to SS ones and today after several years with he is seriously thinking to come back to tubes again, to the " magic " he said!?!?!?!? and that's how we are and what we deserve. This is not a critic to this person that I respect but only an example how we help builded the today AHEE. Could be wise for this person to think in a similar technology of what he own ( SS ) that could be an improvement?, because I know there are other way better designs out there that what he owns. Anyway, only as an example and nothing personal. Don't you think is time to make true and real changes for the better? why more of the same if it is not wroking at all?. We are unsatisfied with what we have and almost every day we are changing what we have: TT, cartridges, cables, speakers, electronics, tonearms and the like. We changed for something new hopping for a real improvement hopping to advance but after a few days/weeks or months we take in count that we advanced almost nothing and then we start again ( endless again. ) a new audio item hunting looking for that advance that almost never comes. IMHO we have to make our selfs things happen!. We have to be the active actors/protagonist of this movie picture name it AHEE and not mere unsatisfied passive spectators waiting for????????? Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
The 'must have option' for "Game-Changer" Turntables |
