Dear Dkarmeli,
in the beginning of my digital adventure I was very sceptical about all the gimmicks you are describing: upsampling, wordclocking etc. As the dCS stuff is a real versatile system I still doubt that all users do know about the different possibilities these units offer. i don't like to know how many are using 50 Ohm bnc cables, maybe in different lengths (!) or do not use the right connectors (yes there is an impact on reflection). digital cables are a complete different issue, there are basic technical parameters to be followed but it's also more than 1/0, you may know this.
to keep it short, yes upsampling, using the right filters for the matching music makes a huge difference on sound. If you know how to handle you will be surprised about the terrific sound it can result in.
not using a master clock is giving away a good portion of the good sound.
you really need to test it. proper clocking is one of the most important issues in digital reproduction. Reaching more accuracy by a rubidium clock - in combination with the stability the master clock is providing - is worth a try. Of course you need locking the additional clock in the system properly, also using the correct menue options of your master clock.
If you wouldn't be so far away I could demonstrate all the different effects. On the other hand you may be right when asking why is it so complex finding a satisfying way for reproducing digital sources like CD and SACD. In our beloved analog field it is maybe the same. Yes, you could end up with a 1000 dollar unit, coming with tonearm, cart, phono pre and everything you need to get sound from the grooves. Would you happily settle on this? I believe No!
As you are working on your FR (cabelling - I did lots of recabellings, some I kept, so on the SME 3012 Ia or on the Ortofons) this shows the favour for improvement and testing. I don't have the vacuum lips you got on your blue micro, I had them on the SX II. I tested different turntable plates and finally settled with an Audio Technica AT6278. Also discovered when fixing the additional platter very hard to the Micro platter it improves the sound. Using the original RY-5500 motor I built in a very good new 240 V power supply to reach more precision and stability. Despite the results were very promising in the end I went for the VPI steering system providing me with even more possibilities.
When configurating the three units (motor, table, fly-wheel) I also realized it is the best to isolate all units on separate artifical coral platforms thus avoiding vibration interactions. The vacuum pump got a separate damping box (btw nice and clever design :-) and is completely separated from the rack - this is the worst vibration source.
Yes, the Neumann DST-62 is a very special cart. I am not sure if a Neumann arm (one has to find such a rare thing!) may carry all the positive characteristics of the cart. The EMT 997 and the SME 3012 Ia will do. I use the SME on my EMT...
What about your system besides the blue micro and the 927? Among your many tonearm/cart/phono configurations which one is your absolute favourite?
|
Dear Tuchan,
All I remember from my high school German is the survival vocabulary, somehow you never forget it.
I found what I liked a few years back and haven't found anything better and no its not Meitner. I'm not sure what you mean about boosting the dcs equipment to optimum. The recorded CD is all it can be, up sampling, adding dither, reclocking is just adding artifacts you can't improve or change that CD. Your DAC is what it is, the chip, the algorithm and the output stage isn't going to change. Master clock in a playback system such as this is pointless and a marketing gimmick. You're only adding salt & pepper. The purpose of master clock is synching multiple digital sources to multiple output channels. Here you have a single source, your transport going into the DAC, reclocking is only a game, what I'm surprised is that you find two clocks better than one, so you're reclocking the reclocked signal that doesn't need to sync with anything and liking it; that should already tell you that something is way off somewhere else.
I use the FR66s primarily with heavy Ikeda cartridges like the 9 supremo & muss. My main problem with this arm is its silver wiring, I might get it rewired one of these days and see if I like it any better. I'm spoilt by the SME-3012, love how it sounds and the ease of setup is better than any other arm that I ever tried. I can align and set up any cartridge within 10 minutes on the SME and fine tune it with music in less than half hour. The FR is a lot more time consuming for me to get it right and even then I find the 3012 sonically superior with most of the cartridges that I use.
SX-8000, how do you tune it. I understand the difference you get going from thread/inertia drive to motor drive, did you do anything else to yours?
I see that you have a Neumann cartridge, you lucked out they sound incredible, now you need to find their tonearm. |
Dear Kmccarty,
that sounds pretty reasonable. Are you happy with the sound or do you think there could be some improvement? Which table and arm are you using? |
Dkarmeli,
I am sure you are succesfully building up your room. This is a wonderful stage in the life of an audio guy. Maybe it will never end - with the right instruments you already have, so many similarities that I really cannot understand what happened to you on the digital side. But that's another story. The Scarlatti Transport is not really Scheisse, maybe you are pointing to the former Verdi Philipps drives. I see you know already the most important words in this language. When my wife learned German some 30 years ago she started with all these expressions as she got told its a kind of survival kit.
I agree the dCS stack is not easy boosting up to its optimum. I think many users out there don't know all about the capabilities of these machines. its quite a versatile system and it needs to be configured carefully, especially when you are using a masterclock (which you should!), also adding dither and on top maybe a rubidium clock in combination. The result then has nothing to do with a one box digital machine also not with the Meitners.
You feel very much having fallen onto the analog planet. btw nothing else could satisfy me as an analog afficionado.
I see you are preparing your FR-66s developing its virtues and blossoming to full scale. This is the job to do on the blue micro which also can be tuned ! I think I will write something about the speakers in the next time and let you know. Currently I am dealing with Neumann devices.
I hope its not your last post here as you have shown profound knowledge in the thread's topic and I enjoyed it very much exchanging ideas and critical remarks with you and others.
|
Dear Thuchan, I am using both the Benz LPS and Benz LP into the Boulder 2008. I have settled at 500 ohms, but I haven't experimented much around this value. |
Thuchan,
Thanks for the detailed description of the room, very impressive! Power is a bitch in the cities. Many fine systems become unlistenable during the summer and now days since the last major brown out a few years ago in NY, the sound has never quite returned to what it used to be. Even a dedicated power system similar to yours doesn't improve things much in Manhattan, and to make matters worse we're 120v here. We moved to Utah about 1.5 years ago and fortunately we do have good power here. I haven't built the room yet but installed a separate mains transformer for the system and each component is on a separate line with its own dedicated breaker. Just started putting the systems back together so a long way to go.
I'm not at all anti-digital it's the medium of our times and I spend a good amount of time listing to it. Even if its not something that I love I have spent a lot of time and money figuring things out, there;s no turning back from it. I'm not a dCS or Burmeister fan. I don't mind dCS's top DACs but I find their up-sampling games and external clock gimmicky and degrading. The 2nd tier DACs aren't anything to get excited about imo. Further I find their transport is sheiße,
Back to the thread and your justified comment; “Regarding the Fidelity Research 66s I think we have two groups of Audiophiles. Those who know this arm pretty well, who are owning the matching table and wo did build it up perfectly and some others – they might outnumber the first group”
Just so that we're clear;
http://www.pbase.com/ddk/image/152083798
Not set up yet but I have spent many ours listening to the combination.
This is probably my last post here, but I would love to hear more on your speakers and exchange experiences.
rgds, david karmeli |
Dkarmeli,
i respect very much your position on analogue vs. digital - and yes here we may have different experiences, especially when it comes to a dCS chain with a perfect clocking system and the DAC set to master function. Regarding the system's capabilities you're writing that every component has an impact on each other. Very true! In a complex system like mine it is a challenge you have to deal with.
I assume you know very well that the power supply for a dedicated listening room needs to be tackled very carefully. I therefore not only built up a complete separate current system for my listening room (with a remote fuse block) but also divided my system's power supplies by three diffferent big lines. The digital system runs to one, the amplification to another one and all other front end units like anlogue to the third one. These lines run in encapsulated pipe tunnels inside of the concrete ceiling from the fuse block in another room to the specific three outlet positions for the system. all distributions within one line will never interact with those of the other lines.
Regarding room tuning I avoided using any fixed installations other than a high record board on the one long side and a high CD board on the other long side. the rear wall is covered by a high book shelf. This way reflections are managed and deleted in a very natural way. You see no glass surfaces in this room other than a skylight area at the rear side, and a small window at the right long side's front which can be covered by an automatic curtain.
Controlling the first reflections in front of the system a special suspended wooden ceiling with a complex internal structure not allowing building up running waves is mounted. Also frequency related dispensers are used at the front ceiling. These are used on the bases of measurements taken and carefully placed. That's all. I think not so different to your overall philosophy.
Regarding the clocking system of the dCS chain comprising the dCS clock as well as the Rubidium clock this is not tweaking how you call it. I look at it as the technicians at dCS do as well as an optimizing approach to a nearly jitter free transportation of the digital signal. Of course I agree it may sound from my description like I am doing a big experiment on certain units of this chain which obviously is the case somehow. btw. i do this in analogue chains with its many variables as well. i am just curious finding out the interaction of parts of a system trying isolating the weak points/parts.
From your understanding of the digital medium I get the impression you will not enter this arena at all which is in line with your philosophy. Nothing wrong about this. From my point of view it is worth engaging with CDs and SACDs. |
Dear Kmccarty,
yes,I did it exactely this way, soldered the resistors and tested, took them out and changed resistors. Following more or less the formula I ended up for instance for the Goldfinger v2 in the Cobra arm (coupled by XLR) with a 850 ohm Vishay resistor. This seems to be a perfect match for the Boulder.
If you have many personality cards you can easily start a try out approach, going around the formula prescriptions.
in this case soldering is really the way to go. Which carts are you running? Maybe I am able to give some hints from my tests. Good luck! |
Thuchan said, "I understand why most analogue friends don't believe in the quality of digital reproduction. Nevertheless if you ever get deep into it the dCS stack it is an overwhelming alternative, or not?"
You're opening a can of worms with me Thuchan but since you asked for it here it is;
The problem isn't as much the quality of digital playback but rather the digital's qualities, see the link in above thread. You can massage it as much as want to but you're not going to change its nature. From day 1 the CD was designed with inherent limitations by the engineers and copyright paranoid media companies like Sony. The production chain is highly flawed and loose so the best that you accomplish is more tweaking and that wont change anything meaningful. CD is a truncated facsimile a much larger file. Upsample it, reclock it digital lens it, green bands, demagnetize, shark oil, snake oil or any other band-aid you want to attach it, it still remains the down sampled, i.e. reduced quality commercial product and DIGITAL. This blog article is tweaker's porn. What are you hearing? The clock? The up sampling? The power cord? the digital cables? Was the CD a direct transfer from analog master or was it an oversampled 24 bit remaster which is another tweak? and the list goes on. So your analysis of this clock is really analysis of whole lot of different variables that have nothing to do with the source. I'm sure that you realize that once you introduce your first "AUDIOPHILE" tweak to your system you have altered the parameters. Audiophile power cords all have overt characteristics and coloration, after you put one in, your system takes on a new character and that character gets stronger with everything additional cord from this point on every modification or tweak that you make is predicated on the power cord's overwhelming character and not your components. You're basically chasing your tail at this point on. Every cable and every tweak introduces another character that you end up offsetting with further tweaks.Its a never ending money pit.
Maybe this is where you and I differ in our final approach. For me, specially at these price points, if the equipment doesn't perform as advertised I'd get rid of it and replace it with one that works right. My philosophy is understanding the basics and nature of the subject to get the fundamentals right and only then one might make some adjustments to taste, like glass platter vs felt. In your shoes if I had spent years building a listening space and then have an expensive custom tailored speaker system installed, I'd never compromise it with resonators and traps. I'd spend that resource figuring out what went fundamentally wrong and fix that before applying patches that will ultimately lead to more aids. This is how I see the digital clock, another patch but not a cure. |
Thuchan said, "I understand why most analogue friends don't believe in the quality of digital reproduction. Nevertheless if you ever get deep into it the dCS stack it is an overwhelming alternative, or not?"
You're opening a can of worms with me Thuchan but since you asked for it here it is;
The problem isn't as much the quality of digital playback but rather the digital's qualities, see the link in above thread. You can massage it as much as want to but you're not going to change its nature. From day 1 the CD was designed with inherent limitations by the engineers and copyright paranoid media companies like Sony. The production chain is highly flawed and loose so the best that you accomplish is more tweaking and that wont change anything meaningful. CD is a truncated facsimile a much larger file. Upsample it, reclock it digital lens it, green bands, demagnetize, shark oil, snake oil or any other band-aid you want to attach it, it still remains the down sampled, i.e. reduced quality commercial product and DIGITAL. This blog article is tweaker's porn. What are you hearing? The clock? The up sampling? The power cord? the digital cables? Was the CD a direct transfer from analog master or was it an oversampled 24 bit remaster which is another tweak? and the list goes on. So your analysis of this clock is really analysis of whole lot of different variables that have nothing to do with the source. I'm sure that you realize that once you introduce your first "AUDIOPHILE" tweak to your system you have altered the parameters. Audiophile power cords all have overt characteristics and coloration, after you put one in, your system takes on a new character and that character gets stronger with everything additional cord from this point on every modification or tweak that you make is predicated on the power cord's overwhelming character and not your components. You're basically chasing your tail at this point on. Every cable and every tweak introduces another character that you end up offsetting with further tweaks.Its a never ending money pit.
Maybe this is where you and I differ in our final approach. For me, specially at these price points, if the equipment doesn't perform as advertised I'd get rid of it and replace it with one that works right. My philosophy is understanding the basics and nature of the subject to get the fundamentals right and only then one might make some adjustments to taste, like glass platter vs felt. In your shoes if I had spent years building a listening space and then have an expensive custom tailored speaker system installed, I'd never compromise it with resonators and traps. I'd spend that resource figuring out what went fundamentally wrong and fix that before applying patches that will ultimately lead to more aids. This is how I see the digital clock, another patch but not a cure. |
Dkarmeli,
only the BV's image appears similar to Kevins Vox Olympian. Ingredients, size, X-over and sub integration are completely different. But on this later more. I see you have a pretty good understanding of a good listening room. I also got the experience when travelling around the US (but not only here) that the room itself seems of minor importance to the good audiophile guys.
Nevertheless it is always an arangement you are doing with your family and your life style. So I do understand.
I sold my Micro Seiki SX 8000 II last month. It will arrive very soon on your continent. I loved this machine, was the first owner and it is a supreme table some even try to copy today. I did some tunings on my blue micro which brings it somehow in the same musicality.
Regarding the Fidelity Research 66s I think we have two groups of Audiophiles. Those who know this arm pretty well, who are owning the matching table and wo did build it up perfectly and some others - they might outnumber the first group. Anyway thanks for your good hints and options you are describing. I will take them into consideration. |
Dear Thuchan. Regarding the loading of the personality cards on your Boulder 2008, did you literally solder in each set of resistors, break them in, and repeat that process until you found the correct loading? I tried installing "clip in" connectors, so that I could quickly change resistors. Unfortunately, those connectors degraded the sound so severely that I gave up on that idea. Anyway, my question is this: did you discover any easy way to try out different resistor values? Thanks. |
Thuchan,
Not so humble! Bavarian Voice? They have an uncanny resemblance to Kevin Scott's Vox Olympians. The back story should be as interesting as the speakers themselves.
Good for you for designing your room. In my experience the listening space is a key component of the chain. A bad room will kill any sound system and a good one will elevate even a mediocre system to new heights. Here in the US, most people's listening rooms I visit are average at best and I have say lucky if they don't totally suck. Over the years I designed and built a number of different rooms for clients as well as a couple for myself. Of course starting from scratch with money no object budget creating a great listening space is relatively straight forward if you know what you're doing but setting up a decent listening space in an existing multifunction space within a budget is a very different challenge. I gained a lot of experience from my projects in manhattan, I totally understand your 2 year journey to build the room. I hope that you got most of it right by now.
The Toho arms look magnificent, a rare gem!
Glass or felt platter, like many of the choices we make has also to do with the rest of the chain and what direction we take tweaking that system. I can't judge your over all system sound from looking at the blog pictures but its enough for me to answer you differently now that I can see your MS setup. Initially I thought that you had the SX-8000 mk2 which was sonically more advanced than the original SX-8000. In this case I will say that you'll hear significant improvements with the AirForce One. You also introduced another variable going from inertia driven thread drive to motor driven platter, my guess is that you went this way to compensate for the FR-66. You gain some body and midrange energy at the expense of airiness and lower bass extension/definition. You might rethink the vpi setup if you replaced the FR with a 3012. Your blog is very informative to understand what you're comparing the R80 to. I thought that we're discussing subtleties and nuances here while in your system with those gorgeous speakers the R80 must be kicking Continuum and the FR-66'd MS butt big time! |
Dkarmeli,
just an excursion, when you read the article about the Atomic clock you may get an insight when digital really does sound great, the Dac in master mode and the word clockings steered by the Rubidium clock. What a difference! but these are details of a different world which is also very fascinating.
I understand why most analogue friends don't believe in the quality of digital reproduction. Nevertheless if you ever get deep into it the dCS stack it is an overwhelming alternative, or not? |
Thanks Dkarmeli! Maybe one day I will write a bit more about the Vox and its development. |
Dear Lewm,
the Boulder 2008 phonostage comes with personality cards for the cartridge set up. The cards serve two functions - switches to set the electronics for the type of cartridge used at the input, and places to solder the custom load termination resistor and capacitor. The cards provide also a Demag function.
I am using Vishay resistors. The perfect and ideal matching cartridge loading - as I have found out - is quite a busy job. I am pretty sure that most users only go for the shipped cards. This is what I also learned from the reviews :-)
I also pretty much enjoy having installed two additional equalization cards carrying two more equalization curves, so now providing RIAA, EMI and Columbia.
btw Mike Fremer was right with his assessment on this unit despite some users prefer tubed phono stages. |
Dear Thuchan, Can you elaborate on the necessity to "align" the Boulder 2008? I have never heard that term applied to a phono stage. Thanks. |
Thuchan, I think I found your blog, audio 16, love the Vox! |
Dkarmeli,
I got my R 80 with the glass platter and went then for the felt platter because a friend of mine exactely described what you realized.
my system is a very humble one: ARC 40 preamp and EMT JPA66 preamp (also phono), Wavac HE 833 II amps, Bavarian Voice speakers (5 way horn system plus Subs, TAD drivers and SupraVox fieldcoil). different tables, phono pres (Zanden, Boulder, Kondo, EMT), SUTs (also WE618) and all what you need to put into arms ...
on digital dCS, Accuphase, Wadia and Esoteric.
When I returned from Tokyo I realised a dream I always had, building a listening room. Maybe this project became more important for me than single audio units - the planning phase took me on a two years trip and I learned a lot about room acoustics. |
Thuchan, I have both platters too but I ended up using the original felt platter. The glass platter seems more detailed, I don't think that it really is though but its also somewhat harder sounding than the felt platter. Initially I thought that the felt platter was wooly compared to the glass one but then I realized that its musically more homogenous so I went back to it. Of course the choice is a matter of the reproduction chain and personal preference.
Do you mind if I ask what you have for the rest of your system? |
Peterayer, please bear with me with some background before I get to answering your questions, I feel that its an important part of this conversation.
Nothing is perfect and judging any piece of equipment is always in the context of a system that has many variables including the stands, quality of mains and listening space. I know that I haven't addressed all the issues in my music chain so everything in that context. What I have done is move around a lot and tried enough different components in my own systems or those of my clients and friends to know what my music chain is or isn't doing right. My own two main systems have remained more or less the same for the past 10+ years so I'm very familiar with it. So always keep this in mind when people comment on equipment. its never in isolation. But there are certain characteristics that one can pick up if they know what to look for.
I have my standard reference arm/cartridge combination and almost the tables I refer to always have this arm/cartridge combination set up as standard. Unless provided by manufacturer, they all sit on massive vibraplane type lab tables but I don't use air with any of them.
The reference tables mentioned in my threads all perform at exceptionally high levels and don't sonically suffer in any obvious way, I really can't find any weaknesses in them. They don't have what a lot of people call vinyl sound. There's no thickness or ripeness like a Linn nor is it thin hyper detail sound ala Clearaudio, they're very neutral and balanced. Many listeners have expectation of overt character when it comes to lps and are initially thrown off by the neutrality of these players and even more surprising is the actual lp that has no "vinyl sound" like we always thought was there growing up with mass market systems. It takes them some time to get beyond that expectation. This is apart from the analogue vs digital conversation.
To your questions on the EMT 927, I don't hear any shortcomings that I can't attribute to other parts of my system. They're there with every source that I listen to including digital. I love the ergonomics of this table, its just joy to set up and use. For me 927's most unique sonic quality is what I mentioned above. Its the solidity with density and the way it brings forward the space and ambience of the recording. I'm not a reviewer and apologize for not having the vocabulary to express this in audiophile terminology. its not about bass, mids, highs, etc., or anything in isolation, its the total presentation that is very natural and real. That's the best compliment I can give any product. The American Sound has many of the same qualities and perhaps slightly more detailed sound.
Obviously I've only listened to a fraction of what's out there under controlled conditions. Mostly its been the mega buck unobtaniums that I have experience with. On the sane price level I like TW acoustics tables, very little to complain about, they sound excellent and considering the ridiculousness of high end audio these days are relatively good value . Given the availability of 301/401 Garrards and companies like Loricraft or Artisan Fidelity who refurbish and supply very good plinths, they can be considered current production and I highly recommend them. Again, aside from the excellent sound quality they offer value in today's market. I can recommend Loricraft's 501 as an excellent modern day idler, haven't heard Mosin's beauty but its on my radar and to try list. At the stupidly expensive end, I like the Vinci and of course the AirForce One, the upcoming, less expensive AirForce Two should be interesting too. Disclaimer, as a dealer I have vested interest in the AirForce tables. |
Peter, agree! In the beginning of the thread Tbg stated "its now all said in the thread" .How wrong one can be :-)
Dkarmeli, I have both platters, currently using the glass platter which is not made of pure glass, coming with a special rubber layer on top.
I agree completely with you on the difference in sound of the 927 and the MS 8000, couldn`t describe it better.
Regarding the Continuum I have a different opinion than most show session results would lead to. My Criterion running with a Cobra arm and the Goldfinger v2 is a serious contender to the previous mentioned ones. Especially when matched with a perfect aligned Boulder 2008 phono stage (not easy to configurate this machine precisely). |
Dkarmeli, since Thuchan asked why other tables cannot beat the EMT 927 could you list other modern turntables that you like? I have heard Basis Ovation, TW acoustics Blacknight, Brinkmann Balance, SME 30, SME 30/12 and Walker. I bought the SME 30/12.
You also mentioned that the EMT 927 is superior in certain respects. What would you describe its strengths to be and its weaknesses? |
I love my Lenco, but the common explanation for its excellence, and that of other idlers, i.e., "torque" cannot be the whole story. First, because altho the induction motors on the Garrard 301 and Lenco L75 may look massive, they are in fact very inefficient such that the torque is not as great as one might think, albeit it is greater than that of the motor of a typical weak motor/heavy platter belt drive. Further in the case of the Lenco, the torque delivered to the platter must be limited ultimately by the coefficient of friction between the skinny idler wheel and the underside of the platter. You could put a 500 hp motor in a Lenco, and that idler wheel would leave skid marks on the platter but could still only deliver as much torque to it as friction would allow. The tire on the idler has to be skinny to minimize "scrubbing"; it wants to roll in a straight line whilst propelling the platter in a circular path. Yet, that's one great turntable. |
Thuchan, do you use the Mr. Dusch's glass or the original felt platter with your R80?
A couple of people commented that you haven't received any objective responses to your thread. I'm not sure what you were expecting besides another 927 user's experience. I've been at this game for over 30 years and learnt directly from the many bad and some good choices that I made throughout the years. At this point in time my ears and years of hands on experience is my most trusted objective and subjective tool. It doesn't matter what Raul or anyone else thinks important, in this case no measurements trump experience and knowledge.
I can't offer you the why the 927 sounds better in certain respects than basically any esoteric table ever made. What I hear unique in my 927 is the sense of space and ambience which flows and solidity of every note. The other great tables share the expansive tonal qualities of the 927 and like the MS 8000 might even have slightly more detailed bottom end but they lack 927's sonic majesty, which adds to the realism that you get with the 927. The only other tables I've heard with that capability is the American Sound and to some degree I think that AirForce One has that quality now, but I will confirm once I get mine next month.
As far as modern day manufacturers are concerned most don't have the engineering heritage or resources of EMT, Thorens, Micro Seiki, Garrard and whoever designed and produced the Goldmund Reference. Personally I find a 301 or 401 in a properly designed base more palatable and musically satisfying than 90% of the modern mega dollar tables I've heard. Specially some of the ones that have been highly praised and recommended by a certain famous magazine personality! |
Thuchan, you started a very interesting thread. |
The mechanical engineering principles and knowledge to build turntables have been around for more than a century. The difference is these guys in the 50s and 60s designed turntables with slide rules and look up tables instead of CAE/CAD processes. The moon rockets were designed with slide rules and look up tables too. Engineering capability and knowledge isn't the issue. Economics is the issue. These designers had economic motivation in the 50s and 60s to build these robust behemoth turntables. They had a market for them- maybe not big but many times bigger than the market for an ultimate turntable today. Tooling costs, even for the special motors was amortized over some volume production and/or the components carried over to other models as well to defray costs. Casting tooling and mold tools today would be cost prohibitive even to build a high dollar turntable. So machined parts become the only option which still will be extremly costly. So the knowledge may exist; but not the will- just like the moon rockets. |
|
Timeltel
the Exclusive P3 is not a good table, it is a great table :-)
PL70 is only loosely related. P3 more controlled, refined and transparent.
cheers |
Regards, Thuchan: Wether intended for professional or home use is secondary to the question, "Has it stood the test of time?"
Denon's answer to the 930 was the DP-100, engineered for broadcast but available with plinth for the audiophile. Other notable Denons that found their way into the studio were the DN-308 and console equipped DN-307. The idler driven Denon RCP53 was introduced in 1962. The broadcast friendly Thorens 124, Garrard 301 and the later 401 remain attractive to some listeners. RCA provided a "Type 70" series. Weighing in at a heavyweight 280 lb. the idler driven two arm equipped Type 73-B from 1954 (with upgraded tonearms) would look at home in a modern rig.
Later "professional" grade gear included the Denon DP-80 & 100, and the Technics R & B (recording & broadcast) series. The SP-10(s), 15, 20, 25, the EPA tonearms and the model 1500 RTR among them.
Bet then, everyone already knows this?
IIRC, the Thorens 124 dates to 1954, the Denon MC-103 to 1956. One might regret relegating most of these units to the dumpster due to generation or a "professional" or "broadcast" label?
BTW: In 1977, Car & Driver Magazine named the '57 Chevrolet car of the year. 36 yrs. later it still passes the test of time.
Peace, |
Peterayer, that is a very good question. Nobody so far has given Thuchan the answer I think to his question unless what has been written so far is the kind of response that Thuchan was expecting.
Thuchan only you can tell us if your question to this thread has been satisfactorily answered.
Raul seems to love specs. but if you look as his mm cartridge thread, some of the cartridges he loves so much do not hold a candle to present day cartridges. Now that speaks volume in my opinion. |
Peter,
having had some funny deja vus on audio gear I got to hear in the past from one side "never go for an idler, they rumble and cannot precisely follow the required speed".
I made my own experiences and did not rely on these statements or war stories derived from measurement reports, reviews etc. but not from one's own listening sessions.
Nevertheless I like to proove my positive impression (if this is the case) and the put hypotheses what really makes this good sound? Therefore I started this thread - and yeah I got some very good answers, objective facts and subjective statements. I also like a good discussion and arguments against my position or impression of a unit's capabilities. This is crucial for a good thread.
I would never be satisfied building up a collection of 2nd or 3rd hand opinions without looking for a chance testing or at least listening to a unit.
The more I get sceptical of the virtues of a table e.g. the more I need to check it in reality. I always wonder why audio friends keep their comfortable seat behind the fire place...
I am convinced that our brain has many ‘’filters’’ in order to, first, protect us, and then to adapt the incoming information for a more easy processing. Maybe this is one reason why "we don't conquer the world on reality checks" . what a pitty! |
Thuchan your thread started asking the question implying an objective answer but I think the thread is now answering the question based on subjective opinions. Do you feel as though the question in your original post has been answered? |
Following the review of the J Nantais lenco, Salvatore on high end audio was thinking that the superiority of the lenco rebuild by J.N was the superior torque that idler drive can give .If there is enough mass in the plinth the defect of idler drive are cancelled.
Perhaps one of the explanations of the success of the EMT 927.
Yesterday i was listening Mario Del Monaco in mono on a decca Lxt on a high end system at a friend's home and i was amazed by the life of the voice,something which is not easily found on today disc . |
Some people have had all those exotic cars and ended up riding a bicycle. Not because they have to but because they want to, some ride the bicycle and just look at those cars in the garage driving to work in modern car meeting latest technologies.
Some people here have the highest level audio gear on the planet setup by the best technicians in dedicated rooms with the finest records you can imagine....yet they still enjoy and appreciate facets from older and so called outdated gear and enjoy talking about that also.
Giving ones opinions from specifications is somewhat like reading about a speech, happens to be that some people actually get to listen to the speech that is deemed better.
Some contributors here have heard the best turntables and the "outdated" ones and this a/b. The readers of this thread will decide themselves who have that experience. They may inevitably pass the contribution of those that base their input on preconceived ideas and speculation. |
Hello Raul, I can assure you that playing records with a myth adds 90 % of the pleasure of listening to music !
The EMT 927 is a myth...nothing wrong with that ! And I do play my records with both my 927's ( one mono and one stereo in original console ) and the sound coming out of them is as good as with my high end audiophile turntables, even better because all this is subjective and no other turntable is as convenient to use as the 927 : instant stop, lightning of cartridge, tonearm light indicator on the groove, all is ergonomically studied.
I use the original tube phono equalizers and Ortofon original tonearms , the in-build strobe is as accurate as the Timeline strobe.
It is always a great experience to play with the 927. Like driving an old mythic car !
And for the cartridges I am still amazed by the performance of the old Ortofon type C mono cartridges and the EMT TSD 25 SFL stereo really makes music .
My best regards,
Jean |
Studer C37 and Studer A820 were not designed for audiophiles as the EMT 927 was not too. I guess Timetel the P3 had a professional background as well? Because of this fact were (are!) these machines not audiophile? I do not understand this logic!
Look at the materials used some 50-60 years ago. Do we use pure copper today, I mean not of any recycled resources and are we usually wiring transformators by hand and with an eye on the distances between the wires? Vintage is not good because it is vintage, professional studio machines are not bad because they were not made for us audiophiles. |
Regards, Lewm: If you have a link to the full article I'd be grateful if you'd provide it. The "ranking" has been debated before. Although there were apparently supporting statistics, your assessment of subjective evaluation seems plausible.
A social anthropologist might observe that of the thirteen rated, nine were of either Japanese manufacture, the Thorens or Marantz being qualified as Swiss/GERMAN or US/JAPANESE. :)
(Apologies, Thuchan, for thread-drift).
Peace, |
Dear Timeltel, If you've read that "shoot-out", you should also see that the comparisons were hardly controlled or scientific in any way. Different tonearms and cartridges were used on each tt. Results were largely based on subjective opinion, etc, etc. Notably also, the SP10 Mk3 was not included. For me, the article only showed what was considered TOTL in 1980 (excepting the omission of the Mk3, of course). That said, there is good reason to believe the P3 is indeed a fantastic turntable. Go for it.
Raul, I don't think you can "prove" something sounds good or not good by quoting data of the type you've quoted. For all we know, EMT were unusually honest among manufacturers, such that their specs look worse only because they represent reality more than those of other brands. And I don't think it's fair or accurate to say that "+/-0.15%" means that the error is 0.3%. In fact it equally well means that in come cases the error is 0%, if your glass were half full instead of half empty. |
Regards, Thuchan: "IF you pull the measurement card". This depends on which "deck" one is dealing from.
Would like to find the entire SS review, only able to find pieces here & there.
This one is also interesting:
Stereo Sound #55, summer 1980
Reviews by Fuyuki SEGAWA and Keizo YAMANAKA
TT test by SS is using this special jig for measurement of rumble.
Usually rumble or S/N at turntable is measured as follows (DIN 45539):
1. test record with plain groove (no modulation) and 315Hz modulation groove.
2. play back these grooves with cartridge and compare difference between above outputs after passing prefixed filters
3. and indicate rumble or SN in dB as noise margin.
Above DIN method is internationally accepted and IEC/JIS rumble test are very similar to DIN.
DIN FILTER A (unweighted): more than 35dB is required for minimum quality for equipment
DIN FILTER B (weighted): more than 55db is required for minimum performance of equipment.
Rumble rate measured with DIN B filter is indicated usually in catalogues to show impressive big number of S/N !
But Ladegaard of B&K in 1977 mentioned "At FILTER B the numerical value appears better than FILTER A, but in the territory of SN 65dB it is not something which tells the quality of the turntable. At FILTER A, the numerical SN value looks worse about 20dB, but it is just influenced by the resonance frequency of the cartridge and the arm. Unless the rumble spectrum is analyzed, rumble from the vibration of the motor proper cannot be acertained".
Thus in 1978 Thorens developed new jig for rumble test and applied once on the test of their turntables (1978-1985?).
Depends on when measurements are taken, DIN B procedures enabled Pioneer to elevate S/N from 78dB to 95dB, with what seem minor changes the P3a was launched.
Pursuing research on the Pio. Exclusive, this turns up on The Vintage Knob:
"(So) where does the 78dB > 95dB difference come from ?
I asked him that too because I was exasperated at not being able to explain it based on changes. His answer, translated and redacted, comes out as the following :
"It is 'numbers magic'.
Sometime in the very early 80s, the EIAJ (Electronics Industry Association of Japan) changed their DIN B measurement methodology to, according to the marketers, 'better measure what the ear hears'. They changed something to account for the shape of the human ear.
Left largely unannounced, they 'flattened' the weighted curve, and added another filter, which had the effect of raising S/N ratios by 'about 20dB' depending on the piece of equipment being measured."
I asked him whether they measured anything when tables came in to get repaired. He said that in fact they measure all tables according to that newer "DIN B (EIAJ, A-network) standard because that is the machine they have now.
When I asked how much better the P3a measures vs the P3, he said, "They come out the same : non-statistically-significant sample difference".
The only difference which comes out in testing is a lower speed drift amount : the P3a has a potential speed drift of half the P3 (though when they service the P3, they tune it to P3a control specs).
I then asked whether --- any of the other mega tables which showed such great specs ---, "No, but the whole curve shifted upward for everyone - there was no way to avoid it."
--- the thing to measure to check real rumble differences would be the JIS rumble spec which used continuously from the late 1960s or early 1970s.
In that way you could compare like-for-like across time and manufacturers."
Gotta confess, have never heard an EMT deck, possibly never will, I am giving consideration to the P3. I've an Exclusive PL-70L 11 I occasionally run but (sacrilege) prefer a garage modded JVC 71 for it's ebullient character.
I've no dog in this hunt but do find the conversation fascinating. Thanks for initiating this thread.
Peace, |
Dear friends: 1957 ( that was when the 927 appeared. ) stage/scenario on broadcast/radio stations and listeners with radio receptors:
those radio receptors had a frequency response: 40-50hz to 12-14khz and the customers do not cares about almost anything else than hear music.
The equipment in the radio stations transmit the audio signal in a range of 30-40hz to 12-15khz and like the listeners were not to critical to the noise level or distortion level or the like on their equipment, their standards were way different to the today standards.
Of course that almost no one ( radio stations or listeners. ) use silver wires or listening through system as the ones today.
The high-end in those times was incipient/starting with very low knowledge around. Against today all of them had a high level of ignorance because they started to learn. We all already learned several audio subjects that those people not even imagined they must take in count.
That TT was made it expressely for radio stations unders specific asking radio stations needs: fast start/stop, high torque, 24/7/365 continuos operation and the like. The TT was not designed for audiophiles, even when started no one TT was in home audio system and almost no one in those times even knew of its existence.
Many years after the appearence of the 927 ( and this is a speculation. ) some one with a low overall subject knowledge and charged of " ingenuity " ( for say the least ) saw the TT and was exited because of the TT weight and big motor and motor size and in that very first moment of no-sense " happiness " he declared it as the holly grail and started to spread with his friends and in other mediums that " there is the TT holly grail " and the people with the same knowledge level that him started to buy it: WHY? no ne cares because the TT already had the holly grail status and " I have to have it ", period.
That is almost the same that happen with the clubs of classic cars: Camaro, Linclon Capri, BMW or Porsche.
I have friends in those clubs and I attended to some of their meetings and in all of those clubs those cars are with out doubt their holly grail.
They talk of the hard task to find out their cars, that the refurbished were made with original parts, that they in self made the 90% of the refurbished, that the today cars are not builded at the same level that those " old " cars, that the unit they own was touched by Jean Harlow or Elvis Presley or Steve Mcqueen and obviously becauise of that the rpice is 40% higher.
They surrounded the cars with a cloud of romantic/mystic and sophisticated hystories that only they believe.
Almost all of what they talk about is out of the day by day the today reality.
As that TT unfortunatelly we are surrounded of audio " myths ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Raul,
you may use many different ways to show that you cannot like a turntable you have never listened to, either if you pull the measurement card or comparison with digital or whatever. I strongly recommend to you listening to such a table and come back sharing your impressions, not repeating your speculations all the time. |
Yes. Promoting your own products effectively, often includes playing second fiddle. I would arrange the order differently.
|
|
Yes Peter, the R 80 is the preversion of the 927, about 66 units were built so it is said. They all differ a little on small design parts. They usually don't carry a lamp on the left side. The motor management I am using is not the standard 927 one.
Mr. Dusch, a former engineer at EMT developed a separate motor management system for the 927. This I am using. Btw he runs his own business and web site now. |
Dear Tbg: +++++ " if they measure something of value " ++++
normally almost all measurements measure something of value. Measurements normally are not arbitrary but looking " to know something ". Sometimes a measure has no value for us because is not related with what we want to know but even that that measurements has a very specific meaning and value too.
++++ " I would love to see valid measures of this " +++++
me too!!!!, measures that content the drag stylus effect on speed tiny changes and speed recovery at different grooves recorded velocities and at different position trhough the LP recorded " land ".
Now, more that see those valid measures what I would like is that the TT designers take in count those measures.
I can tell you that seems not and easy task to have the overall measures because maybe different stylus shape and tracking cartridge self abilities could modified those measures. I don't know for sure but could be.
I don't know how can affect for that kind of measures changes in the VTF due to LP warps and many other faults that are happening during LP playback.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear friends/Dkarmeli: These are the true facts ( not " illusions. ) measurements/specs in the 1957 designed 927:
speed unnaccuracy: +,- 0.15%, the swing tell us that the speed unaccuracy in reality is: 0.30% ( the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
wow an flutter: +,- 0.05% with a swing of: 0.1% ( again the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
signal to noise ratio: 58db ( again............. ).
as I posted: the 927 was designed for radio stations or recording companies with way different needs that any music lover audiophile has.
Gentlemans you can't compete with a very old cycle in a today Formula 1 race.
The 927 is a " tour du force " designed not for you or me but for RS or recording manufacturers of those very old times.
No one can't change all those facts and I respect that " I like it " but does not means is right and certainly could be that that " I like it " is plain wrong.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Thuchan, Yes I read your post of 8-20-13 about the Timeline. I guess I did not understand that the "R 80" is the EMT 927. And your speed management is the stock system as supplied with the 927. I did not understand that or the model designations fully. Sorry. That answers the speed question. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " many times that if THD had so much "meaning" in relation to lowering audible distortions in our audio system, then amplifier development might have ceased back in the 70s, with the advent of the Phase Linear 700 amplifier. THD was at least down to the 5th decimal place.... " ++++
I agree about and other that that amp design you name it was a very old one with several " faults " ( very old active parts and passive ones too. Deficientes ones. ) against today best SS amp designes there are good reasons why that " meaning " that you said tell almost nothing in reality exist and certainly has a predictable meaning in what we are hearing.
THD and other distortions as IMD or other generated elsewhere the system chain as: electrical impedance non-matched electronics in between or non-matched impedances between speaker and amplifier or between cartridge and tonearm or RIAA eq. deviations or TT unstable speed and several other kind in all cases all those kind of system generated distortions have a real meaning and always affect and degrade the audio signal.
That we can't detected it does not means did not affect the system quality performance level because it does.
Why can we detect easy some kind of generated ditortions as could be a on-matched cartridge/tonearm or TT speed unstabilty? because we all are trained to detect it. We recieve that training through our years of audio experiences, this kind of training was not " on porpose " one, we was not consciente of that training we just learned.
Now, if any one of us receive on-porpose training to detect almost any kind of system link generated distortion/coloration the we could be aware of many " things " that are happening and that we are listening that we can sware came in the LP grooves when in reality are added distortions generated in the system and that did not came in the LP grooves because were not in the recording proccess.
For the last 10-12 years I by my self received ( I'm still learning about. ) on porpose training to detect some kind of distortions that many of you can't do it and not because I'm better than you or because I have " golden ears " ( that I don't have for sure. ) but because I'm trained and I know exactly what to look for in any audio system when some of you do not know what to look for because you do not know how that " what look for " it sounds, you think is part of the LP grooves.
I posted all those in other threads, I have my own training proccess and my own " scientific " evaluation proccess. Each one of you can " invent " yours.
It's a fenomenal experience to be aware with almost 100% precision where are in any system its distortion problems and I don't said that from " out of my mouth " some of you already experienced some of those abilities that I acquired through many training years.
Of course that some of you already had a similar on porpose training to detect and be aware of different kind of distortions and can understand in full what I'm telling here and the ones that does not acquired yet those abilities is obvious that can't understand in deep part of my posts.
I give you one example: I can tell you in a " good " cartridge set up if overhang is on target against what other people could think is VTA/SRA unaccuracies. Both " distortions " are very similar but not excatly the same " sounds ". Btw, I learnede about by " accident " mading mistakes in my cartridges set up and I started to learn and " invented " a trainng/evaluation proccess to detec it easily where you can't do it with out know what to look for.
My, take is that because we can't detect distortions does not means does not exist, ceratinly exist and certainly always degrade the audio signal so lowering any kind of distortions at each system link always will improve our system MUSIC reproduction enjoyment.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Some nice pics of restoration of EMT 927 F by ing. Hans Van Vliet here :
https://www.facebook.com/jphansvanvliet
Have a nice day !
Jean |
