Peter,
I tested the R 80 with the Timeline. The table is about 60 cm away from the wall where the red point is keeping in a stable position. My motor management is controlled by the Dusch Multiconverter DU 937 which allows a felt brake compensation and vari-speed. |
Thuchan,
Here is no place to promote my turntable, but I will say that it is not a Lenco. That really isn't a fair comparison because it is an entirely different idler, like the EMT 927 is an entirely different idler. If you are coming to RMAF, we can continue down this path. I would like that.
Peterayer,
In reference to the Sutherland Timeline as a tool for judging turntables, I would be remiss if I didn't remind everyone that an uneven speed is far more critical than one that is a bit off. Recently, a group of us checked a stellar sounding vintage turntable that did not spin exactly to the Timeline standard. In fact, it appeared to be significantly faster. After checking it again with Fieckert's software, it was determined that it was spinning at 33.45 RPM, but it was perfectly consistent. The slight increase in speed is most likely due to a replacement belt that is probably the wrong thickness. Compare that turntable with a turntable that spins 33.34 almost all the time, but with noticeable moments of change that cannot be attributed to a parts replacement. Which would you pick? My point is that the tool should be used carefully, so as to not draw a wrong conclusion. |
Mosin, That is a good point about accurate speed versus constant speed. And by doing this check on a stellar vintage turntable, you seem to support Raul's point that analysis should be both objective and subjective. But how do you know from using the Timeline that it is accurate speed or constant speed? Say the turntable speeds up to 33.45 and then slows down to 33.44 at precisely the same point during each revolution. If this is not detected by the strobe sequence of the Timeline, then it would appear to be a slightly fast rotation, but constant speed, while in fact it is not constant because it speeds up and slows down within the period of the strobe. One can imagine all kinds of variations to this.
The point I was trying to make is that to some degree, it is important to measure these things with tools. It does not tell the whole story, but it helps. I think this is what Raul means by analysis being both objective and subjective. I think this is the point that he is also trying to make, but for some reason he continues to be criticized. |
I suspect you are talking about speed accuracy relative to the desired rpms, but what about the drag of the stylus in the vinyl groove? |
Dear Dkarmeli: ++++ " some arbitrary measurements " +++++
well, that's your point of view but even today those kind of measurements are the industry standard and have a specific meaning.
Dkarmely, IMHO a " holly grail " product any must shine in every way/stage. In the other side: how any non-accurate audio item could be a " holly grail "? makes sense to you?.
Any " holly grail " product firat than all must measures as no other similar product and from here all the other stages in the product design that conform the final quality performance that could gives it with justice that name.
From a subjective stage I can tell you that each one of us have several " holly grails " products at each system link.
Dkarmely again: the overall subject goes deeper and beyond the sole subjective limits.
Seems to me that some of us go in " panic " when any one mention: accuracy, distortions, neutrality, measurements or digital when all these is part of each single stage in the day by day world life!!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
It is possible to distinguish "constancy" (rotation at a constant angular velocity) from "accuracy" (rotation at precisely 33.33 rpm) with a Timeline, altho I am no devotee of the Timeline. But it would be a pain in the ass to do so. One simply needs to make markings at regular intervals on the wall being used to observe the laser beam. If the "dot" moves at precisely regular distances in one direction or the other, with each rotation of the platter, then the speed of the table is constant but not accurate (see above for definitions). IMO, constancy is much more important than precise accuracy, as long as one does not perceive pitch distortion. Tbg, Ideally this would be done with stylus down, playing an LP, to account for stylus drag.
I am just not anal enough to do it, I guess. |
Lewm, as I understand it, idler-wheel turntables is withstanding the slow ups of dynamic passages. So the EMT has that going for it. But the mass of the platter also helps greatly thanks to inertia. Also the friction of the idler-wheel is important as is its diameter constancy and the trueness of the surface on which the idler-wheel drives.
I once had a Final Audio tt which was solid copper! The platter weighed 285 pounds which is good, of course, but it was string driven with a knot on the string.
I think all of this means that what we hear is what is chiefly important. |
I forgot, I don'ttrying to put down that EMT TT. I'm only sharing a different perspective and that's all.
R. |
Mosin,
Understand. Hope I can make it this year to Denver again. Would be my third visit. In case I let you know. Looking forward to our exchange. Thanks for the offer sharing information this way.
Eckart |
Tbg, Without a doubt, by external inspection the EMT 927 is built like a tank in all respects and to a quality level that far exceeds the visuals of a Garrard or Lenco. The question is only whether all that machinery also results in "the best" sound. And that can be debated forever, as seen here. |
Lewm said; " The question is only whether all that machinery also results in "the best" sound. And that can be debated forever, as seen here."
Certainly one of the best, and I very much doubt that anyone who's owned/spent time with one or an experienced person with turntables and audio would be debating this way. The 927 is one the very few machines in the industry that has been accepted by many in the know as the Reference, of course until the audiophile thread here. |
Rauliruegas, I am all for measurements if they measure something of value. As I said in my post above, I am more concern with the stylus drag on the speed of the turntable than whether it is at an accurate 33 1/3 rpm. Often if the torque of the motor is too high it will withstand such drag but oscillate for a while afterwards, which isn't good for the music. I would love to see valid measures of this. |
On measurements. I have pointed out to Raul 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. It sounded like crap compared to any modern amplifier and compared to any quality tube amplifier, ever. So, THD needs to be thrown out as a yardstick. Even manufacturers of solid state amplifiers, which can easily show superiority to tube amps by this meaningless parameter, downplay it these days. Yes, there is probably some high percentage of THD that would be audible, but it would be difficult to establish the cut-off. Harmonics are not all that disturbing to the brain.
Now, as to wow and flutter. I have no idea how much is too much. |
Dkarmeli, I don't own a Timeline, but I do use the KAB strobe to check the speed of my SME 30/12. It is spot on. If it changes due to temperature or belt wear, I can adjust the speed. I have read, and I have been told, that the Timeline is far more accurate than the KAB. I don't know this to be a fact. Of course, the further the wall is away from the Timeline, the more precise the measurement can be.
I did test my old turntable with the KAB and it was fine. It was also fine with the Timeline if the dot reflected on a surface within about 10" of the spindle. But once I set it up so the red dot fell on the wall about 3' away, I could clearly see that the turntable was a bit fast. It had no speed adjustability, so I could not slow it down to precisely 33.333.
Regarding strobes in general, I have seen variations. My KAB disk is slightly warped so it appears as though the speed varies at each rotation at the warp, but the numbers don't drift otherwise, so I think I'm fine. It certainly sounds fine to my ears.
I did try a hand held tachometer once and it was highly inaccurate and I got different readings by 2-5% each time I tested. The KAB is better.
I'm just curious if anyone has tested the EMT 927 with a Timeline. I'm sure it passes the KAB strobe just fine. |
Perfect case of "I like it" and digital vs analog for Raul, my thoughts put eloquently. |
Oops, the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiDDJ-I47rA |
Peter,
did you read my post on the Timeline measurement? |
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 |
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. |
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 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. |
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. |
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. |
|
Yes. Promoting your own products effectively, often includes playing second fiddle. I would arrange the order differently.
|
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. |
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. |
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 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, 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, |
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. |
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 |
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. |
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 . |
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? |
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! |
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. |
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, |
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 |
|
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. |
Thuchan, you started a very interesting thread. |
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! |
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. |
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? |
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). |
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. |
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? |
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 think I found your blog, audio 16, love the Vox! |
