Its good to see humility on this website. All too often, people get pretty aggressive with their beliefs and ideas. There is a lot of collective knowledge with the different contributors that each of us at one time or another has benefited from |
Sorry Nsgarch,
It was only after I sent the post that I saw the date on yours.
Who knew this thread was that old? |
Shame on you Neil, for not predicting Arthur's results two years in advance! ;-) |
Halcro, what I was reading was Arthur's remarks as of 11/27/05 -- two years ago. At which time he'd only heard the Airy 2 for himself. |
I don't know what you're reading Nsgarch....but Arthur spends more time and space on the ZYX than most other cartridges he has ever tested.
It is right after his Class A description of the DV1s in the Recommended Components File.
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Cartridges.html |
the first post of this thread is my test of these three cartridges. |
Who have test this combination? |
Hi Mike,
My local guru (dealer) confirmed along with his "golden ears" customer that the Colibri was the best ever by far and that should apply to all my questions about that cartridge in my system.
Bill |
Dear Dgad: +++++ " are mentioning it even goes as far as the phono preamp itself will have a lot to do with the sound of the cartridge " +++++
When the minuscle signal from a cartridge has to be amplified this responsability is of the phonopreamp. This phonopreamp has to do it with out degradation to that critical cartridge signal, it must to do with accuracy for mimic the RIAA eq. ( inverse ), with out this accurate RIAA you have nothing but a " corrupted signal ". Then the phonopreamp must be amplified the signal with out noise and distortion free. All these subjects are extremly critical and a real challenge and many people does not care about when are even more important than the signal it self. The phonopreamp, in my opinion, is a lot more important link that what the audio people think about.
Dgad, you are right on your statement.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Don't be afraid to go as low as 30 to 35 ohms on the XV-1s ... trust your ears.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
I changed my load to 500 ohms on the Dynavector. Huge difference. Night & day compared to 100 ohms. This is after about 40 hours. It is all over the place. I am guessing going to 1000 ohms will make a difference. The dynamics open up finally as you reduce the load.
Some of the people I correspond with are mentioning it even goes as far as the phono preamp itself will have a lot to do with the sound of the cartridge & the system synergy.
What I am saying is that a review can give some insight to the sound quality of certain audio components but you really need to take into account every little detail. Especially w. analogue. |
Dgad is right. It depends. I have owned the dyna XV-1 for 5 years and had it loaded at 47k for 4.5 year of that. But my system at that time was quite warm and my Pass Xono phono stage sounded better at 47k.
Now it is loaed at 100ohms or 200 ohms depending on the phono stage.
So no right or wrong, just what sounds better to your ears.
I track between 2 and 2.2 grms depending on whether VTA is set for 200gms or 120gms. I have tried tracking at 2.6 gms and it sounded different, but not better. |
I am still breaking the Dynavector in. From my experience with the tracking force too high the treble becomes bright. I find the bass light. I am honestly spoiled since with the Condor the bass is the best I have ever heard from analogue. I am still using 100 ohm load but am thinking about raising it since I have lowered the tracking force. I have heard a few people disagree with the higher tracking force recommendations mentioned here. My experience echos the same. It is finding the balance of tracking force, VTA, & load. It is tricky & takes time & patience. I know some poeple using it at 1000 ohms. I am guessing in the end it is system dependant.
What I want to know is in what order do people setup the cartridge. VTF first, VTA second, loading last??? What load would you start with? |
Two recent reviews of the Dynavector XV-1s -- one in Stereophile, the other in "The Absolute Sound" -- recommended 47 kOhms for the Dynavetor, which is very different from the recommendations above. HP at TAS also recommends using 2.6 g tracking force, which is far above the manufacturer's recommendation. Several people here have pointed out the folly of that tracking force, but I am still curious about the divergent input impedances. |
Dear Dgad: The Condor, like the Colibri, has different music sound presentation over the XV-1, like you already heard it.
Your XV-1 needs at least another 60 hours and your Condor, I think , is near the time that you have to send to Van denHul for the " final touch " and yes if your Condor sits unused for many days then you have to " start " the break in for a few more hours>: maybe ten.
I don't know which could be the issue with your Ikeda tonearm, if you like e-mail me and maybe I can help you about, I yest try the XV-1 with my Ikeda and is a very good couple " fighters " .
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I have been comparing my Condor to the Dynavector XV-1s. All comparisons are being done from long term memory & extensive listening & notes. The setup time involved & tweeking makes it impossible to do a pure A/B test. I honestly need an additional tonearm which I don't have. The Dynavector & Condor both aren't performing at thier best on my Ikeda. The Condor remains the bass champ at this time without any doubt. The Condor also has more detail & snap. It is my live cartridge. This seems to echo Mike Lavignes comments on the comparison of the Dynavector to the Colibri. I would add that I might prefer living with the Dynavector for the added warmth & richness in many situations. All my impressions are early as the Condor is mostly broken in with 200 plus hours, but the XV-1s is about 30 hours & is taking shape. I use the Condor at 500 ohms & XV-1s at 100 ohms. Both were setup on my SME V w. the arm in static balance. The funny thing is that the longer each cartridge sits unused, the more time you need to play it just to break it in again. This applies especially to the Condor. In the end, I completely understand why Fremer uses the Alesis Masterlink for his A/B comparisons. There is really no other way. It it the correct approach? That is for each one of us to decide. |
Ouch! Glad to hear Mehran took care of you, though like the others I'm not in the least surprised. It takes all kinds to make a world, but we could use more of his. |
John, that really sucks! Glad to hear Mehran fixed you right up. I have only dealt with him on one occasion but that was such a great experience I can hardly wait to do so again. |
John - I have had similarr wonderful experience dealing with Mehran. He is truly a wonderful gentleman who goes way beyond just to please the customer. You can't do any better either with him or his products. |
I don't really want to get into all the hard feelings on this thread, but I just had to throw a shout out to my favorite dealer, Mehran. I'd bought a UNIverse from him a couple of months ago, and I LOVED it. I had to go and screw things up though. Long story short, I broke the cantilever on my UNIverse after only two weeks. I was crushed, to put it mildly.
When I contacted Mehran, I thought that he was more dissapointed than me, which I did not think was possible.
Anyway, he fixed me up, for a nominal fee, back with the best cartridge I've ever heard (by far), the ZYX UNIverse S-SB.
Yes, I haven't heard the Lyra Titan, but I've owned a Lyra Helikon for years. I've also experienced a Benz Ruby 2, Koetsu Rosewood Signature, and a Cardas Myrtle Heart, just to name a few. None of these cartridges even comes close to the life and vibrancy of the UNIverse.
It may get better than this, but honestly I don't think that it can. I still get goosebumps when listening.
Bottom line: SORAsound is a fantastic company, and Mehran is the best dealer/sales rep/ supplier that I have EVER met in my 30 years in this hobby.
Thank you SORAsound.
Thank you Pat (Lugnut) for bringing us together.
Thank you Mehran, for being such a great guy.
Best Regards,
John McGrogan |
I think my "posting mentality" has worn out my welcome.In looking back at my threads, my intent was to be "sort of" the opposite of my rather conservative lifestyle.I was trying(unsuccessfully)to be "provocative",NOT downright nasty!!I thought it could be more "heated fun" than the "boiler plate" questions,and answers we see so much of.I was wrong to assume that.I'm not happy with myself, that so many view me this way,but am not going to avoid that obvious fact.To me,it seems that posting in the fashion I did,was sort of like an addction.To drive some controversy!I guess it was only me,who got a rise out of it,and I do understand any,and all sentiments.I'll handle this like it should be dealt with,and not post anymore.Probably best for all. |
>>I really don't see where I was actually rude or abrasive,in these posts,as you claim<<
Read your posts again. It's actually quite clear to everybody or you wouldn't be getting the flack. |
Larry,I'm still a nice guy!Though at your behest,I'll give it a break.
Btw-I really don't see where I was actually rude or abrasive,in these posts,as you claim.Maybe that is perceived by some,who I addressed,but I can't control that.Loyalyies usually tend to fall with those more closely associated with oneanother.
Best to all. |
.
Well, I guess it would have been quite helpful and saved a lot of peopleÂ’s time if I had seen this thread sometime in the last couple of weeks. I have been way too busy lately and have not been able to keep up with this thread.
.
Sirspeedy, I will be addressing you with the my post.
.
I need to clarify a few points for you. Your assumptions and points are not valid because you have your facts wrong.
.
1 - I never told you that the arm had not been touched since the listening session. I did in
fact tell you that Pat and I were shocked that when we check the VTF that it was at 2.30
Grams and that we played with it from down to 1.85 up to 2.35 and found that surprisingly, 2.15 was ideal. I was surprised that a 2.15 setting sounded best (after several trials and retrials) since most people have found that a setting between 1.90 – 2.00 on the ZYX Universe produces their best results.
2 - I also told you that the fluid tweaking that Doug, Paul and I did was back in December
of 2004 and our “get together” was in March of this year. I had to re-remind you of
the dates on another post a few months ago when you were making points incorrectly.
3 - In March the 8 of us started out listening to the Graham (after it was checked) with
a Shelter 901, Koetsu Rosewood Signature Platinum, and a ZYX UNIverse and
compared to a Schroder Reference and a TriPlanar 7. Two of the group did the set
ups with few more looking over their shoulders. I have heard both of them do set ups
on a few occasions and I can tell you that they have always been the best at set ups
in any gathering that I have been fortunate enough to be present.
4 - After the group of left in March, one remaining friend re-mounted the Graham on my table with my ZYX Universe (actually I observed) and watched as it was carefully dialed
for twenty minutes by the best person I know at setting up arms and cartridges.
Since reading your posts here, I checked with my friend and he let me know that there
was no way that he left my arm at 2.30 grams which is where I found it long after
March and nor did he leave the Anti-Skating at the extreme that you discovered when you were visiting. With the 2 hurricanes and all my business travel, I had not been listening to my table for almost 3 months. In only conclude that someone must have
played with the VTF dial and the Anti-Skating (remember, my system is in my office here there is a cleaning crew coming through every night.
.
.
I can tell you that there was 100 % consensus from 8 experienced audiophiles that the Graham did not produce results that were close to what we heard from either the Schroder Reference or the TriPlanar on any of the Cartridges.
.
You come across in your posts as a man on a mission to defend the Graham 2.2 (which I think is an excellent arm) and make subjective evaluations about peopleÂ’s (who you have not met, do not know ) abilities to set up an arm. Both of my friends that did the set up for our Group of 8 have set up Graham 2.2 and are more than adequate to dial in the VTF, VTA and Azimuth.
I feel like you are flailing at any opening to defend your Graham 2.2 and you lose any sense of credibility with your attacks on people. You are way off base with your judgments of their abilities with regard to setting up tables, their ethics and or agendas.
.
If you are wondering why people appear to be defensive with you, you might try re-reading this entire thread with an open and objective mind and see how you think you might have felt if you were the recipient of the barbs that you have tossed out.
.
Go back through your postings on previous threads and see how many times you have apologized for the roughness or aggressiveness of posts that you have made.
.
I get the sense that you are so intent on getting your point across that you donÂ’t listen (or read) what the other person is saying or the point they are trying to make. You might want to make more of an effort to understand what someone is trying to tell you instead of being intent on getting out what you have to say. I once suggested in a previous post that you take the time to compose your posts off line in a word document and re-read them before posting. You might want to think about that.
.
I found you to be a truly nice person with good intent. I donÂ’t think your Audiogon persona reflects who you are.
.
.
.
I will leave you with the following:
.
The Graham 2.2 is a wonderful arm that I am glad that I have owned. Its ability to draw out and present music, detail and all that we chase is not even close to what I have heard produced by the Schroder Reference or TriPlanar. The Graham was so far behind the others arms and the people involved with doing the set ups are so skilled that set up is not any where near the issue here. You are challenging the observations of 8 other people based on their mutual experience that you were not present to witness. That completely flies in the face of logic. You are in no position to have a position in this situation and that is the essence of the strong responses you are getting in this thread.
.
I am more than certain that the set ups on the arms/cartridges back in March when the 8 of us got together were done at an extremely high level. I assure you that it was not an “audio party”. The comparisons of that weekend were done as carefully as possible and with the greatest effort to attention to detail to produce clear and accurate results.
.
The group of 7 other guys who got together are more than just fellow Audiophiles to me. They are good friends. To a person, they are intelligent, honest, humble, and giving and I feel quite fortunate to know them. Your points questioning any of their honesty, ability, motives, agenda are completely off base.
.
.
I hope this clears up some of the mis-conceptions and allows the rancor to die down a bit.
.
Regards to all,
Larry
. |
Speedy, give it a rest, you don't know anything about the set up of Larry's system during the infamous audition, and on many occasions have completely misrepresented what Larry said, about both the Graham arm and the set up.
I can't imagine what you think you need to prove, but you were not there, and don't have enough information to condemn the session, or the results.
The longer you argue from ignorance, the worse it makes you appear. There is no need for this, unless your goal is to take Rauls place as the most _______ audiophile posting here, now. |
Speedy cut it out and grow up. |
Doug,you mean optimized with your aid?You own a Tri,and you feel confident you can be astute about the fine details of the fluid?I rest my case!!BTW-and I do understand how you can feel you knew what you were up against with the fluid,so I'm really not trying to be smug,but--there's fluid adjustment,and there's fluid adjustment(which MUST be done,in conjunction with vta and downforce,and anyone stating the contrary makes my argument).In your case,you can safely forget about the latter!!Also,it was the "owner" who stated he and Pat(one of the only guys who's opinion I'll take on his word,alone)had done the "super fine detail" of fluid,after my post,which was AFTER your session.Please stop stroking me with the expertise crap,when you simply cannot get around a bogus comparison,which had the victors "coming in their pants".Ain't buying it!!
Also-as I'm cleaning the weaponage,have you made your choice? :-)
Best to all. |
Raul,
Excellent summary. Thanks for being a good "referee"! :-)
SirSpeedy,
Whoever told you the fluid dampening was not done for our arm comparison last March was mis-remembering.
Paul and I visited Larry in November, 2004. We went for two specific purposes:
1. To let him audition the Airy 2, Airy 3 and UNIverse.
2. To help him adjust the blue fluid, which we did for each cartridge following your excellent instructions.
When we left after four long days of work his Graham's damping was optimized for a UNIverse. That was four months BEFORE the arm comparison. |
Teres,you have a nice table,btw.--As to set up of the 2.2,it could not possibly have been correct,even discounting the anti skate issue,as I was told that the "critical fluid adjustments" were done "after" the seven man session.Sorry!Besides,the illustrious Mr Deacon's comments,regarding perceived performance clearly tell me it was NOT set-up correctly.Also,I heard it(it was still "fairly" good,btw),and I'm confident Larry knows what he's doing,at this point,yet I'll bet that arm was set up by committee.BTW--I TRULY don't care about these results,but I'm not about to give an inch to what I know to be incorrect input,over the last year.
I assure you the only reason I'm so insistant about all of this is--Larry,himself stated that though he "loved" his 2.2 he was never really all that satisfied with the performance.I want to push him to "play around with it a bit more".There's more "there" there!!For sure!!Though,at this point I'm fairly confident he's given me "the boot",thinking I'm a "kook".Can't say I blame the guy.--Also it seems clear to me that guys like Doug are off base regards the correct performance of the 2.2,pain in the ass,that it is.Of course Doug does like to correspond with Arthur S.He(Arthur),who does not, in the least bit, question "educated perceptions".Right?
Obviously,all involved in the listening session who benefited or were "happy" with the "let's say incomplete" results don't like this,too much.I completely understand,and promise I'm done "spouting" about it anymore.I'm sure everyone's thrilled!
BTW--ALL pictures,as of late look really cool with the nice Shroeder,atop your lovely looking table. |
Dear friends: +++++ " But the plain truth is that Larry's Graham could not match the transparency of any Schroeder or the microdynamics of a TriPlanar VII. The worst possible mis-adjustment of anti-skating could not account for the performance margin agreed to by everyone who actually heard them side by side. " +++++
This statement from Doug tell us that we are " seeing " three totally different tonearm design, every one with its " highs " and " downs " ( nothing is perfect ).
+++++ " We did not like it with a Koetsu, " +++++
I agree with Doug, the 2.2 is not the best match for the Koetsu cartridges. I agree too that the worst ( and I understand that was not the worst one ), mis-adjustment in AS...., in this aspect I agree with Teres too.
Now, if we want to be very serious and strict about then Sirspeedy is right: the AS must be dialed perfect for a true evaluation.
For me, what I learn with this kind of " opinion fights " ?
- first, that any cartridge has to match with the " matched " tonearm: 2.2/Transfiguration.
- second, that exist tonearms that are more " universal " than others: Reference and Triplanar against the 2.2
- third, that there is no " best " tonearm, what exist is a best combination: tonearm/cartridge.
- fourth, that an " audio party " is a real and great fun ( I have it every single week here ), but nothing more than that.
-five, that you all are really great audiophiles that always think " I'm right " ( me too ). I know that I'm not always right, do you?
Tks for your " friendly audio fight ". This let me confirm my " old " opinion/experiences/subjects about.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
In that case, I'm defensive too. |
Well,you'll be happy to know that I'm about played out,on this subject.That being said,I simply DON'T believe the original comparisons were accurate!Of course any parties benefiting from the skewed findings are free to disagree.This does not mean,in any way,that the products are/were not SUPERB,in their own right.Or,that the parties,at hand,cannot set up their stuff,correctly(and I really doubt if Larry set the 2.2 incorrectly).It simply means that you cannot set up MY stuff.Though I doubt that should bother any of the "experts" at hand. |
My defensiveness is due to being dumb, in case anyone wants to know! |
Gmorris, You missed the point, well actually both points. I didn't say, nor did I intend to imply, that the anti-skate setting did not affect the sound of the Graham. Here is what I was trying to say:
1) It is highly unlikely that anti-skate was set incorretly during the evaluation. The 2.2 was removed and then re-installed after the evaluation. Plenty of opportunity for the setting to get messed up.
2) Even if the setting was wrong (highly unlikely) as Doug so aptly stated, no amount of anti-skate mis-adjustment could account for the differences heard. If the sound of the tonearms was close then of course a small adjustment could tip the scales. But it was not close.
Sirspeedy, sorry for the defensiveness. It did ruffle my feathers to have what I see as an honest and valid comparison discounted. My defensiveness was in fact due to "dumb ego", but not marketing. Yes, I am the turntable manufacturer. |
BTW-Doug(or anyother interested party)--I was told the "critical voicing" of the 2.2 fluid was done AFTER your little seven man session.So we have the anti skate AND the fluid NOT optimized on the Graham,at that event.Can you ALL get together and maybe do a correct comparison?Inquiring minds want to know!!I'm not holding my breath,yet to answer the teres question,to me,I didn't have to be there,with what I now know.
Also,the synergy of the Tranny/2.2 may be fine,yet the synergy of that arm with many other fine cartridges would be OK,--should someone actually know how to set it up!!BTW-I assume the Phantom would outperform the 2.2,but I still like the arm from the Rhineland,only I'd have to order one under a friend's name,or risk the mfgr walking around with the "armtube in his underwear" for a day,before final assembly,for me!
Doug,we should meet Saturday eve,around eight,at a local lobster house,in Cos Cobb,for the proverbial "DUEL" you seem to SO need!You may have your choice of either eighteenth century flintlock pistols,or seventeenth century Samuri sword.I'm well versed in both.All originals,of course.Should you be nible enough to "do me in" my better half has been instructed to "fork over" my new Koetsu Coral Stone,as your "just reward"!BTW-your dad cannot stand in for you!!
Oh yeah,What's with the "SPEEDYMAN" comment?The only people who have called me that(alot)are the women I've been intimate with! :-) |
Doug,in case my previous post does not see the light of day,I wanted your dad to know that I was told the "critical fluid level" was NOT optimized until AFTER the "seven man,three arm" audio party!So,we are left knowing the A.S. was way off,as well as the fluid,yet this is OK!!What can I say?Peace to all,I guess!
DOUG---
BTW-as stated previously,yet NOT posted--I accept your offer to duel!I'll meet you Saturday eve,in Cos Cobb,at a local lobster house.You can choose from either seventeenth century flintlock pistols,or sixteenth century Samuri sword.I'm well versed in both(just kidding,but I DO have a "plastic sword scar",given to me when my son was six.Really!!)In the unlikely event you should "do me in",Doug,my wife has been instructed to fork over,to you,the revered Koetsu Coral Stone!!--"What say ye"????
PS--your father cannot substitute for you,though he probably has a "much better set of ears,than both of us"!
:-)!! |
The above arguments that the incorrect anti-skating setting did not have any definitive effect on the sound of the Graham begs the question which is central to the validity of the aural observations of Dougdeacon, et al. To wit: what are the impacts on the sound fidelity of non- optimal anti-skating settings on a tonearm/cartridge combination? . The most obvious and likely negative results would be cartridge mis-tracking and channel imbalances. Cartridge mis-tracking would lead to severe distortion (this is obvious: if the cartridge does not track properly it will not extract the information correctly from the groove). The degree of distortion would depend on the cartridge/arm combination (some arms are less critical of anti-skating effects due to arm geometry and length.). Since there will be some level of mis-tracking (ie distortion), is it not reasonable to assume that under these flawed conditions any blanket statements made about the performance of the arm would at least be misleading and at worst invalid?
|
|
SirSpeedy,
Perhaps there's some synergy between a Graham 2.2 and a Transfiguration that doesn't occur with other cartridges. I have no way of judging that. (Good diplomats always leave the other side a face-saving exit.)
But the plain truth is that Larry's Graham could not match the transparency of any Schroeder or the microdynamics of a TriPlanar VII. The worst possible mis-adjustment of anti-skating could not account for the performance margin agreed to by everyone who actually heard them side by side.
We did not like it with a Koetsu,
We did not like it with a ZYX,
We did not like it SirSpeedy man,
We did not like that stodgy Graham.
Even my father's 72-year-old, non-audiophile ears heard the difference. As soon as we lifted the TriPlanar and dropped the Graham his toes stopped tapping, his head stopped bobbing and his eyelids drooped. (It was past his bedtime, but it took the Graham to remind him!)
For heaven's sake, face reality. Just because a component sucks doesn't make the owner a bad person. I used to own Bose 901's, okay?
|
Sir, how could Herb Papier make a device that allowed you to lower the tower on the TriPlanar? The issue was and is that the armboard of the Sota is too high for perfect set up. It is not possible to add something that will correct this issue!
The Graham is a good arm, it's just not as good as the TriPlanar. I'm not here to defend Frank S. or Tri Mai (since I'm not very happy with Tri, and his willingness to help, or follow up with his promises), if you can't hear the improvement, keep the Graham, but don't base a conclusion on a faulty premise!
I sold that bike over a year ago. The new one is a lot nicer, thanks. |
I WAS told the A.S. setting was NOT touched since that fateful session took place.AND, LARRY knows what he's doing,so I must assume he was told/influenced by another party,of which I suspect three people.Big deal!!So I'm creating some "needed" controversey,yet It's really honesty on trial,here,and the need to see someone own up for an error.As for your remark(teres)about"the differences we heard were far greater than what could be accounted for even fairly major setup errors",and"silly to claim that because a tonearm has not been precisely setup that a comparison is laughable" tells me all I need to know about your approach to music reproduction.But thanks anyway.BTW-are you the actual TERES table mfgr?
What is with all the defensiveness anyway?Why can't any of you big shots simply,and logically state that if in fact there was a setup error,of this type(BTW-try making an adjustment of almost two grams "off" in any of your arms,and then report back as to the variance in perceived sound)it probably would have swayed the findings.What is the big friggin' deal, outside of the dumb "ego" thing,anyway?Nobody broke any laws.I read,all the time about honesty in the hobby,yet when I mention what I saw,was told,and heard it comes off as though I'm trying to trash someone, or product.NOT TRUE!!Amazing,to me!!I'm starting to get a HUGE impression that MUCH of this "supposedly hobbyist oriented" forum correspondence IS really just marketing for some favored mfgrs!Hobbyists,SO liking their stuff,that the ass kissing doesn't stop,until a NEW component takes it's place.I see this ALL the time,and sort of understand it.Nice guys that I'm sure they are,in many cases.
Best to all! |
Sirspeedy, let me get this straight. You show up at Larry's
and find that the anti-skate is way off. From this you conclude that the 2.2 was not setup properly for the "7 man listening session". And further that the whole session was therefore bogus and laughable. Sheesh talk about a laughable leap in logic.
I was there and helped with the setup. Great care was taken each step of the way to make sure that each arm was setup properly. It's not unlikely that some of the setup's were less than perfect. However, I am sure that there were no glaring problems like the one you cite. I have no idea how Larry's anti-skate ended up being off, but it is very, very unlikely that it was that way during our evaluations. Why in the world would you make that assumption. The tonearm was re-installed long after the Schroder/Graham comparisons were done.
Further this was not the only time where we compared the 2.2 with a Schroder Reference. A year earlier another group heard the same thing. Do you want to claim that anti-skate was off for that comparison also. I also owned a 2.2 and replaced it with a Schroder Reference. Guess what with lots of time tuning and dialing in both arms I heard the same thing.
It's also silly to claim that because a tomearm has not been precisely setup that a comparison is laughable. The differences we heard were far greater than what could be accounted for even fairly major setup errors. Fine tuning a arm/cart certainly refines and improves the sound. And for a good comparison the setup should be done carefully. But you can tell lots about the goodness of a tonearm even with a less than ideal setup.
I really am baffled at your resistance to what seems to be credible conclusions. You cite absolutely no credible data to the contrary, but seem to be looking for a reason to discount something you did not hear. |
Nrchy,The "late" Herb Papier made me a device that allowed for proper set-up.I stand by my comments.The seven man "show" we've heard about for the last year,was skewed towards the other two wonderful arms.Yet,the 2.2 was WAY off.Anyone having owned a 2.2 would understand the variance in performance that an almost two gram shift in A.S. exactitude could/does bring.That IS how it was.Sorry!Yet you DO have great stuff,and a nice "bike",too!
Best to all. |
Sirspeedy, how much time did you spend with the 7 man listening group, hearing what they heard, and seeing the set up they saw??? It is impossible for you to make these comments, and expect to be taken seriously. The people who were there have spent their own hard-earned money based on the sound they EXPERIENCED. Who sounds more absurd, the one who makes a decision based on their experience, or the person who rejects the results of their session, but has never heard what happened?
Sirspeedy how can you claim to have heard the TriPlanar and the Graham (which is inferior in every way) when you stated earlier that you had the TriPlanar on a Sota Cosmos on which it was IMPOSSIBLE to set the arm up correctly?!? There is a logical gap here. Besides, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'm sure you would not out-of-hand reject the merits of an arm which you never gave a fair shake.
I borrowed a pair of Quad ESL 63 speakers to audition at home, but I could not use them since my amp protection circuitry kept kicking in due to the fact that it could not drive the load. How stupid would I sound if I rejected the quality claims of people who had a system in which proper set up and drive was a possibility???
A session cannot be 'Kaput' the word simply does not fit, a lot like your summary of the events which you did not experience. |
I have just read Arthur Salvatore's "swooning synopsis" of the ZYX Airy III cartridge(he claims it to be the best he's heard,and clearly mentions "Doug's" comments on the other fabs design)with a yawn.Why,because I have been lucky enough to finally hear the flagship Universe.The truth is,that I have been able to detect,and EASILY,it's superiority of performance,in GENERAL, though NOT compared to other top performers.This ALL clearly heard in a system where the arm was CLEARLY set up(originally,and then tweaked)in an "almost" INEPT fashion(go ahead,hit me)bordering on the "CLUELESS",as I had suspected some months ago.To be off in anti-skate,by SO much margin,is inexcusable,and NO amount of rationalization can detract from that.Though the owners of the other two arms will,no doubt,exclaim I'm pissed off or too rapped up in the "far from perfect" 2.2!And,far from perfect it was/is!Yet it is still superior,in every way,to the Triplanar(I've owned that arm),and NOW I have my reservations as to the real superiority of the "OTHER" arm.Though the main system was fabulous,with a capital "F"!!
All in all,this tells me that the UNIV is a wonderful design,and that the 7 man listening session was,and is KAPUT!!Any comments about the three arm comparison can only be taken as "laughable",IMO(which I'm happy to stand by,BTW)!!I STILL love you guys,but I am compelled to "tell it like it is"!Or as in the case of the NOW "supremely defunct" 7 man listening session as it "WAS"!!
Best to all!! |
Back in 2000, given the same price range, I decided to stick with Black beauty at the time.
Black Beauty was the improved Grass Harper IV GLA and the latest cartridge before the Colibri was introduced in 2000. According to the person who sold me the Black Beauty, he claimed that the Colibri was even quieter than Black Beauty if I can live with the lower output and I was suppose to be able to hear even more detail.
I didn't see any point to switch then and even now since I'm very satisfy with Black Beauty.
thank you for your response. |
Dear S23chang: I have experience with the Frog but not with the ones that you named.
Now, the Colibri comes too in a medium output version where you will not have problems in your system.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul, Do you have experience with other VdH cartridges like the grass hopper IV and Black beauty?
I didn't want to move to Colibri due to its lower output which doesn't work well in my setup. |
Frank, I thought that was MichaelJackson that said that!?! : ) |
Dear Mike: Now, that your XV-1 is fully broke-in ( I think but I'm not sure ) can you give us your experiences about.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
