Ready to try vinyl

Hey Jean des Nantes,

You clearly didn't read what I wrote, or understand it to the extent you passed your eyes over it. And don't try to tell me my Kuhn, or my history of science, you dillatante.

Anyway, I am gratefully humbled. I had though *I* was pompous and long winded!

Long live glass and particle board!

About five years ago, I decided to make the jump back to vinyl. I've got lots of old records that I was never able to part with, and with reading all that was said on these forums, decided to give it a shot.

After a lot of reading, I came to the conclusion that the majority here say, belt drive was the way to go.

I bought a Thorens TD125, and worked on it for three years, off and on, and basically liked it. Went to all the Thorens sites, lots of learning and tinkering.

One thing that always stood out to me, was that the speed stability was somewhat lacking. I cleaned, oiled, bought new belts, but could see by the strobe markings that it wavered no matter what I did. I'm not golden-eared, but I could also hear it on certain passages. Did I get a bad TD125? Perhaps

I loved the sound of vinyl, I still wanted to play records, yet I was unable to make it sound right.

After reading the stuff about DD tables, I took a risk. I bought a used Technics SL1200 MK2 off ebay. I knew that a lot of these have been abused as DJ units in clubs, but the pictures looked good, and the guy selling it seemed believable.

It is the best deal I've ever made. The only tweaks I've made, are the ones that Kevin at KBUSA recommends, the sorbothane footers, and the fluid damper for the tonearm. There's a power supply add on that I've yet to get, as the speed stability is perfect, and I question whether I need it.

I'm not telling anyone to do anything, or knocking any other equipment. This was MY experience getting back into vinyl.

Used SL1200 $200
fluid damper $149
footers? Can't remember, but reasonale

Dear friends: I think that Johnnantais is right in many ways and I agree with him in many issues.

His Gallileo, Bacon, etcc references, are a way to dramatize a fact that the 99% of the people " can't see it " or does not " want to see it ".

Opalchip do serious statements about what exactly is the job of a TT for to know what can we expect from a TT : +++++ " What exactly does a turntable do? It's a platter spun by a motor that we put a record on. The ABSOLUTE BEST thing it can do is turn at an accurate, highly constant 33rpm and not impart any vibration to the lp. It cannot "add" anything positive to the playback. " +++++

Any one of you have to agree with those statements, especially: ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ( 33/45rpm in the short and long run ).

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). I own four belt drive TTs, three SP 10MK2, two DP80s and one DP75 Denon's. In the past I was owner of: SP10MK3 and a Denon DP 100 ( please don't ask why I don't own today these two TTs. I don't want to remember it ).

The idler/DD servo TTs are dead steady on the rpm issue. The motor in the DD TT is really a tour de force, at least in the DD models that I own.

The pitch in the music reproduction in a home audio system is the most critical subject for a right musical appreciation. Any small variation in the TT speed change the pitch and change totally what we are hearing.

The problem in the belt drive systems is in the belt drive it self ( not in the small motors that are using ), all kind of belt drive materials: kevlar, nylon, silk, rubber, etc., have the tendency to stretch ( every single second that are in use ), is this tendency to stetch what do almost impossible to mantain a constant speed. The DD drive servo TTs don't have to fight with this critical issue and don't have that little speed variations that the belt drive have: especially in the short run, that is where really is important. Now, it is not only the stretch tendency on the belt drive system what is a critical issue there are other critical issues in a belt drive systems, like: changes in the room temperature, changes in the room humidity, the pulley and platter friction with the belt, the pulley/platter build imperfections, etc...

This single subject: " ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system.

Johnnantais don't have to go so far away: the best TT system is the Rockpor Sirius, this 70K+ " baby " use a DD system: wonder why? Don't you think that if the " experts belt drive system " was the better Rockport would had choose it?

The three belt drive systems TTs that are in my current audio system are very good on the speed issue but aren't perfect: I'm checking every day and some days after/before every listen record the speed variation.

There are many issues of the why's many of us and all the " reviewers/experts " are using belt drive systems: but this situation is only circunstantial and does not means that the belt drive system is better than the direct drive system, because it's not.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). I own four belt drive TTs, three SP 10MK2, two DP80s and one DP75 Denon's. In the past I was owner of: SP10MK3 and a Denon DP 100 ( please don't ask why I don't own today these two TTs. I don't want to remember it ).

Raul, although I frequently agree with your writings, we are very far apart on this topic.

Having owned multiple direct drive and idler wheel drive design turntables, I am aware of their strengths. No question their speed accuracy is uncanny, but there are a few exquisitely engineered belt drive turntables that overcome this technical obstacle.

The Walker represents the pinnacle of this engineering, maintaining flawless speed accuracy and control that equals the idler wheel models while maintaining such virtues as adjustable air suspension system, air bearing non-resonant platter and integrated linear tracking arm with adjustable pressure air bearing.

Understand, I was one of the first to compliment Johnnantais and throw my support behind him when his Lenco thread was begun. In spite of my admiration of the Lenco and Garrard idler wheel designs, there is no contest between these and the Walker.

We can banter back and forth on this all day, so I will just say that you're entitled to your opinion and that I don't share your view. This, based on my own experimentation over the years with hundreds of turntables.

How many Mexican pesos is a Walker?

Dear Albert: I think that I don't explain the speed issue in a right way.

+++++ " : ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ( 33/45rpm in the short and long run ).

Here the idler/DD TT's beats any belt drive design ( including the Walker ). " +++++

If I can remember the Walker speed accuracy is 0.002%: a really splendid figure, but the SP 10M2 is half that of the Walker: 0.001% and the SP 10MK3 is only 0.0001%.

I agree with you on your statement: +++++ " The Walker represents the pinnacle of this engineering... " +++++

But that is not the point. My point is very simple:

" A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system ", if only for the better speed accuracy of the DD design.

Albert, this is part of what I already post and maybe you loose to read:

+++++ " This single subject: " ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system. " +++++.
You can note: ( where everything the same ).
Your statement that the Walker is superior to a standard Lenco is out of place: of course that is superior.

I know that I don't have your wide experience with hundreds of TTs ( like you say ) and my reference to Walker TT was not against the Walker or against any Walker owner like you. As I told you my point is a simple one.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

OK then, your comments are based on specification posted by Technics, builder of the SP10 MK3.

If that number is correct, perhaps speed accuracy is not as important as it seems.

Or perhaps the whole turntable and arm package is more important than just speed accuracy, assuming Technics has stated speed accuracy properly.

Many pieces of equipment that are excellent on paper do not necessarily sound excellent . For instance, Technics also builds some integrated amplifiers that have amazingly low distortion specification but sound pretty dismal against tube based amps from Atma-Sphere, VTL or Audio Research, all of which have higher distortion numbers.

I have owned several direct drive tables and auditioned the Technics hundreds of times when I sold them. I was never impressed enough with their performance to consider them for state of the art playback. Of course I was going by sound, not the specification sheet.

Hi Albert: I think that I can't explain me or you loose my point:

+++++ " " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

That's all.

I'm not a fanatic of the " numbers ", I only take care about where they are critical and in a TT that number is critical and ( EVERYTHING THE SAME ) push the balance in favor of the TT with the best number. Simple as that.

Albert, you post:

+++++ " Many pieces of equipment that are excellent on paper do not necessarily sound excellent. " ++++++

and I agree with that, but I insist: that's is not the point. Sorry.

I don't want to open the door for a direct comparison between the Walker an a SP 10MK3/MK2 up-graded. But we can do it, if you want.

I have two plinths/frame for my Denon's/Technics, one from solid green marble ( 40+kg ) and one from solid natural onyx ( same weight ), btw: beautiful frames.. I have a neumatic suspension footers for those plinths. The plinth function not only like the frame TT but it is the arm board too. I can mount any of my SAECs tonearms or I can do and additional hole for other tonearm. I have a vacuum hold down platter mat for the Technics TT. You have a KRSP and I have another one. Maybe some one that is reading this thread can borrow us a SP 10 MK3, but if not the SP 10 MK2 is ok.

Albert tell me how, when and where do you want to do it.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Certainly I'm up for it, I like tests.

Your welcome to fly here and bring whatever equipment you wish. I have a nice high end system to do the audition and a support group of audiophiles to help us physically move things.

If you don't like my equipment, one of my members must have a speaker you approve of, including Vandy 5's, Kharma Exquisite 1D-E, Wilson Maxx, Wilson Watt 6, Sound lab A-1, Sound Lab A-3, Magneplanar 20's, Magneplanar 3.6, Aerial 10B, and from the "do it yourself" crowd, multiple horn systems powered with SET amps.

How far away are you?

my humble take on this is that in fact speed accuracy IS INDISPUTABLY as important as it "seems," and the issue at hand is not the table/arm/cartridge combination, but the table ONLY, and it's one and only function, which is to maintain as stable a speed as is possible to reproduce the time domain of the LP. to compare this to specifications of amplifiers is comparing apples to horse apples IMHO. the key is IMPLEMENTATION (as in all things), and the walker had better be optimized in this respect to justify it's price. to hear a properly implemented/optimized technics, lenco or garrard with the same arm and cartridge would be preferred, and i guess that's where things are going. this is getting exciting!

i would add that jean's lenco thread did not require endorsement by anyone, it has stood on it's own merits and by his (significant and ongoing) efforts since day one. not trying to be overly contentious, but that needed to be said. credit where credit is due.

Raoul's crossing the border!

Raoul, since Albert is such a fine gentleman, make sure you bring him and his friends a case of the finest tequila: Patrón.

http://www.patronspirits.com

***

Accurate speed measured over what interval(s)? This might make all the difference!

my humble take on this is that in fact speed accuracy IS INDISPUTABLY as important as it "seems," and the issue at hand is not the table/arm/cartridge combination, but the table ONLY, and it's one and only function, which is to maintain as stable a speed as is possible to reproduce the time domain of the LP. to compare this to specifications of amplifiers is comparing apples to horse apples IMHO. the key is IMPLEMENTATION (as in all things), and the walker had better be optimized in this respect to justify it's price. to hear a properly implemented/optimized technics, lenco or garrard with the same arm and cartridge would be preferred, and i guess that's where things are going. this is getting exciting!

i would add that jean's lenco thread did not require endorsement by anyone, it has stood on it's own merits and by his (significant and ongoing) efforts since day one. not trying to be overly contentious, but that needed to be said. credit where credit is due.

I think you missed the point. When I posted at the Lenco thread it was very early on with lots of speculation as to the accuracy of Jeans comments. I put my money up, ordered a Lenco off Ebay, ordered a Decca tonearm from Holland, a new EAR 834 phono and Shure cartridge, just from Jean's comments. I even went on to design my own plinth and post it in vertual systems here at Audiogon. I am a supporter of Jeans ideas.

My results were wonderful, the Lenco is an inexpensive turntable that makes great music for little money. My comments were supportive of Jean and I take no credit for his thread.

As with all things high end, the performance differences seldom justify the price. For me, LP is my main source of listening as my library is mostly vinyl and the Walker is so far beyond any other LP playback source it defies logic.

What got this thread off center were comments that appeared to support the idea that speed accuracy was so important that it surpassed the "whole package" approach. I'm not saying speed accuracy is not important, but not so important that it can overcome all the engineering that make up the turntable package.

Having owned two Basis Debut Gold (Model 4 and 5) with both AirTangent 10B and Graham 2.2 arms with exact same Koetsu RSP I'm using with the Walker, I can state without doubt, the Basis is speed accurate enough to provide state of the art sound.

The Walker package is superior to the Basis and although the Walker is more speed accurate, it is only part of the picture.

An "equal" test is not possible between a Walker and a Lenco or Technics as the Walker arm is integrated into the foundation and design of the table. Any comparisons would be between the Walker package and whatever package was chosen for the other table.

Testing is fine and I will support it, but having heard the Technics tens of dozens of times, I know exactly what it sounds like. If anyone want's to challenge the Walker in a "dollar for dollar" match against the Technics, I concede defeat before the test begins. Just the same as Rockport must concede defeat against the Walker as it costs three times the price.

Dear Albert: I think that if everybody have the right attitude to do that " learning exercise " about the importance of speed accuracy, we will " have " something.

+++++ " . Any comparisons would be between the Walker package.. " +++++ " If anyone want's to challenge the Walker in a "dollar for dollar" match against the Technics, I concede defeat ..." +++++

Albert, the issue is not the Walker and is not a Walker challenge. This is not my idea and I don't think is yours, right?. No body wants to compare a 40K TT against a 1K TT: this will be totally unfair.

Before we can go-on there is one subject that is really important for to do a critical evaluation on TTs and that critical subject is the TONEARM/CARTRIDGE combination: is has to be the same. Albert we have to find how we can run the Walker with a different tonearm. If we can solve this issue, I can give/put two samples of the same tonearm.
There are other issues that we have to solve but I think is better if we solve one by one.

Other thing that I would like to have on this " exercise " is the direct Jeans participation: what do you say Jeans?.
Btw, I think that the ideas/help of anybody in this forum will be happy welcome.

Albert I want to clarify something: +++++ "What got this thread off center were comments that appeared to support the idea that speed accuracy was so important that it surpassed the "whole package" approach... " +++++

I never post that idea, I post : +++++ " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

Albert your move.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Bring on the tequila!

Dear Albert: +++++ " If you don't like my equipment, one of my members must have a speaker you approve of, " +++++

You and any one in this forum know that your speakers and you friend's speakers are great ones, no question about.

Maybe where is more important for our " analog exercise " is first in the phono preamps and second on the amps. But these issues are for our second/third move.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Before we can go-on there is one subject that is really important for to do a critical evaluation on TTs and that critical subject is the TONEARM/CARTRIDGE combination: is has to be the same. Albert we have to find how we can run the Walker with a different tonearm. If we can solve this issue, I can give/put two samples of the same tonearm.

Sorry Raul, that is not possible. The Walker tonearm is integrated with the turntable and there is no room to add another arm or anything to mount an arm to. The base of the Walker is stone and I have no interest in drilling into it to mount another tonearm for a test.

I never post that idea, I post : +++++ " A Walker DD system beats a Walker belt drive system .. " +++++

Not according to Lloyd Walker. His opinion of direct drive is the cogging (search for speed) is worse than errors of his air bearing and silk belt drive. Guess that will never be resolved as Walker has no intention of building a direct drive so, we are back to one mans opinion against another mans opinion.

You are secure with your decision and I with mine.

The unfortunate vinyl neophite who initiated this thread has no doubt been comletely scared away by now by those posters who have hijacked his thread into yet another Raul vs. the World debate on the fine points of analog reproduction which are so far beyond the scope of his question as to be irrelevant. One thing he was right about, however, is the "all the fuss" he has heard over analog. I have heard less fussing from a nursery school full of 5 year olds than on this forum! ;)

... but then I guess fussiness is the one defining characteristic of a true analog addict.

Further posts on you impression of your new aquisition would be appreciated. I have a modest Vinyl frontend and wounder wether it would be worth it to upgrade. Although I find the convience of CD still quiet appealing.

I also learned something new a couple weeks ago. The bass is compressed from the original recording because of vinyl limitations. I have yet to A-B an album and CD on my system.

" ACCURATE AND HIGHLY CONSTANT SPEED ", ( where everything the same ) do the difference between a belt drive system against a DD system, where the DD system beats the belt drive system.

As I've followed Raul's arguments regarding DD versus belt drive turntables, I was reminded of a story Lloyd Walker tells:

At one of the CES shows, three gentlemen entered Walker Audio's room in which Lloyd was demo'ing his turntable and engaged Lloyd in a very sincere and very animated discussion about belt drive turntables not possibly being able to maintain the speed consistency needed for true state of the art performance. They raised all of the same theoretical arguments Raul presented (and rather than repeat all of these, I encourage you to read the various posts from Raul above). The substance of their point ultimately being that only a servo controlled direct drive turntable could maintain speed accuracy and resulting pitch consistency for true state of the art performance.

In the course of the discussion, all had agreed that sustained notes on a piano were one of the most revealing tests of speed consistency and consequent lack of pitch variation. So, Lloyd puts on a classical piano solo recording on his turntable and they begin to listen. Sounds pretty good, but the three gentlemen continue to argue that without servo control, no turntable can maintain pitch constancy.

At this point, Lloyd is getting a little frustrated. So, he pulls a pair of scissors out of his kit and, right in the middle of the music, CUTS the silk belt. The music continues to play. And for the next 30 seconds the piano performance continues without a motor driving it all and with perfect pitch stability. (End of story)

Personally, I'm a bit of a skeptic. So after hearing this story, I decided to test for myself on my Walker Proscenium turntable (after all, the belt is only a strip of silk tape and is easily replaced). Well..., Ivan Moravec continued to sound just luscious on some delicate Chopin for at least 35 seconds before I could detect any change in pitch here.

Cheers,

If the government really wanted to do the population a favor, they should can all this bullshit manufacture of the useless flu vaccine–have had it administered twice and caught the flu with even worse symptoms than ever–and find a cure for Elpitis: the dreaded psycho-acoustical condition that brings new meaning to the word bipolar for many of us. (If I am not mistaken, Dante mentions Elpitis affliction as a punishment in the third level of “Hell” and Moses thought about it for one of the Egyptian plagues but at the last minute opted for frogs.)

Why, there I was perfectly content with my perfectly beautiful Audiomeca digital gear when I spot in a closet a Paul Desmond LP that missed the shipment to the Salvation Army many moons ago. I reach in the cover–mind you, with the same care and finger dexterity that I had learned since I started collecting (insert a few more moons here)–and pulled out the black disc. I could swear that as I gazed into the grooves I heard angelic voices and had a bright beam of light wash over me because (as in a trance) I immediately went to the garage where a (cheap) Technics TT–I kept it because I had intended to use it as entertainment for my then-newborn son to watch toys spin on the platter–was quickly put into service using other ancient relics: a Sansui receiver with a phono input and a pair of AR3s.

Well, that was the end (beginning) for me! Desmond’s sax sounded like a...well...sax? Working against me and my resolve was also that the record was in good shape so the dreaded “pops” were not a turnoff. My Elpitist progressed through a B&O, another Technics (it was at this juncture that I discovered Audiogon’s “Oracles of Analog,” an enthusiastic bunch that really fucked me up even worse), an MMF 7 and, finally, a TNT V with a ZYX Airy 1000. Instead of going to fashionable stores to purchase CDs, I am now being spotted in dimly lit backrooms of second-hand shops searching through cartons of LPs or worse, bidding my life away in the click-and-gotcha byways of EBay. Once or twice a year my wife allows me (after swearing that I have taken my medication) a pilgrimage to the holy shrine of New Jersey–the Princeton Record Exchange–where I spend a day and four wallets scavenging for 12-inchers.

Oh no, it doesn’t end there. Sorry. Then there are the so-called “tweaks,” my dear. The LP cleaning machine, the LP covers and dust jackets, the fluids, the brushes, the cabinet(s) that can actually store thousands of these thingies (yes, trust me, it gets to a thousand by the end of the rapture’s first month)...please! Oh, and let’s not forget the phono amp since you outgrow the receiver phono input as the disease accelerates and invades the glands which control common sense.

Welcome and ready to...try vinyl?

An arpeggio of gratitude towards Rushton for that lovely and amusing story. (Are you sure it wasn’t Moravec’s gravity-defying Chopin performance that kept your table spinning?) I am but a half-step away from making an appointment with Señor Walker and his table

Regards,

Direct Drive Website. This is a very nice website with lots of fun info and a DD Museum:

http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/index_eng.html

So, what's the new to vinyl dude getting? A $70,000 Walker?

Albertporter...I won't debate with you whether existing DD turntables exhibit "cogging", but, speaking as one with some experience with (non-audio) DD precision servos, "cogging" would be a flaw in the design. It is no more inherent to a DD system than to an indirect drive such as a belt or idler wheel. A DD system avoids problems of compliance (belt stetch) or backlash in the torque transmission hardware.

I'm sure ALL you guys read the post,about the Mega Massive,and speed stable,Fly Wheel!!There are a couple of ways to obtain accurate speed.This being one!

Also,as I'm sure the Walker is quite "stable enough for me",though Peter Montcrieff makes a strong arguement for direct drive( unfortuneately he does this in about 100,000 words),anyone NOT happy with his/her Walker can trade me for my NEW SOTA COSMOS sreies III(speed controlled by a very cute,and dead accurate computer/belt config)!!I won't ask any questions,though I do love my Cosmos,I'll still be happy to make that trade!!

BTW--Albert,My COSMOS is ALL BLACK!!How about it???????

Actually in a "sort of related" area,my friend Sid Marks makes a very strong case for the "first pressing" syndrome,which is, in and of itself, a very valid area of getting much better performance without doing a thing to the set-up!!

There are numerous variables involved in analog "Heaven"!No parameter is perfect.

Sid's point,and he is also a FANATIC,with a capital "F",is if we start with the earliest pressing available(he actually gets numerous ones,and compares them)you bridge the gap to better sound.I know you all are aware of this,but I have been sort of shocked at how many "early" pressings are "significantly" improved upon,by a slightly earlier one.Who has the time for all this?Not me!However it bridges the performance gap,all the more!!Makes me think, too!

I've learned more in the 30 minutes it took me to get through this thread than the months of reading about various TT designs. Thanks to all those who have been participating. I own a belt driven table, I'm pleased with it but I had been considering a dd Technics table for some mixing, perhaps I'll go head to head with my table just for fun.

Well I see this thread certainly kept going during my absence, these types of debates will occur again and again, and perhaps thankfully infrequently. Thanks Raul for recognizing my point in referring to the history of astronomy, and for always questioning!: people are blind to fundamental assumptions, which being invisible, are not investigated and not questioned. People respond emotionally and not logically to these comforting assumptions being questioned, as in the end we most of us prefer stability (;-)). Thanks to Musicdoc and Albertporter as well for their support, you're both gentlemen. I can see Albert's point that a true fair comparison between drive systems is not possible due to the integral nature of his turntable (I certainly wouldn't want to touch that animal), and am very grateful to Albert for his support and fun spirit, but I have to say that Albert, you are being somewhat disengenuous (picture finger-wagging auntie gently scolding) in stating that "In spite of my admiration of the Lenco and Garrard idler wheel designs, there is no contest between these and the Walker." Since the Lenco was mounted with a humble stock Decca International (with its stock thick tin wiring and plastic frcition-fit pieces) and Shure V15VxMR while your Walker was mounted with a state-of-the-art air-bearing tonearm, cables and a Koetsu Rosewood Signature Platinum (not to mention other discrepancies) then this statement is hardly meaningful, is it, something which should have been pointed out. I mean, if you were to stage a contest between your Walker and a SME 30 and mount the SME with a Decca International and Shure V15, would people stand quietly by (as they do now) and simply accept your verdict it doesn't even come close to the Walker?

At that time as well, I could not even convince anyone to mount a humble Rega on the Lenco to give it a fair trial by my peers, and so was forced to track down and publicise the extremely cheap Decca International tonearms, which at time sold for 25 euros, which indeed got the ball rolling. When bowled over by the resultant sound, many wrongly attributed this greatness to the tonearm, and not the platform: the Lenco. I started to kick their asses to stop playing with the cheap budget stuff and stretch the Lenco's legs with at least a Rega, which finally resulted in the following comment from an intrepid Lenco-er which got THAT ball rolling: "And yes...it sounds fantastic, blows my STD305D away, quieter background, enormous controlled bass, incredible detail, just altogether jaw droppingly good...and it don't look bad either!." For context, the STD supplanted a Linn LP12. Finally, the best tonearm/cartridge ever mounted - Graham 2.2/Benz Micro - received the following report: "Well, as I indicated previously, we have installed a Graham 2.2/IC-70 cable on our latest creation, an L75. At the advice of Jean, we went whole-hog and mounted my Benz Micro Reference2 Copper, a cartridge custom built by Mr. Lukaschek himself. We have now spun about 15 LP’s with this combination...This is, with doubt, the best combo I’ve ever had in my system and one of the best I’ve ever heard in any system with remotely comparable components. Of course, the slam and pacing of the Lenco is there in spades. I was not, however, prepared for the expansive soundstage which goes well beyond my speakers and into the side yard. There is a ton of detail without being anything close to analytical. The midrange is very sweet and female vocals are just a gas! From those who have used the Graham with other tables, the one very minor complaint of some is a hair bit of lightness in the bass. Not in this front end. I have heard the Graham 2.2 now on about 8 different tables and I’ve never heard it sound better. A real winner in every respect. A spoiler, actually." For context, the fellow's previous 'table, which he subsequently sold, was a Nottingham Spadedeck. I trot out these reports occasionally (and new ones keep coming in) as they constitute the evidence in my experiment/challenge.

At the time you asked me which way to go, and I wrote you "for musicality go for the Decca, for information go for the Rega" (or something along those lines), as I fully understood you had no real interest in pitting the Lenco against your Fabulous Beast but were in it for the fun aspect, and for providing that shining example kudos! Now I am extremely grateful for the support and good humour you provided in the early days of the vulnerable thread (in fact I miss your witty contributions, I still laugh at the "pillow-fluffer" comment), but have to point out that the Lenco has indeed humbled quite a few highly-regarded current title-holders when armed with nothing better than "mid-fi" tonearms such as the Regas and such-like, (and even then someone recently reported a Lenco traded blows in an extremely sophisticated set-up with a SME 30 armed with an exotic MC while the Lenco was armed with the usual budget items). Barring that, if a Lenco armed with a RB300 can stay ahead of a VPI TNT, what can it do if it were armed with a good air-bearing tonearm, such as the Walker's "father", the Maplenoll, or with a sota unipivot such as the Graham 2.2, and a Koetsu mounted to that? I'm not saying it will beat or even match the Walker (though in some ways, such as drive, it might), but as I wrote long ago, if it takes a 40K-$50 belt-drive in order to clearly defeat a Lenco (i.e. if this can only be achieved at ruinous cost), then what does this say about the belt-drive drive system?

Now I would truly like to see such a showdown, I don't think making everything absolutely even is necessary to make the point (and since it can't be done then the point is moot), but I am not going to use my [limited] travel money for such a venture, preferring instead to concentrate my hearing on the sound of belled goats and lapping waves in the Greek hillsides above the Aegean, or indeed beer in the heart of Berlin. I could however someday send an emissary in the form of a specially-built Lenco, or one of the Lenco followers nearer could take their own. If in the process we find that the Lenco has a ceiling of, say $20K equivaklent belt-drive, then we know this and I finally know what the upper limits are. In the process, the idler-wheel is re-instated as a serious drive system with its own set of strengths and weaknesses (which certainly was not the case a year ago, so we have learned something already). The DD afficionados also point to certain strengths over belt-drive (which again exposes weaknesses in the system which it is wiser to acknowledge than wish away if true progress is what we want). Anyway, even the fact this is being discussed is good news, that people understand that something must be tested in order to be fairly judged, and to keep an open mind. Until the next Great Debate, enjoy spinning that oh-so-lovely vinyl all, and I would say always suspect your unseen assumptions (and those of others, such as the chemical/food companies), use that little-used muscle in these days of reality television and Disney-run/corporate-run newscasts, the brain, we have never, EVER, needed it more! Now, back to my lovely Lenco/Rega/Denon for some more of that Baroque, which perhaps the Lenco favours, I'm so obssessed with it these days, gotta love those Eratos! Sorry to those who have hung on so far for such a long post, too late to delete, the smart ones are drinking beer.

Jean,
For heaven's sake please keep quiet about Eratos. Are you trying to start ANOTHER price war?!

All,
Eratos suck. They have noisy surfaces, compressed dynamics and are rolled off at both frequencey extremes. Not even a DD Walker could make them sound good.

[Sneaks back to his latest Vivaldi/Scimone acquisition.]

I just want to mention that I heard the mega-dollar Nakamichi direct-drive turntable. I thought that it obviously sounded like a direct-drive turntable(inferior to belt-drives, in my mind). It was the record-centering Nakamichi($10,000?).

That listen was like 25-years ago. I don't remember the specifics, but I do remeber the Denons at DB audio has a similiar signature. I believe the argument was directly connecting a motor to the spindle was conterproductive as we are talking about groove modulations that are less than human hair.