Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?

Dear Thuchan: Why could not be? after all the Hevac1 opinion is not the first one in the thread where the 927 was beated.

Do you think the 927 is a perfect TT?, no way because till today does not exist perfect TTs.

Maybe things are that your system distoritons match very well withb the 927 or that could hide the 927 " failures "/non-perfect performance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear 57s4me: IMHO the first and main factor/characteristic/target on analog is: that the stylus tip ( at microscopic level. ) be always in touch with the grooves and I mean always with out any tiny deviation from there and this depends mainly in the whole cartridge design and not on the TT quality or even in the tonearm one.

Cartridge tracking habilities depends mainly on the cartridge it self, I'm not saying that we don't need at least a decent tonearm design because we need it but not at the level everyone could think.

I tested hundred of cartridges ( from LOMC to MM/MI ones. Vintage and today ones. ) in several different tonearms with different effective mass and effective length and build materials and my first hand experiences tell me that if the cartridge has high tracking habilities it will showed always it does not matters that even the resonance frequency with the tonearm be way out of the ideal range, example a heavy mass tonearm with a high compliance/low weight cartridge.

It is so " curious " ( I mean curious because is unknow for me the precise whys. ) that the same cartridge body on a MM cartridge when I tested with three different stylus original replacements where the only change was the stylus tip shape and even that shares the same whole design on suspension and the like there are differences on each one tracking habilities and sound quality level.

I agree with you that if you already losed groove information you just can't recovery and then the main target down there is to recovery all the recorded information in the grooves and this can do it " only " by the cartridge and from here all what you want: from TT mat to tonearm board passing for different steps to damp everywhere the analog rig stopping that feedback Tonywinsc and you touched.

IMHO a massive TT design as could be the 927 not warranty that non-feedback because we have to remember that a massive item don't stop per se that feedback but even could be worst and easyly perceived by that extremely sensitive " microphone " name it cartridge. The only way to be sure any TT design ( including the 927. ) is doing its job on the subject is making measuring taking in count the lowest " level " any cartridge can be disturbed. With out those measurements real tests all what we have to say on the whole subject is subjective and its validity is valid around those " ears " and the accuracy and distortion level of the audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Tbg: ++++ " with no tracking distortion are typically superior. Long tone arms also are superior for this reason. " ++++

I respect your opinion but maybe you think that what you listening trhough a long tonearm is because that lower tracking distortion, my take is way different:

a 12" arm against a 10.5" with a Löfgreen A set up gives you this numbers about distortions:

the maximum % distortions between null points are:

0.46 and 0.54. Difference: 0.08%

average RMS % distortion:

0.31 and o.36. Difference: 0.05%

IMHO that kind of % distortions can't be detected even for a bat.

The differences you are talking perhaps comes from other " side ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Tbg: +++++ " tracking distortion are typically superior. Long tone arms also are superior for this reason. " +++++

these are your words and these my answer to that " false " statement:

++++ " IMHO that kind of % distortions can't be detected even for a bat.

The differences you are talking perhaps comes from other " side ". " +++++

so your " nevertheless " has no real meaning. I own Ikeda tonearms and know it very well along several other tonearms.

IMHO a longest tonearm provoque more problems that what it try to solve. As with the TT subject the tonearm one is full of misunderstood for us because our opinion is based/took foundation in what we learned through many audio years where the teacher always was the AHEE that has more a commercial $$$$ orientation that gives us any real help to improve our audio/music knowledge level. They still think that we customers/audiophiles are still stupid people and I can tell you that no one of us is " stupid " .

IMHO any tonearm design must fulfil the cartridge needs ( not our needs. ) and the first target has to be that the tonearm be " transparent " for the cartridge that does not degrade the cartridge signal in any way.
From this point of view a long tonearm against a shortest one is in clear disadvantage because can't " respond " to the cartridge tracking movements as fast as the shortest one.

As that fact there are several ones why a shortes one is better than a larger one.

Things are that the additional distortions/colorations provided by the long tonearm match in better way your music/sound priorities but not because lower " tracking distortions " in the long tonearm. This is a misunderstood and a marketing hip promoted by the AHEE.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Tbg: No it's not wrong.

We have to think that a higher mass even if matched with the cartridge weight//compliance is always a " problem " because the cartridge /tonearm are in motion so we have to talk here of dynamic mass not static.

We ha ve to think to at stylus tip level at what stylus tip needs, that's it that the tonearm can react fast/immediatly to the stylus tip requirments during grooves riding/tracking and as longer the tonearm as lower the tonearm bearing arm wand response. We have to think at microscopic level and not macro.

In the other side alonger tonearm not only has a longer surface that in motion resonate and vibrate with more dificults to damp it that to shortes surface/arm wands.

A longer tonearm produce additional challenge to the tonearm bearing than a shortes one and a longer tonearm normally suffer on the arm wand stifness/bending that a short one.

In the other side the cartridge signal has to run a longest distance/path in a long tonrarm than in a short one: do you think is not important?, well change the headshell wire/leads in your tonearm and you will have a change in the quality performance of that signal: 3" makes a way difference for the better or worst.

A common problem we almost all have is that we are accustom to very high system distortions/colorations because that's the way we were listening music through the last 30+ years teached by the corrupted AHEE, so when we follow listening those higher distortions/colorations trhouag a long tonearm we like it against what we hear in a short one but IMHO what you like or what I like is not important here what is important is what's right and what is wrong.

IMHO the lower distortions/colorations ( any kind ) in an audio system along accuracy and neutral performance is what really can makes a difference for the better quality performance level.

Now, that that lower distortions and higher accuracy does not like to you or to me is not important and means only that what we like are higher distortions and unaccuracies that are wrong.

Which the differences between different audio systems?: mainly its distortions and accuracy level: not what you or me like to listen because this is totally subjective.

When you listen to live music in a near field what do you listen?: low, distortions, low unnacuracies, neutral sound, natural agresiveness: natural tone colorations and obviously the dynamic power that only the live music can gives.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Peterayer: The SME V and the V-12 are way different tonearms and that's why you listen different performance level as the other persons you name it. So, it is not a good comparison.

Please read my post to Tbg and remember that we are talink of a tonearm/cartridge in motion not static.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Peterayer: +++++ " SME did spend two years developing the longer version of the V arm. It is not simply a 3" longer arm tube like some other designs. " ++++, the difference in effective mass is only 1gr.

this is what you posted and your answer why is not a good comparison.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Peter: IMHO to be a fair comparison we need to compare: oranges against oranges, the V-12 and V has a different design and IMHO to make a comparison you need a V designed as the V12.

The V12 has only 1gr of difference in EM than the V that's means the build material in the V12 arm wand even the same magnesium has a different thickness or treatment and resonate in different way and not because is a 12 one.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear mapman: +++++ " the best tonearm length would probably be no tonearm, or 0 length. Tonearms are necessary evils... " ++++++

I can't agree more with you in that statement and it's because that fact that any single tonearm manufacturer have to design thinking at stylus tip cartridge microscopic level than at macro cartridge level or try that the tonearm be the star when as you well said is only an evil and a cartridge's slave.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Tbg/Mapman: This is something I posted/answered time ago in other thread about digital and analog comparison:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I agree, the digital can't approach that type of LP sound. IMHO : Why can't approach it?, because analog/LP is totally faulty.

The analog signal is heavily manipulated, let see it:

when recorded and to be cutted ( LP. ) the signal must be equalized according to the RIAA standard and this means and equalization that goes from 20hz to 20khz +,- 20dbs!!!!!!!this deemphasis means added distortions, phase chnages, non-linear anomalies, added noise, additional stages where the signal have to pass through.
Then the signal is trasfered to vinyl with all imperfections where does not exist a perfect cutting system, here there is several kind of signal loses: certainly what is in the recording was not what was recorded before all that proccess.

When we want to hear the LP in our audio system that analog signal must be recovery through the phono stage for we can attain a flat frequency response ( just like exist ( with out RIAA eq. ) in a digital medium. ) so inside the phono stage that signal pass again for an additional RIAA eq. ( this time an inverse eq. ) with all the heavy degradation: distortions, phase problems, added noise, colorations, etc, etc, etc.

Inside that phono stage the very low output signal must be amplified ( sometimes 10K times!!! ) to a level where the preamp can handle it as it handle in "; natural"; way the digital signal that has a lot higher output level. Through the high gain proccess the signal pass through 3-5 additional stages that continue degrading the signal continue adding more distortions ( of every kind ), nothing of this happen with the digital medium. That very low output signal characteristic makes that the signal be extremely sensitive to be degraded by everykind of " pollulation " ( electrical/magnetic. ) where the higher digital output signal is a lot less suceptible of that kind of degradations.

All those is what happen to an electronics level now we have to add the worst of all the signal manipulation:

a cartridge to " read " the recorded information, a cartridge is a rudimentary " instrument " for say the least. Cartridge designers make some kind of " magic "/tremendous efforts for the cartridge can makes its critical/titanic job.

A cartridge is an " unstable " tool, everything affect its performance: kind of cantilever and cantilever build material, stylus shape and with which kind of quality was builded, room temperature, kind and quality of cartridge suspension, cartridge motor design, cartridge body resonances, cartridge ridiculous pin connectors, etc, etc, each part of the cartridge degraded the original signal with out exception.

After that the cartridge must be mounted in a tonearm for it can ride the LP and one of the first challenges that the signal has to deal with are the " stupid " tonearm wire connectors to the cartridge and then the in ternal tonearm wire and the the additional IC between the tonearm and the phono stage. In all those links the signal continue degrading, this does not happen in the digital alternative: so no signal degradation.

But the worst for the " end " ( sometimes I think the analog medium is: endless of problems. ):

now the stylus tip hit the LP grooves and at microscopic level that stylus tip start a heavy fight against the grooves/its compliance and tracking habilities to stay in the grooves to be in touch always and this happen almost never ( especialy with low compliance cartridges as the LOMC ones. ).
The stylus tip is " jumping " generating distortions and harmonic distortions. All this " fight " is transmited through the cartridge body to the tonearm which start to resonate ( adding distorions, non.linear anomalies, atc, atc. ) according those cartridge self resonances and according the cartridge compliance/tonearm effective mass.

But all the information captured by the cartrdige has not only a doses of tracking distortions becuase non-perfect cartridge tracking habilities but distortions because the stylus tip never coincide with the grooves never coincide on how the grooves were cutted!!!!! not even in a linear tracking tonearms.

Why is that? for several reasons: the LPs comes all with waves and off-center hole that preclude a perfect alignement trhough all the LP tracks. There is no perfect tonearm/cartridge set up it doesw not matters which geometry alignment we choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson, etc, etc, in all them there is tracking errors for a pivoted tonearm and that tracking errors means added distortions in the signal path.
Btw and talking of set up there is no perfect cartridge set up_ VTA/SRA/azymuth, overhang/etc, load impedance, load capacitance, etc, etc.

All these parameters all the playback time are changing because all the LP imperfections including different LP weights, excentricity LP " center " hole.

Don't forget the TT speed unaccuracies, speed unstability, rumble, wow&fluter, platter resonances, TT bearing ones, tonearm/TT mount board feedback and of course system SPL feedback that affect every analog rig.

I can go on and on and on with all the " thousands " degradation links where the analog signal must pass but as an example I think is enough.

Gentlemans, IMHO it is a " miracle " that we all after all those kind of degradations we still can enjoy the analog sounds!

+++++ " it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers... " +++++ ( speaking of LP. )

these and other adjectives that we audiophiles used to use when refering to LP quality performance experiences does not comes in the recording in the original recording , those " characteristics " are a result of the heavy degradation that suffer the analog signal, degradation that does not exist in the digital alternative so that's why both mediums sounds different.

Of course that digital has its own trade-offs, well I prefer it: is truer to the recording.

That we like it the analog alternative does not confirms and does not means in any sense that is right, IMHO is wrong almost dead wrong.

I prefer digital HR ( DVDA: 24/192 ) for music sound reproduction at home because I 'm nearest to the original sound that passed through the recording microphones with lower " artefacts " than in the analog domain.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R. " +++++

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

and digital is still improving " every day " so the digital future is way promisory against the analog that is almost static.

I'm still on the quest of the very last boundaries on anlaog/LP reproduction and I'm doing by my self ( for many years. ) because the AHEE corruption does not help about but all the way the other side around: the AHEE has not interest that we can achieve the last analog boundary/frontier speaking on quality level performance. Pity, for say the least.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Lewm: AHEE means: Audio High End Establishment, we all belongs to it and we audiophiles are cautive into.

We customers decide almost nothing on which audio item should I buy.

Whom was whom taught to the " high end " audiophiles that MM/MI alternative did not belongs to the " high-end " but only the MC cartridges ( LOMC )?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophiles that tubes electronics is the name of the game?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophiles that SUT's is the way to go?

Whom was whom taught the " High End " audiophile that fix headshell tonearm design is the way to go against the removable headshell tonearm designs?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile that longer tonearms is the way to go?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " that BD TT were the road to go?

whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile that subwoofers are for HT and for improve bass weight?

Whom was whom thaught the " high end " audiophile that a high output impedance amplifier ( tube ones. ) performs great with speakers?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile that SS electronics are cold, analitical and non " musical " ?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile the analog is way superior to digital?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile that the important subject is that normal attitude on audiophiles: " it can be colored and non accurate but I like it "?

Whom was whom taught the " high end " audiophile that accuracy, neutrality, measurements are not important but that: " I like it "?

Whom was whom taught..............., etc, etc, etc, etc,.

WHOM WAS?: yes, the AHEE. You decide on audio only what you learned and normally you learned what the AHEE taught to you over the years.

Manufacturers, reviewers, audio distributors, audiophiles, magazines and the like are the ones that created and developed the AHEE and you and me can't do almost nothing to change it to change the AHEE " trend " a " trend " that IMHO goes against a true audio high end music reproduction grow up.

Got it?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Atmasphere: +++++ " This is bogus and possibly insulting... " ++++

NO it's not, even you learned ( for the good or bad ) through the AHEE and your ears accustomed to what the AHEE taught to you.

Your ears can't decide on what you are not accustom to or don't know.

Please don't post as a manufacturer but as a cautive audiophile of the AHEE.

All what I posted to Lewm is what we learned trhough the AHEE and we " like " to follow that trend even if it's way wrong. I used to follow it too but I learned by my self against what the AHEE taught me.

I was on tubes till I learned, I was on SUTs till I learned, I was on LOMC till I learned, I was on BD TT till I learned, I was..., I was..., and was not the AHEE whom help me to learn about but my self/own " discoveries " and one after other audio subject were I change my mind was a lesson to me: that what the AHEE taught me was way wrong and as I said we audiophiles can't make almost nothing to modify that " corrupted " AHEE trend.

The AHEE was very carefully to hide vital audio information to us audiophiles/customers even today and these misinformation is the worst kind of corruption where we have not a single defense.

I don't want to go deeper on this whole subject because is full of trash.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

The internet forums are part of the AHEE.

R.

Halcro: Audiophile forums as part of the AHEE tend to help but unfortunatelly not as fast as need it.

Take a look to the last 100 of threads in this forum and see what people ask and read what other persons answered and more important: wich kind of audiophiles ask and answer and which kind of audio systems they own?

It does not matters all those " characteristics " the mature audiophile normally gives answers according what he learned through the AHEE through his audio life, he is not willing to change it self because the AHEE does not permit that he do it. He has no culprit about.

Take a look say to that latest thread on SUTs and you can confirm what I'm posting here.

You and me are an audiophile " by product " of the AHEE that step by step learned and liberated ( in some ways ) of the AHEE trend.

Like it or not the AHEE exist, call you as you want it but is a real " issue ". If you have a better name good, for me is the Audio High End Establishment.

Think a little on this: why exist in some threads a so " hot " posts between audiophiles ( like me ): because in one side are the ones that defend what they learned for years through the AHEE and that are not willing to change and in the other side are audiophiles that finally learned OUTSIDE the AHEE that what they learnend were way wrong. Inside those differences exist an ignorance level on both sides but that ignorance level is not the same.

Halcro: if you or any one taught you that 2 x 2 is 7 and all your life you was sure about what happen when some one tell you that that was wrong that in reality: 2 x 2 is 4!!

Come on the AHEE unfortunatelly still wants that we believe that the Earth is not round but flat/plane!

It's up to any one follow believing that.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Halcro: I posted that we all are cautive and " victims " of the AHEE. Here an example where you were one more of those AHEE " victims ":

DaVinci Grandezza tonearm: you are a proudly owner of this tonearm. What's plain wrong with this design?

IMHO that the designers wanted that the star be the tonearm and not the other way around with the cartridge. In those times maybe they did not have very clear that a tonearm design main and whole target is to fulfill the cartridge needs.
Well, the original design that you own? does not permit azymuth changes according cartridge needs an according LP playback needs.

As you several audiophiles bought it and invest big dollars for it. Whom cares? no one of the owners because almost all were proudly to own that expensive and golden shiny tonearm.

All of us have to pay a very high price to learn outside the AHEE to can grow up in favor of MUSIC playback.

DaVinci manufacturer finally learned and after a while they designed a tonearm with azymuth mechanism and not only that but with a removable headhsell!!!!! when they were against both tonearm characteristics.

I know that like them you learned too but you are still an AHEE " victim " and there are several main and critical audio subjects where you are not willing to change and are " paying " the price listening day by day inferior quality MUSIC playback.

In some ways all of us are still looking the Eart as a flat " land " and we are ( almost ) satisfied with and that's why gentlemans like Atmasphere, you and several other ones still recomend:

" use your ears to decide. What you like it is the way to go " and this Earth flat subject is one of the main problems that the AHEE support any single day and why they support it?:

because mantaining on the ignorance side we the customers they can mantain us cautives and with out problems.
If we are ignorants we just don't ask for more.

What happen with the Timeline? started a " revolution " in the audiophile side. Everyone started almost for the first time if the TT we own was and is achieving the main TT design: speed and speed stability and this sole subject right now is a " problem " for the AHEE.

What if each single audiophile start to ask that the amplifier output impedance must match the speakers impedance curve to buy any amplifier?

what if each one audiophile start to ask no more SUTs in the phono stages to buy it?

what if each one audiophile start to ask for flat surface LP and perfect LP center hole to buy it?

what if....? what if.... ?

Can you figure what could happen inside the AHEE? and outside too?

IMHO that's the audio world where we all belongs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear mapman: Sources of truth?, it does not exist in formal way. They came from personal research deep research I can say.

Do you asked why almost no one likes ( AHEE ) to talk about distortions ( any kind )? distortions generated inside/outside at each single audio link in the audio system chain.

Distortions = Tabú

I support by some years now that the main quality performance differences in between audio systems are how hig or low are each one audio system distortions.

I support that the main target for any audiophile must be to lower any kind of distortions at any single link in their system chain. Because this means to have a more accurate and neutral audio system people " refuse " to do it because " they like what they listen right now " and don't want to be nearest to the recording.

Even the gentleman that started this thread made/make jokes on me because that " lower distortions " target .

I posted several times that the crucial/critical subject is not what you like or what I like or what people likes but WHAT IS WRONG OR RIGHT.

To accept that and to test it we have to have an UNBIASED attitude in all audio subjects/myths, to want an AHEE LIBERATION!!!!!!! because that AHEE in its today form is what stop the high end grow up!

A lot of creative audio item designers can't develop all that creativity when they already have the knowledge and skills to do it and they did not and don't do it even if they want it because the whole AHEE does not permit it does not leave them FREE!!!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear friends: +++++ " To accept that and to test it we have to have an UNBIASED attitude in all audio subjects/myths.... " ++++

that's what I posted and from your answers all of you are biased on what you learned through the AHEE ( Lewm, like it or not what is your audio foundation came from the AHEE and you are happy to follow it. ), so can't accept nothing that goes against it.

Gentlemans if my attitude were the same as yours I never started any audio project I started by my self and like all of you I stayed as a simple AHEE follower.

Btw, I never said ( Peterayer. ) that I'm not an AHEE member what I said is that all of us belong to the AHEE like it or not.

+++ " everyone is nuts (misinformed, whatever) except you. " ++++

I never said that either, I said " some " that's different.

++++ " WHat if you are wrong or missed something? How would you know? " ++++

I agree that no one is perfect and many times I posted exactly that: " maybe I'm wrong but..... " and till today no one took the " flag " and tell me you are wrong because:.......

you are right I can be wrong and is almost impossible not to miss something.
But time always helps to tell us if we are right or wrong and if we missed something. Through the time more than once I had to rectified on " wrong " statements that does not pass the test of time.

Every single statement/experience/discovery/ whatever I share in this and other forums is something that I test it every single day and still do it.
Many gentlemans in this forum and in this thread already made some changes in their audio believes testing and making of them some Raul " discoveries " and when that happen one, two, three, four or five times in different audio subjects/myths then is a confirmation that now if I'm wrong I'm not alone but in the other side can means that I was not wrong.

+++++ " I don't think any of my audio beliefs, correct or incorrect, were foisted upon me by some sinister cult power. My ignorance is entirely of my own making. " ++++

well now result that you don't belong to the audio community in the Earth, where do you come from? from Venus?
I don't think so, like it or not you as any one of us are a " by product of the AHEE that certainly is not a sinister cult power, not at all.

++++ " I suspect it is quite desirable to pursue low distortion, but not THD which turned out to be bs. " ++++

well that is a myth. When you lower the speakers IMD you are lowering too the THD and you can hear it if you are not deaf.

+++ " Without substantiations with data from "your research" you have no grounds to stand on. " ++++

well, that's is not exactly true. The substantations are each one of the gentlemans that some way or the other choosed to experiment withsome audio subjects I suppot and now they decided to follow it.

++++ " AHEE and "distortions" are Raul's indirect way of saying that the only truth is his truth, painfully arrived at.... " ++++

wrong absolutely wrong. Normally we are closed to any different audio subject that could modified in any way what we learned through the years because for each one of us what we learned is the " true " is the " Bible ".

I was not diffrenet from you in this regards but the difference was and is that I questioning if what I learned through the AHEE were true or misinformation because my ignorance level.

I questioning not only the AHEE but my self and each day I do that with my audio " new " discoveries and some AHEE audio subjects that are in doubt.

Everything I posted and shared in this forum is a result of that " questioning " and obviously a result of tests and first hand experiences that till today always were enriched for some of you that like it some of my discoveries.

Gentlemans, please do it a favor and don't question me but start a proccess to questioning what you learned on audio with a simple question: WHAT IF SOME CRITICAL AND IMPORTANT AUDIO INFORMATION I LEARNED IS WRONG TODAY ? What if wrong?

How do you know it's not wrong other than that futile: " I like it " ?
No one is perfect an all of us have an ignorance level that makes that we must learn every single day to improve that ignorance level. Of course that the easy path is to stay where you are to be a simple spectator/onlooker of your audio life instead an actor of it.

Till today with some of you the AHEE was and is the " designer " of your audio life not you.

Good news is that you can change easy that trend when yo decide to do it with an unbiased attitude unbiased from what you learnend questioning what you have and questioning your self.

Gentlemans, do you think that you live an enjoy a perfect audio world? a perfect audio life?

because only if you think that you will continue to question me and not your self and the AHEE.

I think that each one of us have the right to grow up in the right audio direction. To achieve that first you have to find out that road and when you have on hand never come back to that " jail ".

Sop from your point of view you are right and I'm wrong, you are perfect and I'm imperfect, you are " happy " and I'm unhappy,.... why not think the other way around just for fun. Maybe each one of you discover something interesting that could change your future audio life.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mapman: Agree that are many other persons that are thinking and experienced audio subjects " out of the box ", I never said I'm the " only ": not.

My posts about are not exactly to convince any one, it's clear that when people are sticky to " something " only them can be unglued.
What moves me about is to make some conscience that not all what we have what we experienced what we learned and what we belive and are sticky with is right, there are several subjects that are wrong and alternatives " unknowed " for us that helps to improve to rectify what is wrong in favor to be nearest to the recording.

Unfortunatelly in some of those alternatives we have to turn around not only our believes but many times our be-loved electronics or audio items " we like it " and unfortunatelly too we are not prepared yet to do it we don't have the correct attitude to do it.

I know that we have to change in some ways if we have to grow up and the first change must be in each one unbiased attitude because with out it we can't really change.

Why is that?, well many of us are accustom/ears-equalized to those: mid range lush colored sound, smooth highs, non-accurate organic bass and the like.

What could happen when instead of all that kind of sounds that you are accustom to start to hear accurate, neutral, non colored, low distortions performances through your system?

what you will hear is something different from what you are accustom something different for the better where the music you will enjoy and that comes full of " emotions " now will sound not only nearest to the recording but nearest to the live music as never before.

Accurate, neutral, non-colored, low distortions does not means in any way_ cold, analitical, no-emotions and the like: NO, what means is that we can have all what the music it self can make through our senses but with accuracy.

Live music has its own agresiveness and normally has not that " smoothness " you are accustom to or that lushness you " die for ".
As Lharasim posted we have to understand first how live music performs. Try to make an experiment: bring to your place some one that can play a horn/trumpet for you and hear it seated 3 m. from him, listen and try to find that lush or smootness you normally like. You can try wit other instrument and then you will understand all what is wrong in what today we are listening through our audio system.

Many of us think that music " belongs " to the mid range well in a home audio system my take is that music belongs to bass range, as better the system bass management as better the music experience.

It's in this frequency range where IMHO we have to start to inprove. A clear, accurate, neutral bass range puts the right frame for the music where in the other frequency ranges you will hear that transparency/dynamic/power and information that you are unaware right now. Having the right system bass management means lower IMD/THD in your system and you can hear it and when you experienced this for the first time you will be speechless.
As with this action there are many others but IMHO this is the first step.

Yes, I know that many of us think that we already has that right bass management well ask you if can improve it and work there before you buy more cartridges, TTs or tonearms. For we can enjoy at top level all our new audio toys we have to improve that bass management system ( as other things around. ): the cartridge signal is processed through the system.

To achieve that " right " bass management ( with passive system speakers. ) we need to have two self powered subwoofers working in true stereo fashion:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&27&4#27

Secon step could be to match system electronic impedances in the same manner that with a cartridge we look to match it with the right load impedance. That means to match phonolinepreamp output impedance with the amp input impedance and the output amp impedance with the speaker electrical impedance curve. In this last case we need that the output impedance on the amp be/stay very low: 0.05 ohms is desired.

You can follow questioning me but is useless, what can help you could be to try and test/experience those two steps along attend as many times you can to hear live music.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mapman: Unfortunatelly all the audio community belongs to that AHEE.

Now, inside the AHEE are great things and bad things, good very good people and other not so good.

Agree, impressions matter with people, sometimes even more than facts.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mapman and friends: If we take a look around us around each one system and around threads/posts on several internet forums we can confirm that more and more audiophiles are now listening/to take refuge on vintage audio items: TTs, tonearms, cartridges, speakers and even electronics.

Why is that?:

certainly there must be/exist heavy reasons to that kind of behavior other than " vintage nostalgic ".

That's IMHO a fact that is telling to the AHEE that something is wrong with the AHEE historic trend and that something must has to change that audiophile firm trend in favor of what MUSIC playback needs, in favor of what LP playback needs and of course in favor of what all of us audiophiles needs more than simple making $$$$$$$.

I think that that audiophile " silent protest /revolution " is not enough because the AHEE follow with its trend.

I think we have to SHOUT at every single forum/way we have. I think we have to take active actions to really provoque an audio highn end change in favor of the AHEE and its real grow up in the right direction.

How can we SHOUT and be heared?, examples: that all over the world the audiophiles stop to buy any single audio item for one week or one month, to all audiophiles cancel their audio magazines suscrptions, that all audiophiles send an email SHOUTING to all audio forums, etc, etc.

Today, we audiophiles over the world are the ones that mantain that permit to survive any single AHEE member ( the good ones and the ones not so good. ) with our money$$$$ not with their money.

Always is to easy " to play " with other person money but a different history to " play " with our own money. Don't you think?

That's my opinion, which is the one each one of you have on the whole subject? do you want to follow paying for audio items ( any ) that does not fulfill the MUSIC and your real own NEEDS?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thuchan: ++++ " audiophile nirvana which we all of the AHEE community will never reach .... " ++++

No, I never said that. What I said is that there is an alternative to enrich that today Nirvana you have: lowering system distortions.

I posted two steps that helps about but certainly there are others that we have " walk ".

Now, one important subject is: how can I know that I'm really lowering the system distortions or in the right road?

There are some ways to do it. One of them is:

listen to digital, CD ( redbook ) in a decent/latest CD player. You need to buy titles as these Original Soundtracks:

1492 Conquest of Paradise ( Vangelis ), The Thin Red Line,
Memories of a Geisha and Gladiator. There are more but those is a good point to start.

Listen to those digital recordings and through the time ( working on system up dates. ) as you " accept " in better way ( enjoying really. ) what you are listening as better is your system quality performance and for sure your enjoyment to analog playback.

Digital has its own kind of distortions different from the analog ones and that's why permit and serve as a tool to improve our analog listening.

When an audio system has low distortions even those kind of digital recordings are not only listenable but you can enjoy it easily. Now, you have to enjoy it not only at low or " normal " SPL but at not-normal/high SPL, this is very important to test/experience because at high SPL; you will know about those distortions.
Normally are high distortions the ones that preclude that we can hear ( with out risk. ) the system at high SPL.

If today listening to those recordings is a " torture " for your ears then you have a big big system land to improve.

There are other tools that will serve you to know where you are " seated " in that lower distortion quest. Latter I can post about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thuchan/friends: Remember that you are not evaluating digital, you are not evaluating analog, not evaluating those CDs kind of music and not evaluating your ears what you are evaluating is the: SYSTEM QUALITY PERFORMANCE LEVEL.

Please don't try to make comparisons between digital and analog and don't look if digital can performs or not as analog: NO, NO.

Those CDs are only a tool: as an srewdriver to unscrew a screw and that's all.

It is not important that you like that kind of music or that you dislike digital " per se ", please use it only as a tool a " measure " tool to evaluate the system quality performance regarding low or high distortions on it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thuchan: Some tracks on those CDs has high content of low mid bass/low bass and are very good to evaluate the system bass management at low and high SPL.

What to look for?: that room/flor shake?, certainly not. What we are looking for is a bass perfomance with: fast transients, short decay time, no overhang, pitch, definition/precision,quality of, natutal color not " organic /bloom ".

We are looking for a firat rate bass management that permit to enjoy that bass frequency range with out " touch " the midrange/high frequency ones, i mean with out lost of midrange/hf transparency but the othet way around: clean, transparent, higher detail and endless dynamics on these frequency range.

Some of the tracks in the Gladiator CD is very good about because combine that kind of bass with full midrange/hf range music. It has very demanding " grooves " where only with top system quality performance can enjoy it and can follow each single mid range/hf notes at each single layer in the " grooves ".

Of course that there are passages where the bass go not only deep but with enough quantity to feel it inside your " bones " but even there the other frequency ranges must be hear it clear with detail and emotionally right.

It is not an easy task for any audio system, always a chllenge that when " you win " the overall rewards are richness than ever.

There are other CDs that are very good tools to evaluate that regards as: The Day After Tomorrow.

Those CDs tool/tests helps to improve room interactions, speakers/subs right position, faults on electronics.

Yes, you have to make changes or confirm that your system is just RIGHT and inproving.

Btw, I'm posting about because you ask for.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Thekong: +++++ " So, that goes back to what I like / prefer ... " +++++

not exactly, maybe I did not make a good explanation or you don't read it pefectly what I posted because your statement is not what we are looking for. We don't want more of the same because in some ways more of the same were wrong.

What we like it what you like or what I like or prefer is not the main subject but what is right or wrong, it does not matters if we like it or not.

When you attend to listen music ( example a horn player ) maybe you could like what you hear or not but that does not cares to any one.

What you are listening ( I'm not talking here: the kind of music but the instrument sound. ) is the way the instrument " speaks ", it's the self instrument color/voice and you can't do nothing to change it. The player does not ask you if you like it that instrument " voice ", he just play.

Maybe you could like more that hron sound if been less agressive or more smooth or not so bright or with more lush. All these because it's that way you are accustom to for all your audio life is that way that your " ears " prefer the music sound but what you normally are accustom to maybe is not right but wrong maybe it's not the sound of music in a live event at near field listening position.

So, what you like mor prefer is not important. What we are doing is wuestioning if what we heard through each one system is right or wrong against live music.

I posted here:

" if we have to grow up and the first change must be in each one unbiased attitude " +++++

" ++++ along attend as many times you can to hear live music. " ++++

that means no more: " I like or I prefer ", because the main subject has nothing to do with what we prefer because what we prefer is subjective ( and could be way wrong ) and how in true a horn " speaks " is objective: like it or not.

The example is with a horn but is valid with each instrument or at orchestra levels.

With all respect I don't care what you like/prefer or do not or if you want to change it all that's up to you
. I'm only sharing a " road "/alternative to improve each one audio system enjoyment and that's all.

IMHO something that could help to each one of us is how each one of us can enrich the whole subject/idea/alternative more than question it because we can't question it something that we never have the opportunity to experience.

I think is futile/useless to question/argue against something that we are not willing to do/try.

Everyone of us think that we already achieved the audio Nirvana at home and that could be not exactly as that because: do you think that exist thousands kind of Nirvana's?

IMHO exist only one, the right one. I'm still on the quest of it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Atmasphere: The issue is not if lP " smokes " the CD or the other way around. If you hear Gladiator in both formats then you can heard that digital smokes analog but this is not the issue. It is only a tool.

I make emphasis precesily in that was a tool and don't try to compare anything on LP vs CD as you posted because, again, that's not the subject.

In the other side, my experiences with different kind of electronics is that high distortions always are evident when you make comparisons/tests at high SPLs and I made emphasis on this regards too.

No process is perfect and mine on distortions neither.

Yes, the ears cares about distotitons if those ears are true educated on what is right or wrong because if are educated on what you prefer then does not helps on what is the alternative to upgrading that I'm sharing.

You posted the answer: ++++ The bottom line is understanding what the ear cares about +++++"

again, not what is prefered but what is right or wrong. To understand it you have to have the knowledge level, have to be aware of.

Normally we are accustom our ears are accustom to what we prefered more than what is right. Of course some of you already know what is right or wrong but some of us are not aware of that subject and what I'm saying is for the ones that are not aware of.

Now, till this moment I posted some steps that could help to be sure where we are " seate d" and till this moment no one posted something that can enrich the proposal/alternative.

Seems to me that no one is willing to " unglue " of what learned and with this kind of attitude is almost imposible to have a formal discussion that can help to achieve better conclusions or better alternatives to improve what we have.

I gave two steps to improve system distortions: better bass system management and system matched electrical impedances. Till today no one posted that he already achieved it years ago or that started yesterday to do it through system changes and shared his experiences.

So, what's all about?

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Normally when the system set up was made to listen mainly to analog then that's how it performs and when we hear other alternative normally we dislike or the anlog smoke the other one.

Please stop to make that kind of comparison is useless and does not helps to the overall subject.

We are using digital as a tool: I repeat as a tool because its distortions are different from the LP ones and what we are evaluating are the system distortions level.

Why is so dificult to understand it? or is it so bad my explanation that no one can understand it? if yes: end of the subject.

R.

Dear Thuchan: +++++ " But why not describe for me and others in positive words how your brave new audio world looks like and which (positive!) attitudes and habits are necessary for becoming a full member of this rare circle. " ++++

this is what you posted and my posts were a result to your question.

So, now after I gave you my posts/answers ( from your request ): are you telling me " smoke..... because it's about TT?

I think is in some way " dishonest " to ask a person: " pull the triger " and after that " blame " me because I followed your advise/I pull the triger. Are you nuts? what's all about?

I felt your " pull the triger " was a real and sincere action but I can see that you are not trusty and we have to have care not to fall in that kind of trap.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Btw, you are wrong when refered that I'm talking of digital because I did not. Maybe you can'T understand what means: " tool ".
I'm speaking of a tool to improve the analog experience. Is it not what you were asking for?

Why your " surprise " ?

Got it?

R.

Dear Peterayer: I have no doubt that what you experienced in Viena listening at near source field live music was the most enlighted, learning and full of enjoyment of any other music experiece you had on your life.

I assumed because I had that kind of full experiences too in several ocasions. This is IMHO the best music reference we can have and a must to live it.

So, you understand very clear what means: low distortions and certainly what's right or wrong and that's al about.

Btw, looking to your system and even that your system place/room is not a big one but due that your magico's 7 inch. drivers are handling a wide frequency spectrum I can tell you that you could be nearer to teh recording and nearer to what you experienced in Viena adding to your system two active subwoofers in full stereo fashion. You will lower distortions as you never imagined. An opinion only.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Peterayer: It's normal that the manufacturer advise be that you go for a bigger speaker in his catalogue.

Still today IMHO when we are talking of home stereo system subwoofers perhaps no one knows more than Velodyne. JL are good but not good enough.

In the other side, for integrate a pair of subs in a system the first issue is to know exactly what we are looking for and from my point of view the main targets are not bass impact or extension. We have to have very clear which kind of installation we will do where crossover frequency on the subs and main speakers is critical and it's from here where we can start to " build " the subs integration followed by the room subs position.

Yes, it is not an easy task but if you or the person that help you have the knowledge level then there is no doubt that you can achieve success about.

++++ " seamless integration " ++++, again with the right knowledge level that is IMHO always attainabel.

I took almost a year with my system to achieve that: " seamless integration " .

First decision you have to take on subs is to choose the right subwoofer and IMHO JL was a " wrong " alternative. It's not my opinion but there are facts about, example: for the model 212 JL gives an spec of 6.5% value for its THD at 50hz, this means that at lower frequencies as 20 hz that number can goes over 10% easily.

The Velodyne THD at 20 hz is only 0.5% and there are several reasons for that and one is the Velodyne system acelerator/servo that sense/measure over 15 K times each second the woofer movements to impede not only overload but to mantain inside that 0.5% THD. No not all subs are the same, but the important issue is the knowledge level we have.

If you are trying to add subs with high distortions you can't have success.

Believe or not IMHO the integration of active subwoofers in system with passive speakers is a " new science ".

Regards and enjoy the music,

R.

Dear Mosin: ++++ " I suspect that in the end, whether one likes how EMT 927 sounds, or doesn't, depends solely on its maker's idea of what constitutes the proper signature .... " ++++

IMHO if a TT ( including the 927. ) has its " sounds/signature " then is away of netrality, a TT main tragets must be accuracy and neutrality.

No one here speaks about neutrality but how great it " sounds " against other TTs, makes no sense to me.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmely: There is no doubt that you are a passionate music lover an audiophile and a in deep admirer of the 927 and so deep that maybe you a are leaving some importants facts or at least not mentioned yet on the 927 quality performance.

I have no doubt either that at engeneering level the 927 is a " tour de force " and I would like to know how that so high level of engeneering is reflected against some facts/specs/measures that speaks about one of the main design TT targets named accuracy. I think that first than all when we are talking at this so high level of designs we have the right to know how accurate is the item.

So, how it compares on signal to noise ratio for example against the Exclusive 3a that measures 95db? or against the Yamaha GT 2000 with a wow and flutter of 0.0025%? or the Technics SP10MK3 speed stability of 0.0001%?

Engeneering must be reflected on accuracy characteristics against what is in the market, especially when we are saying that the 927 is the " holly grail ". Maybe you can put some " light " about.

Now, I agree with Tonywynsc that neutrality could be the " perfection " that can't be achieved but ( again ) when we are touting so high the 927 is reasonable to ask for that characteristic that as Peterayer said is plain and simple: " don't add or lost nothing to the recorded signal ".

Natural from your point of view and your examples posted is more a subjective parameter that means it's not neutral but only diferent with different colorations/distortions.

I never had the opportunity to heard the 170 kg. American Sound TT that's a different kind of design including its drive mechanism but I heard the Final Paruthenomn( 140 kg. ) that was an assualt to the state of the art on TT.

Btw, Mosin I think that is so elusive the neutrality target that you really can't find out that " boring " you said. But that's not the point, what you said seems to me only : how to find out a mistake on what I posted. I know that you know exactly what I'm refering when I speak of neutrality on TTs.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mosin: What could be main targets for you or people like you when are going to design an audio item?

for me that that audio item " does not add or lost nothing to the recorded signal ". That we can achieve it or not is another matter but the important subject is the target.

The R"R comparison sugested here IMHO does not works because what's in the LP grooves is way different from what is in the tape if for no other thing because the eq. RIAA. We have to remember the additional steps where the signal must pass before we can have on hand a LP.

All in " nature " have its own natural coloration. We can't mimic the real thing in a two channel home audio system, so at least try that at each single link in the audio system chain all those link can approach ( nearest ) that neutrality.

I care about in my system. Approaching 100% of accuracy and lowering every kind of distortions through all those system links we can be nearest to the LP grooves.

Dkarmeli, posted examples of that " natural " sound and reality when we are seated in different places in a music hall but that IMHO we can't take in count because what comes in the LP grooves was recorded for microphones that was in a very different position that when we attend to a concerto. Those microphones are really near to the source and the direct sound is the one that prevail when at our seat position the reflected sound has a main influence in what we are hearing.

I always say that the main difference between audio system is it's distortion levels ( everything the same ) and accuracy.

What are we touting here with the 927?, only subjective words not a single fact as the ones I asked to Dkarmeli. If we are saying that the 927 is the holy grail: where are those facts that could prove with out doubt is in reality the hoily grail? some people here say that the motor is something as the star? well where are the facts that can prove it against say the motor in the Rockpot Sirius 3 that has a signal to noise over 100db!!!

Subjective tests are always important but we need to have those measures on the item performance to know if what we are hearing is a real inprovement or only a full of distortions performance.

Now, if you have different targets than accuracy and neutrality then everything is different.

MS designers never had those targets and even in the SX-8000 they offered in those times two different kind of TT platters with different colorations. If a designer is looking for some kind of colorations ( named distortions. ) then he are away from neutrality/accuracy. Any one has the privilege to design or buy what he wants.

Things are that I like the accuracy/neutrality approach.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmeli: Thank's for your wide answer explanation.

++++ " it goes way beyond measurements " ++++++

agree, with today measurements we can't explain for sure all what we percieve or discern on almost any audio item but those measurements is a reference especially when we are talking on this kind of top quality performance level.

Of course that what is important is how deep an audio item " moves " you how well wake up our emotions/feelings but from this point of view, that as you said we can't measure, MUSIC it self has a mains characteristics that's to moves you even if you are hearing trhough a Walkman.

I heard several times the 930 and other TT EMT models in systems that I know very well and other that was my first time with. I'm not impressed for it in a different way that hearing other top TTs.

++++ " my subjective experience is the final determining factor for me. " ++++

When we make that statement IMHO that means: " end of history ".
There is no single argument to that " I like it ". It lost any proposal because any one of us are unique and what you like it could not like to other persons and the other way around too.

Facts/measurements does not cares on what we like it but in what's wrong or good and that today measurements can't explain what we heard in precise way does not means that that can't do it it's only to know what to measure and where to measure. Even those the TT typical measurements are good reference.

What if the 927 S/N is a mundane 75db or the w/F only 0.1%? what could told us these measurements?, plain and simple: that what we like are colorations/distortions away to be natural and higher that what we can hear trough other TTs.

At the end the whole subject is really complex and only testings in the same audio system the 927 against other 6-7 top TTs we could have a " true light " about and only if that subjective testing were made it by non-biased persons avoiding that: " I like it ".

About the Final TT I know an Agoner whom own it and I can tell you that maybe he does not agree with that: " too many gimmicks " .

Now, IMHO nothing in audio ( including the 927 ) is a rocket science that can't be duplicated. If, for example, I'm a TT designer ( that I'm not. ) that wants to put on the market the real ultimate TT I can asure you that I will analize every single today/vintage top TT not only to duplicate its performance but to improve over it. Maybe no one thinked that the 927 is the one to beat ( price no object. ).

Could you think that in China, Japan, Korea, etc, etc can't be duplicated? I think this is not the subject.

Subject is that we must have measurements of the 927 as a reference independent of that: " I like it ", IMHO we have to know: what are we hearing with those today tipical measurements/facts?. It can't hurt if we know about.

Don't you think?

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Mosin: +++++ " True, but the rub is in what is measured, and how it is measured. Let's use speed control as an example. I make a turntable that is "speed accurate" to at least one part per million, which is the theoretical limit that can be achieved with an idler type drive due to the inherent tracking error of an idler wheel. I know that sounds impressive, but what does it tell us? The answer is not much, really. Why not? That is because such a measurement is an average. " ++++

yes but then you have to go on the whole TT design about that inertia you are talking about to mantain always the speed accuracy. All these is clear and when that is achieved then we have accuracy all the time it does not matters stylus drag or problems in the elcetric source or whatever.

That kind of accuracy ( between many other things in the TT design. ) helps to have or approach for neutral performance target.

Seems to me that in all audio orders/items the accuracy word is an eveil word a forbidden word when accuracy is the norm that moves all the Universe and moves inside the Mother Nature.

The Earth planet spins around the Sun with absolutely accuracy that with out it the Earth could be burning or a celestial piece of ice. With out accuracy the perfect equilibrum that exist in the Universe fall down and collapse.

With out the kind of accuracy that has the Earth " forces/energies " the equilibrum will collapse too and the sea water ( example ) could goes six meters high.
When a lioness is hunting every single step on that hunting must be accurate to have success and the lioness knows a lot about accuracy and when non-accurate it fail on the hunting ( 60% of the time. ).

As with those examples there are " millions " on every day stages that its behavior foundation is accuracy as the human been organism: our heart or lungs works with exceptional accuracy as any other of our organs/glands.

Accuracy is ne name of the Phisycs Laws or Mathematics. Accuracy is the foundation and prevail in all life stages all over the Universe.

Your example: +++ " I make a turntable that is "speed accurate" to at least one part per million, which is the theoretical limit that can be achieved with an idler type drive " ++++

speaks of accuracy.

Why no one in audio accept or wants to speaks about accuracy?, when is the norm/rule elsewhere.

In a phono cartridge accuracy is showed at different stages: cartridge tracking abilities makes a difference between cartridges because : how accurate the cartridge track the grooves makes those differennces. At other stage we can see how accuracy is part of a cartridge design: how accurate the cartridge can convert the stylus/cantilever movements on MUSIC.

In a phono stage we can have different levels of accuracy in the RIAA eq. due to the deviations in every single phono stage from the RIAA eq. standard.

Why are we looking that our cartridge and tonearm stay matched?, because the quality performance will be more accurate and neutral that if not!!!

I can follow mention hundreds of examples how accuracy lives inside any audio item design, so why not name it wioth the name that belongs to all those: ACCURACY.

Even each one ears/body has different accuracy level.

Neutrality has a hard relationship with accuracy and is way different from that " natural " that Dkarmely mentioned.

In your post: +++ "
"speed accurate" to at least one part per million ... " +++

the word accurate you writed inside quotation marks, why? when you achieved the limit of idler drive mechanism. Why that " fear " to name things as they are!!!!!

IMHO even if you audio item designers ( not all. ) preclude the use of accuracy/neutrality each single step in your designs ( not all. ) carry on the mark of: accuracy/neutrality even if you can't achieve it but you work for it in each single step in a TT design ( or other audio item) because I can't think and make no sense that a TT designer can design the plinth or arm board with out accuracy and dead neutral as targets.

Of course that all of you can follow denyying: ACCURACY AND NEUTRALITY with out no single reason.

Agree with you that today tipical measurements ( I posted ) can't tell us all thye history but today those kind of measurements is all what we have and for good or not that's all what we have and a useful tool along our listener experiences that through many years we developed several abilities and one of that was to be to have and discern more accurately with a better understand what is wrong or what is good more that what we like.
Many os us like wrong or average " things/colorations " but this is not the whole audio subject

I try every single day to learn for I can improve my awareness on accuracy and neutrality.

Of course that any one of you can have way different targets.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmeli: +++++ " but from the best recording engineers, top recording labels and mastering labs, from people who had access to best master tapes and knew recordings with access to everything under the sun and did it for living. It was always THE industry standard .... " +++++

that only could proves that that design was made it thinking on that kind of market ( just like the SP-10 or Denon DP100 and other TT. ).

Normally those Industry standards are not necessary what we audiophile need. We have different needs that a recording engennerr. With a TT happen the same that with electronics: ask any audiophile here if is using pro-amplifiers or pro-DACS or pro-anything. I have experiences with that kind of pro-industrial design products.

If you see for example FM Acoustics when they decided to go to the high-end market they designed especial electronics for this market, they don't used its pro.industry designs: needs are way different.

I want that remember that were those recording engenners and record labels whom manipulate the microphone signal and were the culprit ( when it happen ) of so many bad recordings.
No, I don't want a celebrated pro-designed audio item: I want an audio item designed by a music lover audiophile that understand our needs.

The Industry standard means only that but not that is the best for us.

I changed in my set up ( other than my BD TTs. ) the SP-10 for a " simple " Denon and JVC TTs.

and this confirm my take:

+++++ " EMT wasn't concerned with the audiophiles, they built industrial grade professional equipment of the highest order.... " ++++++

Your statement:

++++++ " The great stuff is a lot more than rocket science, its art of highest order.... " ++++++

is only an opinion.
Art?, IMHO art is MUSIC, SCULPTURE, PAINTING and the like. Engeneering design at any stage is only that: engeneering design that could have different level of quality and excution.

+++++ " I know enough to know what I like... " ++++++

of course you know but that is not the subject. The subject is more more deeper and a way different concept in audio that that: " I like it ".

I think that we have to analize audio subjects in our stage/scenario with its specific needs.

That an industrial design could works in our " land " not means is the Holly Grail in our " land " but only another option/alternative.

Btw, I think that in all audio subjects we have to analize them with two " charges/weights ": objectiv and subjective and unbiased.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmeli: It's obvious that we are looking the audio subjects in different way.

In the other side I'm not trying to diminish the 927 I'm only trying to understand/find out facts that can confirm your words.

Subjectivity is unique to each person and even in your appreciated " romantic " way of thinking is not the same for other persons.

Dkarmeli, there are scientific reasons why you exist in the same manner that are scientific tools that can or not confirm your words on 927.

I posted before that when you say: " that's what I like it or I like it ", then the conversation is endded because there is no single argument against that " I like it " when the other side close the door.

I said that any audio subject must be analized in two ways: objective and subjective and of course with an unbiased mind.

Yes, for me accuracy and neutrality ( low low distortions/colorations. ) are my audio system targets. I don't like or want to add more color/distortions to the one that comes in the LP grooves.

Btw, if creativity is what you means with art then we can agree to disagree because that " solid engeneering " is not only " numbers " but how a human been handle those " numbers ", is part the creativity ( how it works with the " numbers " ) of that " solid engeneering " because one thing carry the other. Art is a little more that only creativity.

Anyway, thank's for your time.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

ear friends: IMHO analizing any subject from different perspectives always help.

I said that po-audio products as the 927 and other EMT models were designed not for music lovers audiophiles as you or me but for the specific needs of Radio Stations and in lower grade to recording companies ( Technics and Denon models were the answer to EMT on those markets with the SP-10 and DP 100. ) and those needs are not necesarly the same what we needs other than a TT can spin.

Radio Stations needs at least three main targets: fast start/stop, drive power and that the unit can works with out problems 18-24 hours a day 365 days a year. They don't care about almost any other thing. The EMT is a package not only a TT that comes even with the phono stage integrated, something that we don't need it.

Of course that the EMT TTs could works in our today audio systems but I think is not the best option as is not an option for any one of us that instead to use a normal Honda ( or whatever ) car use a Formula 1.
Sure the Formula 1 is great but is great for Formula 1 races not to our city streets that ask for different needs.

Now, here are some specs on EMT TTs that could confirm what I said:

the 938, 948 and 930 models had a signal to noise ratio: 70db and wow and flutter: 0.075%

where the 950 shows a less poorer ( but still a poor and along the others the worst specs I seen in my life for a TT that several people things are top ones when certainly are not. ) spec on w&f: 0.05%.

All of them speed innaccuracy is : 0.1% when an average Denon model ( Not the top, from those times. ) has: 0.002%

IMHO there that touted " holly grail " is a misunderstanding about and I think almost an " insult " to today TT designers.

I repeat what I said: if that EMT were so good then many other manufacturers today already designed around it but this is not happening because they understand in better way the today home audio system needs.

Biased opinions are not a reference against a " calm/cool " unbiased ones ( not mine. ).

Well this is a different perspective to analize that EMT item where we can't change facts only because that : " I like it ".

I invite any one of you try to think " out the box " and I'm sure you will improve a lot your enjoying MUSIC experiences trhough each one audio system.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmeli: +++++ " If you paid me I wouldn't sit in a roomful of audiophiles listening to gladiator, vangelis or any other audiophile paraphernalia du jour comparing analog vs digital .... " +++++

well, the mundane Gladiator CD is a challenge ( played trhough latest DAC technology. ) for any top audio system including yours.

When any one can listen the Gladiator CD at 95+ SPL and peaks on the 107db and is gratificating what are listening then you can say your system is at the very top quality performance level performing with very low distortions and near to that neutral characteristic and obviously with accuracy.
In the other side when that happened then you can be sure that any single LP will shines in that audio system.

Btw, Gladiator is only an example, I use several recordings with every kind of music: classical, jazz, blues, pop, rock, etc, etc. where any one can attest the today digital supremacy over LP and if you use a DVDA to compare it against the same LP recording you just can't belive it.

There are several good reasons behind the today latest digital technology that permits to affirm that supremacy against LP.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Swampwalker: ++++ " what is essentially a subjective experience may, " ++++

that's your opinion bacause for me is an objective/subjective experience.

Btw, I took that analogy with out revising nothing of information.

You understand perfectly the subject of accuracy . That you took your time to investigate something on my samples to find out where I could be wrong is futile not objectivity.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dkarmely: Remember that to make comparisons I have to have both versions: the digital and the LP.

Btw, that Gladiator is really a mundane old CD that I compared against the audiophile LP today pressing.

R.

Dear Bydlo: +++++ " I think just one plain number as W&F tells you as much
about a TT as a shoe size about a girl. " ++++++

I agree and that's not what I posted here, measurements ( today ) can't tell thw whole " history " but we can't diminished.

I prefer a mproduct hat sounds good and measured good that one that ( everything the same ) measured in poor way because goes against MUSIC and against my targets.

Could make sense to you that a TT designer design the item with out measure it, at least for curiosity?

Example: if I'm designing a TT at least I want that spins at 33 1/3 rpm/45rpm not at 36-45.8 rpm and like this other parameters independent of all the whole TT design.

We can't live with out measures, that girl you taloked about gives you itz size/measure shoes and how old are you? or what time is it? or the size of your chirt? or how many hours to fly to Hong Kong?

Accuracy, neutrality and measurements are not the " eveil " no one wants to talk, it is part of our life in any single stage of it and in audio is not the exception: like it or not.

Please, any one of you tell me why you don't want to know about accuracy or measurements on audio items because designers must do it.

Mosin here, talked about: that he alredy gone to the lmit of the idler technology about speed stability.

It makes no sense to me try to deny all those subjects that ar critical an important part on each one of us audio systems.

Regrads and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dkarmeli: You don't need to throw all your records, why? that's not the subject and the irony in your statement neither.

Yes, the only fact you have is subjective: " I like it ", nothing wrong with that. My subject goes beyond it and involve alot more that only that. I'm not biased in the same way you are, my take in my home audio system is to enjoy in all its splendor the MUSIC that comes in the LP grooves adding and losting the less.
To achieve that target I need accuracy, neutrality and very very low distortions ( any kind. ) at each audio link in my system. I'm trying to be nearest to the limits/boundaries of LP experience, be nearest to " perfection " because first than all I'm a music lover and not a harware lover that's only a tool to enjoy the software named MUSIC.

Dkarmeli, the difference between each one of us reside in what kind of distortions we like. Btw, I don't like any kind of added distortion/colorations in my system, I already posted: is more than enough all distortions/colorations that already comes in the LPs to not take care in deep where the cartridge signal must pass and try to avoid signal degradation.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

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.

I forgot, I don'ttrying to put down that EMT TT. I'm only sharing a different perspective and that's all.

R.

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.

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.

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.

Dear @lewm : The @halcro question is a very good one not only for you but for each one of us with multiple TT/tonearm/cartridge's.

Now, you said:

"""   it is impossible or at least very difficult to sort out the root causes of those differences because of the tonearm/cartridge differences.  However, I think those of us who regularly listen to a variety of different combinations can begin to discern what aspects of the sound are likely to be turntable-specific. """

well in your case is not only the tonearm/cartridge diferences but two totally diferent and independent audio systems in a diferente venue where we can must handle diferent degradation kind of distortions because both systems are diferent and with diferent TTs both.

I made emphasis on TTs because you said:

"""  I am very confident there is a kinship between the "sound" of the L07D and that of the TT101, and what those two have in common is a coreless motor ... """

I respect your opinion but seems to me that because each TT belongs to a totally diferent audio system with diferent tonearm/cartridge combination and all that opinion could be on the " air " and maybe not so " confident " as you said.

Anyway, good for you that now what " move " to you is the MM/MI alternative that's is a very good one and a real aternative to the LOMC that's a great one too but a " little " diferent.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.