Grand Prix Monaco review in new Stereophile- OUCH


Anyone read Fremer's review of the Grand Prix Monaco in the latest Stereophile?

Ouch that has to hurt. I am familar with the design of this table, and of course on paper it seems groundbreaking, but if I were in the market for a $20K table, (I'm not) this review would completely kill my interest in this seemingly stellar product.

Any other opinions?

(actually this is a great issue of Stereophile - lots of gear I am intersted in)
emailists
It's "grooves" but of course it's all "subjective" and dependent upon many factors. Those are givens. However, do this long enough and get it wrong too many times and you've got no credibility. In Stereophile you write your "subjective" (I prefer "observational") impressions and then there are measurements. When it comes to speakers I try to predict what the measurements reveal and I have a pretty good track record in that regard. There should be more information in reviews than just subjective sonic opinions and there usually are in the good ones, including information that's valuable when considering a purchase.
I returned the Halcyonics stand as I do all gear I don't buy. I have no doubt that Halcyonics made a difference....
I don't mind the bit**ing or the personal attacks. It's unfortunate, but part of the territory. Instead, you should visit the Wall Street Journal and look up a piece by a guy named Terry Teachout about "deaf audiophiles." This guy is dangerous and is deserving of a well written (not nasty) email. His address is there. The guy hates us and has been at it for quite some time.

Constructive criticism is always welcome but how many times do people complain that reviewers "never say anything negative" and then when they do, they complain about them too!!!!

The Monaco turntable is something everyone should spend some time listening to. It's strong suits may outweight the negative ones for you, or you may not hear the negatives I pointed out at all. Also remember that reviews put products under a microscope and when that's removed some of the problems diminish in size....

It's important to point them out though because short term you might not hear them but long term (once you plunk down yer money) you might! A reviewer's job is to find those "issues" quickly and point them out...at least that's how I see my job.....
the fluid amount has to do with critical damping and the critical damping will for the most part be dependent upon the weight of the cartridge and its compliance. Underdamping will usually cause the sound to be brighter and 'faster,' overdamping will make it sluggish-sounding, thick and sometimes dark and veiled. Yes, this is an important consideration...
I'm not sure why Thomas doesn't suggest damping fluid with his 'table. The arm's physical performance shouldn't be dependent upon the 'table used, though the sonic combination is another issue. A few people complained "why didn't you set up an SME V, why didn't you set up a Triplanar," etc. I tried to set up a popular inexpensive 'table (Pro-Ject) that allows for most set up parameters, and one that didn't (Reg) plus a unipivot (VPI), the idea being the old "teach a guy to fish" parable. I felt that the VPI unipivot instructions would translate easily to the Graham.....