Well, Paul, a majority of audio Morons is that in their infinite chase for a “better” turntables approach the subject of turntables’ assessment using fundamentally faulty techniques. 
 
Let pretend, juts for sake of illustration, that a price of TT is directly relates to the TT’s Sound and a more expansive TT performs better, proportionally to the TT’s price, juts for sake of illustration…. Pretend a person has an average TT, let say the one that costs $1.5K. He spins the cords and he is happy. Then, a person listens a “noise” that analog people spread or read the thing that the Framer-like write and the person is ready to do “upgrade”…. What is VERY important that the person does not identifies for itself the Sonic problems with his current TT but instead got for another TT - a one that does not do “better” but juts sounds differently. Pay attention to what Framer-like do. They never identify problems with a current reviewing TT (or any other product they touches) but they/he only proposes some “differences” between a new reviewing product and some kind of deprecated product that does not need to be promoting anymore. Some people feel that Framer-like do it because their “marketing savvyness” but I do not feel so. The real reason why Framer-like-airbags do it is because they are completely ignorant in more or less civilized assessment procedures. The only real motivation for TT upgrade (or change of any audio component) should be a person clearly defines for himself what specific sonic shortcomings his current TT has. Then, ONLY AFTER THEN, a new TT should do nothing else but addressing those specific shortcomings.
 
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=432
 
So, the Framer came up with his “Continuum Messaahis”, but in realty in my eyes he did nothing but spoiled a subject of objections-loaded turntables. You’ve never seen Framer, or any other similar to him empty-head, complaining about a specific performance of his current TT… until they endorse a new model and then they sell to subscribing public the imaginary benefit of a new TT. Doing that, a reviewer suddenly discovers that his old TT had some issues with sound and “of course” the new TT “accidentally” addresses the problem. What actually in realty happiness - is that a reviewer conceives a set of artificial problems (juts for a sake of review) and then just cash out the “solutions of conceived problems” by proposing the new model.  Is very important to understand that a reviewer in this case is completely enslaved within a primitivism of own reviewing methodology. They write big words and try to sound cogent and intelligent but the core of it is that in the reviewing (as it exists today) when a review only intended to be written then the set of the “solutions of conceived problems” have already been pre-cashed. In this environment writing a review is juts dumping on the page a pile of word of to fill the page. That is why I seldom read review: becomes they are all writhen because the wrong reasons.

For instance the last TAS published Jonathan Valin’s observation about “competition” between Kuzma and Walker turntables. They both what is called “expensive” TT of the similar price-range and for an ignorant person the setting looks very reasonable: identically set up TT, the same needles, the same rest of the system (including a dead phonocorrector and insulting acoustic system) and so on. I also do not question the Jonathan’s desire to pick honestly the differences in sound that he was able to observe. However what Valin did I consider was a completely idiotic experiment, the idiotic enough to be conducted only by a reviewer of Jonathan Valin’s stature. Valin’s observation would be a valid entry at some like of AudioFederation blog but as a major article of a national publication and Valin’s journey looks... like …  all the rest Jonathan Valin’s doodles. If Jonathan Valin (or Fremer with his Continuum) are not able to take a “TT itself” and are disabled to say what the TT does wrong sonically then they have no business to write up for audio publications. Who the hell needs to read about the freaks comparing the sounds!?

Anyhow, the biggest problem is that they are not really understand with their short and limited reviewing minds the format in which their reviewing listening inelegance operates makes their observation about their turntables useless.  Therefore that hypostatical person with his “average TT” that I proposed above as an example is completely not served by the “Framerizm”…

A few weeks ago a have a friend of mine called me and told me that he has a change to “upgrade” his $5K TT to $15K. He named two well know to me models and asks my opinion. I asked his what is wrong with Sound in his current setup. The guy was throttled….

Yes, the Continuum is might be a good turntable but …what is wrong with SOUND of other turntables, the turntables that are not called “Continuum”? The Michael Fremer and rest writing clowns are not in position to handle this quest – they are too busy to sell turntables to the empty cretins like Mike Lavigne what whom Sound is a “Robb Report” of own mind. I am sure that the “simplified” Lavigne will be happy, the Fremer and the Continuum’s accountant will be happy…. However, the interests of Sound and the interests of the “person with an average turntable” still will not be affected. Yes, I would not be surprised if an “average turntable” (in context of proper reference points) would perform identically or better then the Valin’s or Framer’s “inventions”. But obviously those guys are disabled to see it, even if it was the case.

Romy, I get your point that it seems like the best and most likely application of your evaluation ideas would be exactly the “high-end” designers and manufacturers we are met to disparage.  And this should be particularly true in the case of the Continuum, where, apparently, plenty of time, money and expertise are combined, supposedly just for the purpose of constructing a viable world-beater of a turntable.  While I admit that the arm/’table combination is probably the most difficult part of the hi-fi chain to get right, the Continuum endeavor has all the “right stuff”, in rote terms, as near as I can tell.  There should be nothing stopping these people from doing exactly as you suggest, trying the “best” of the competition and fining their data through listening trials to arrive at a turntable that does its job as well as can be. It is frustrating indeed that any ostensibly-well-organized endeavor such as this would route itself instead through the constricted anus of “The Marketplace” to deliver yet another genuine gold plated turd.

For all I know this TT is excellent; but there are a number of telltale signs that it is just another “big” TT that in terms of performance lands squarely amongst its overwrought, high-priced brethren. I admit that I am predisposed to suspect the worst since I have never heard especially good sound emanating from one of these behemoths – at least not for long, and so I have never seriously pursued one even though I have thought in terms of solving some of the problems these big TTs purport to address.

For one thing, I agree with mass for TTs -  to a point -  when, according to my observations, it becomes unnecessary or even undesirable, for simple, practical reasons, not least because spinning an 80 lb platter requires less-than-stellar-sounding motive force.  And likewise with the air bearings, which so far have done better on paper than in the field.  In all cases, apply Ockham’s Razor to any fat in the design.

Also, I have to say I am no less suspicious of that tonearm, which appears poised and ready to strike from its pivot like the serpent from which it derives its name.  All that mass rearing up over the stylus looks like trouble to me.

Call it an educated guess at best, but the Continuum *looks* to me like a triumph of industrial design, manufacturing method and marketing over purpose-driven evolution.

A costly product such as this definitely needs a “Launch” to “succeed”, so it is no accident that such products always come in through the Grandiloquent Front Door to fanfare and enshrinement by invested parties posing as critics.

God help me, but with that much riding on the financial success of the venture I might well do the same.

I do not want to dive seriously into discussion about Continuum turntable. I have not reasons or interest, not to mention that this thread is not about the Continuum turntable but rather about the primitivism and idiocy of the “gantseh makher” Fremer.

Clark Carpenter, in his brilliant film review "Simplistic Schlock for the Simple Minded" said:

"Saving Private Ryan" is typical Steven Spielberg fare: a big budget spectacle, bereft of style, filled to the brim with childishly heavy-handed moralizing and peopled with facile "characters" who exist only as cardboard cutouts for the ensuing morality play.… The problem with Saving Private Ryan is the problem with everything Spielberg touches. More broadly, it is the problem of the American commercial cinema. Lacking the courage of any real conviction, it cannot offer any challenge to its audience. Instead, it panders to that audience with easy answers, impressive effects, a soundtrack that booms and tinkles in all the right places and a nice mom's apple pie pat on the back for every red blooded American. What's missing is even the faintest glimmer of awareness that the world doesn't break down neatly into heroes and villains, cowards and the courageous, us and them. In the place of subtlety, it gives us spectacle, in the place of art, it delivers technically proficient propaganda."

I just ran across this quote from Mr. Fremer, circa 1999, and I doubt much has changed on this front:

"Sitting in my listening room auditioning this $3995 Premier 15 phono section from Conrad-Johnson—a process that I made sure went on for months!—I couldn't help but think of all of the phono sections I've heard and reviewed over the years, and how convenient it would be to have them all here to compare to the C-J. But I feel reviewing is not and has never been about making those kinds of impossible comparisons. While some readers would like to have a lineup and a hierarchy, that's an impossible task—and in any case, what might work best in my system might not in yours."

I said before that I believe some reviewers do not so much fail to constantly question and/or sharpen their methodology as they "honestly" hold to the notion that audio is pretty much various combinations of trade-offs so complex and unnerving that NO ONE could ever sort it out.  While this in no way alters your sharp observations on method, it does point, I think, to a not-so-disingenuous approach by at least some of the apparently deaf and lazy reviewers out there.  These "reviewers" OPENLY offer what amounts to nothing more than free association passed off as audio reviewing.

I actually still wonder if Fremer and his ilk really do experience "excitement" over a given piece of equipment, and then I wonder some more whether there are any well-founded bases for their enthusiasm.  I have not written off alll the reviewers so much as I have lost track of them.  I used to read some of them enough that when they said, "Zig", I knew to zag, etc., because there was at least some continuity expressed in their likes, dislikes and observations that enabled me to put them into my own context.  However, this has not been the case for some time now, and Fremer's main boss, John Atkinson, openly dismissed even the idea of an audio lexicon, along with any need for regulating or any means or method whatsoever of ensuring the mutual intelligibility and/or general significance of his reviewers' reviews.  And of course he knew and knows his "readership".

So who would not get lost when there is so little in the way of direction on the one hand or significant response on the other?

Clearly, you know something about Mr. "Framer" and his intentions, since you clearly got under his skin, which I would have supposed rather thicker than it turned out to be.

I thought your Fremer/Continuum pairing was genius because it was quite specific and at the same time generic, like the bullfighter's red cape.  When I segued it was my intent to more rigorously examine the putative manufactured object of your attention, but I went with the Continuum-like when I knew it was the Framer-like.

BTW, I still glance at Fremer's reviews in Stereophile, and once in a while I read one.

Best regards,
Paul S

With great plessure and a deserved sense of appreciation I opened today the Stereophile and learned Continuum turntable was pushed by Michael Fremer to the “Product of the year”. I would leave aside even theoretical bogusness of the “Product of the Year” concept. In the realm where the Stereophile’s Morons lives there is not rational, applied purpose, journalistic cogency besides developing some cheap taking point for marketing avenues. Anyhow, they do what they do but in context of the given thread that is something that I would like to note: the price of the Fremerized Stereophile.

Stereophile elected the Continuum TT’s as the “Product of 2006” without regard that Continuum was hit market in 2004-2005. But at that time the Stereophile’s marketing whores did not share the Continuum's profit destitution and therefore, according the Stereophile’s logic, the Continuum TT did not exist.

Whatever the Continuum system does sonicly irrelevant to the given context… but do you know what happen when the industry “embraced” the product? Yes, you right –the price! (A few days ago I observing the BS that the industry created around Kharma loudspeaker I desisted to write a little essays about “Kharma in America”, I will do it when I have time and it will have a lot of common with Continuum’s pricing policy)

So, what the Industry did with Continuum’ price?  In one of my posts above:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?postID=3108

I have mentioned that I was communicating with an "industry player" who was considering becoming the Continuum’s distributor before the Fremer’s crap hit the fan. That industry player was VERY pricey and he was not one of those “Internet discounting junkies”. So, during those times when he was contemplating to take Continuum on, the RETAIL price for the Continuum’s entire system meant to be $40.000.00 ….  and it is including all necessary markups. (I would like to keep the Continuum’s wholesale price confidential - it is solely their business). So, what happen next? The "Sunshine Fremer and Co." popped up in the picture and the Continuum “Product of 2006” was announced at $99.500.00…

Nope, people. It is not about just prize – it is about justice. A next year, the few pages of BS that Mr. Fremer has written in his publication, those pages cost you, a customer, $60.500.00. It is  $60.500.00 that is taken out of each Continuum turntable and thay are $60.500.00 that do not worth anything.

Anyhow, as the result, the BS about Continuum is keep spinning, spinning, and spinning… this time at the right speed.  Defiantly it WAS the Stereophile’s “Accomplishment of the Year”

The industry mechanism of making shekels on somebody stupidity works like clockwork.

When I last year I was writing my initial article of this thread about Mike Framer, kangaroo and the financial burden that all this industry cheerleading inflict I was very conservative about the estimate of the  Framer-like financial apatite. 2 years ago not-yet-sang-about Continuum was proposing at CES their new TT for sub 50K (after the deals markup). As soon the Framer undertook the company promotion the price went to $96K. I estimated in my initial post that it will be $65K but I was wrong. My apologues for misleading the public…

The story how the Framer got his Continuum TT and how much he paid for it was mysteriously discussed at the number of the sites. I do not know the Truth and I will not speculate. However, I can testify that a number of the manufactures (who produce very expensive products) told me privately that many reviewer get expansive items “for a review” (without paying) and do not return them. It is not the manufactures are is not benefited  -each reviewing whore LOVE to mention what he his new cable elevator that he is reviewing sound extremely good with his Wilson MAXX or to mention any another component from the list of the items that the reviewer DID NOT PAID FOR.) Interesting (and pathetic in the same time) but the reviewers even make money on trading of the reviewed equipment.  I know personally the reviewers who extort components from manufactures, pump them up in their articles, make the prices go up and then sell the component for premium price at used market under the mask of their parties. Then, after the sale, (it might be in year or two) the reviewer return a portion of profit to manufacture (they pay hugely discounted prices). Considering the tend of thousands dollars involved and large number of equipment going thought the hand some of them, believe or not, make a nice supplementary income, sometime 3-figures income.

Anyhow, this post is not about reviewing fantail ethics, which is no different then our dirt in US Congress, be about something else. Many years ago one of the industry heavy player educated me how to ride the fools in audio production. He told me that the “rule of sale” is following: make a big splashy product, create a lot of noise and publicity about it and inject into the consumer minds a notion that the product is “unreachable”. Then introduce to the market a cheap “hoi polloi” model, turning into cash out the publicity around the first “flashy” model. So, to my surprise Caliburn anointed their new “Criterion” turntable at $45K.  (For the readers in the “Their Countries” who read my site let me to explain: the $45.000.00 is a price of INEXPENSIVE turntable in America). Well, this step from the Caliburn was painfully predictable, Also it is predictable the upcoming review from the Mr. Framer… I know each and single work in that review,  you know it too…

Well, I would care less about all that Caliburn saga but there is of something that hidden behind all of it. What is hidden is that Michele Framer with all of his pomposity has very mediocre, close to very bad, sound in his listening room (I have numerous testimonies from visitors who were in his room and some of the things that he writes are very much support those testimonies, I personally never was in his place). So, if the guy has crappy sound in his room (in fact it is how it should be with any freak who shovel equipment like a deck of the cards) then should he be fired as the unqualified person? If you go to a driving school and see an instructor who can’s park a car without hitting a curve or when you see 330 pounds fineness instructor then you recruit him/her or show them the door? I feel that very same in audio. If the person is disabled to get interesting sound, regardless of what he does, then the person should not have rights to open his mouth about audio subjects. Practically it is true if his “lips movement” cost you money, a consumer.

It was 15 years ago. Michael Framer was sitting in his home, taping scotch over a small white box, crying and cursing God. “Oh, Gods who run Roma?!” – wept Framer – without knowing the true meaning of his question.

“Gods what did I do to upset you?!!! I regularly brought sacrifices and followed faithfully the rules of the reviewing religion. Why you did it to me, Gods. You left me no other changes then to become murderer!” With this world Michael Framer put the last turn of tape over the box, stack a little key on the side of the box, turned the key and mischievously smiled. Then the Framer placed a big postal label with Australian address atop of the box, and  satisfied with the result he put the box in his current mail….

Today is March 15, 2022 and I’m sitting today with Michael Fremer at the yard of Sing Sing Correctional Facility in Ossining, New York. My editor asked me to find among the Sing Sing prisoners the most ridicule convict and write up his story. When I asked then unanimously all Sing Sing’s inmates pointed me to Michael Framer.

“He is strange”, said Alex Boom, life-convicted 63 year old priest, for slicing 129 monastery nuns with gas saw. “He is strange because he is sitting in his sell all day long, staring at a water dripping out of water facet and wring epic ode about the facet.”

So, I met Mrs. Fremer. I’m sitting with Michael Fremer and asked him what made him during that fateful winter of 2007 to send 3 ponds of dynamite to Australasia.

“I was angry, I was angry liken never in my life” – Michael explained.

“I was an audio reviewer and my serves to the public was to explain to people what to do. I spent almost a year of my life taken one hungry Australian, who had unhealthy relationship with his kangaroo, and make him as celebrated turntable manufacturer. Then the table turned. In the winter of 2007 Goldmund announced their new Goldmund Reference II Turntable. It was expansive model that with price tag of $300.000.00. I immediately got one and in the spring of 2007 I published an article claming that $300.000.00 Goldmund Reference II sounds 30% better then the $100.000.00 Australian Continuum. After reading the article the Australian people got pissed and demanded me to pay for the TT that they have given to me. I did not have so much money. I was trying to raise cash by selling the Continuum turntable but unfortunately everyone knew that if it comes form my hands that it should sound like shit and therefore I was not able to get any money for it. The bills kept coming and the phone kept ringing. I decided that the one way out is to kill all those Australians freaks along with this ugly kangaroos and their money collectors. I put 3 pounds of dynamite to a box and mailed it to the Australians. Yes I know, it was stupid but what else could I do? BTW, I see that you are recording our conversation. You know, I know 4393 ways to make this recoding to sound better…”

I said to Michael that I do not need the recoding to sound better. For my purpose I record words but not the words sound and what I had already was enough for me. I wished to Michael Fremer good lack and expressed gratitude for his honest story. I left the Sing Sing and whale I was driving I was thinking… What I was thinking about? I was thinking about that wild kangaroo that jumps calls across Australasian bushes and that do not give a damn about nether turntables nor about the turntables criminal promoters.

The subject of this head is not the Continuum Turntable but rather the little frighten Moron with sentimental name Michael Fremer. It is important to note that Michael Fremer is not just a Moron own problems but the persons who is with his proactive idiocy vigorously ruin audio industry. A few years back I pledged to sabotage or despise any product that Fremer “helped  to destitution”, do you think it is because my attitude? Nope it is not my attitude but my experience.  I just know in what kind shit any product or company turn into as soon the Fremer’s metastases touches a product or a company.

A case for illustration.  4 years ago Continuum was lost in nowhere AU company with those Australian folks trying to do better turntables with the scope of own understanding. Then Mike Fremer took over the marketing of the Continuum, blowing his usual short penis attitude hype and making the similar to himself cretins to “endorse” the Continuum. As the result the Continuum got some momentum in the industry, got a chair at the table of audio feast and as a result (absolutely like any other audio company I have seen) the Continuum have apparently turn (sound-wise) into… any other company the Fremer’s metastases have consumed. I did not go to for CES 2008 but from quite reliable sources I heard that almost a dozen of different companies used the Fremer-sponsored turntable. So, what was in common among all CES vendors that used Continuum? Reportedly they all had extremely horrible analog sound and had digital options way better performing. Well, I was not there but it sounds about right to me. 3 successful years is the time that the stupid Hi-Fi industry needs to fuck up a regular company…

I think the phenomena shell have a special medial name and be listed at WebMD…

This is kind of even funny. I was told that I need to buy the last Stereophile and to read how the industry cheerleaders vaseline the Magico guy. So I did buy it the magazine.

What was almost hilarious in the magazine was the lost in the slippery LAST paddles Mike Framer who does not knowledge and can not hear any negative difference between his raw record and the LAST treated records. I do not know what drives him to make such a statement. Perhaps if he extorts 55 gallons of LAST juice from the company then he would not be able to use and the fact alone makes his position about LAST too indifferent? Anyway, the point that I try to make is following: Why the hell a person, who do not recognize any positive of negative contribution of LAST, fancies himself as a belly baton of analog reviewing?

It's hard to know where to start...

I'd read a fascinating (and widely recommended) article about the importance of absolute speed stability in turntables. http://www.iar-80.com/page12.html

I'd also read Grand Prix Audio's white paper on their turntable where they also state their belief that absolute speed stability is the most important criteria in a turntable design.

Having previously read Mr. Fremer's review of the Continuum turntable, I thought I'd see what Continuum had to say on the subject.  If they felt they'd nailed the speed stability issue, then perhaps that would go some way to explaining the large jump in performance over previous designs that Mr. Fremer was hearing.

Some further googling turned up your post.  These are my thoughts...

This is in no way a criticism, but English is obviously not your first language.  Your posts are littered with spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors which make it difficult (for me at least) to understand what you are trying to say.  Perhaps this explains why Mr. Fremer thought you were mocking Continuum and himself rather than just himself?

If you feel that some (all?) of the hi-fi press is guilty of a litany of sins, then why not just calmly state you case, provide evidence and foster intelligent discussion on the topic?  Your post was not funny.  Your post was a personal attack that had an undercurrent of viciousness that I found despicable.

Despite claiming that you are not criticising the Continuum turntable, you go on to do just that in your subsequent posts!  For example “I have my doubts that Continuum team is able to manufacture Sound instead of rendering thier abstract mostly irrelevant design principles.”  Sounds like criticism to me!

I hope you don’t mind if I explore your comment further.  Let’s take one design principal mentioned by Continuum in their literature.  Speed stability.  Irrelevant?  You may not consider it to be the single most important function of a turntable, but surely you can’t say it’s irrelevant!  Another design principal – Isolation from external vibrations.  Seems a decent enough principal to me.  Can you please list for me those design principals that Continuum document that you feel are irrelevant?  As important is WHY you think they are irrelevant. Your credibility is at stake here.

At least they don’t claim that their platter can be manufactured with different materials to tune the sound for different amplifiers!  Or (get this) that the art of turntable design was the art of recognizing and managing emotions in materials.  What sort of dim wit would fall for that?  Oops!

In another Fremer & Co. bashing, you claim Fremer and his ilk “… are completely ignorant in more or less civilized assessment procedures. The only real motivation for TT upgrade (or change of any audio component) should be a person clearly defines for himself what specific sonic shortcomings his current TT has. Then, ONLY AFTER THEN, a new TT should do nothing else but addressing those specific shortcomings.”

Now this comment is just plain silly.  Firstly, the job of a reviewer is to write reviews.  Are you seriously suggesting that because a reviewer is perfectly happy with their turntable at home and can find no specific sonic shortcomings, that they should be disqualified from writing reviews of turntables!!!

Secondly, surely it is possible that listening to a new product may highlight shortcomings in existing gear - shortcomings that you never new you had.  It would be a very closed minded individual who (once happy with the performance of their music reproduction system) would shut out the possibility that improvement might just be possible.

I always feel that whatever I say isn’t personal enough.

markus46 wrote:

This is in no way a criticism, but English is obviously not your first language.  Your posts are littered with spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors which make it (for me at least) to understand what you are trying to say.  Perhaps this explains why Mr. Fremer thought you were mocking Continuum and himself rather than just himself?

I do not think so. It looks like you have  no difficulties to read it but even you, through all your difficulties, understood that that the initial post was the Framer mockery and use Continuum juts to serve the exotic Australian framework. It is not that my English was an impediment but the frame of the Framer’s dim mind. Here is where he does not need a criticism but lobotomy…

markus46 wrote:

Despite claiming that you are not criticising the Continuum turntable, you go on to do just that in your subsequent posts!  For example “I have my doubts that Continuum team is able to manufacture Sound instead of rendering thier abstract mostly irrelevant design principles.”  Sounds like criticism to me!

.. and if you read the rest context of the thread then you might discover why I came up with this supposition. My site is not a republican talk-radio and there is need around here to pull taken out of context phases and try to advances your own agenda.

markus46 wrote:

I hope you don’t mind if I explore your comment further.  Let’s take one design principal mentioned by Continuum in their literature.  Speed stability.  Irrelevant?  You may not consider it to be the single most important function of a turntable, but surely you can’t say it’s irrelevant!  Another design principal – Isolation from external vibrations.  Seems a decent enough principal to me.  Can you please list for me those design principals that Continuum document that you feel are irrelevant?  As important is WHY you think they are irrelevant. Your credibility is at stake here.

There is absolutely nothing at stake here and my reply is not attempt to claim my credibility.  The Speed Stability, the Isolation from external vibrations and many other things in the way how you appear used them are not the factors of design but the tradable commodities of marketing efforts. They do not sell to you the actual Speed Stability of the presumed results that derived from Speed Stability but they “sell” to you a collection of efforts that according to them implies alleged speed stability.

markus46 wrote:

At least they don’t claim that their platter can be manufactured with different materials to tune the sound for different amplifiers!  Or (get this) that the art of turntable design was the art of recognizing and managing emotions in materials.  What sort of dim wit would fall for that?  Oops!

The “art of recognizing and managing emotions in materials” was a direct quote from designer of Micro Seiki, it was exactly what he told me, at least it was what was translated by my interpreter. What is interesting is all of it that I just present it as somebody else quote and ‘am not looking anyone who would “fall for it”. Is you are in a search to something to “fall for” then it sounds like it is your personal need…

markus46 wrote:

In another Fremer & Co. bashing, you claim Fremer and his ilk “… are completely ignorant in more or less civilized assessment procedures. The only real motivation for TT upgrade (or change of any audio component) should be a person clearly defines for himself what specific sonic shortcomings his current TT has. Then, ONLY AFTER THEN, a new TT should do nothing else but addressing those specific shortcomings.” Now this comment is just plain silly.  Firstly, the job of a reviewer is to write reviews.  Are you seriously suggesting that because a reviewer is perfectly happy with their turntable at home and can find no specific sonic shortcomings, that they should be disqualified from writing reviews of turntables!!! Secondly, surely it is possible that listening to a new product may highlight shortcomings in existing gear - shortcomings that you never new you had.  It would be a very closed minded individual who (once happy with the performance of their music reproduction system) would shut out the possibility that improvement might just be possible.

Yes, what I stated above is one of the major postulates of my audio views:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=432

I do not disagree that other ways are possible, and externafication in some cases might bring positive results. Still the use of the externafication methods is a quite complex subject and I would like do not go into it, particularly because I feel that looking at the way how you think about audio it might be above your head (no condescending intended).

Romy the Cat wrote:

It looks like you have difficulties to read it but even your, through all your difficulties, understood that that the initial post was the Framer mockery and use Continuum juts to serve the exotic Australian framework.

Romy the Cat wrote:

My site is not a republican talk-radio and there is need around here to pull taken out of context phases and try to advances your own agenda.

My only 'agenda' is to take you to task for the drivel you write.  If you do a search for "fremer" on this site and look at the posts that you have written, it becomes clear who has the agenda.

Romy the Cat wrote:

There is absolutely nothing at stake here and my reply is not attempt to claim my credibility.

I am rapidly concluding you have no credibility, but why not take a shot at it?  How about addressing the questions!

Romy the Cat wrote:

The Speed Stability, the Isolation from external vibrations and many other things in the way how you appear used them are not the factors of design but the tradable commodities of marketing efforts.

What!?  Of course they are design issues!  A turntable manufacturer that did not address those issues would make a shitty turntable.

Of course if a manufacturer feels that they have done something special to address a design issue, then they should be free to tell us on their web site, white paper and other marketing materials. 

If a manufacturer believes they have tackled certain design issues in an innovative way, how would you suggest they tell us?  Or do you believe they should just stick to meaningless fluff about 'managing emotions in materials'?

Romy the Cat wrote:

Yes, what I stated above is one of the major postulates of my audio views: http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=432 I do not disagree that other ways are possible, and externafication in some cases might bring positive results. Still the use of the externafication methods is a quite complex subject and I would like do not go into it, particularly because I feel that looking at the way how you think about audio it might be above your head (no condescending intended).

markus46 wrote:

How about addressing the questions!

I did not see any worthy questions you raised. If you have any questions then answer them is your business.

markus46 wrote:

Mate.  There is nothing complex about using your ears. If you really believe that "the only real motivation for TT upgrade (or change of any audio component) should be a person clearly defines for himself what specific sonic shortcomings his current TT has. Then, ONLY AFTER THEN, a new TT should do nothing else but addressing those specific shortcomings", then the major postulate of your audio views is simply wrong. Sorry to be the one to break it to you.

Thanks for breaking it for me but you do not see me suicidal, do you?  This perception I linked, even the understanding of this perception is a truly truly evolved moment of audio thinking and very much not for everyone, certainly not for a majority of audio simpletons. Markus, I do not mean to assign you in to the group of simpletons but if you keep pitching to me the adolescent understanding of audio I will juts loose an interest to response to you. I truly have more interesting things to do then to prove to you my “credibility” - I hope you are adult enough to have something else to do besides to search the credibility from others. I would advise you to spend some time to read my site if you are interested, I presume you that you might have a lot of to discover about audio besides the sucking in the white papers, repeating the marketing slogans, and listening what others say about audio.

Paul S wrote:

Markus46, you are not alone in getting the idea that much fun is made at others' expense around here.  But try reading on for a while and see if some of it perhaps starts to make sense as you expand your context.

Paul S wrote:

So much of "Audio" is not only market driven, but it is plopped into a market that has been "pre-conditioned" to await and accept the current latest-and-greatest "break-through" or the solution-du-jour to the problem-du-jour, not unlike the pre-met-and-decided "fashions" for any given season, this by the "audio journalists" whose mission is precisely to SELL what they are given to sell.  Not a problem, I suppose, as long as everyone is aware of it; but at the same time, no real help, either.

Paul S wrote:

Perhaps at this point the Continuum looks to you like some Uber-'Table, who knows.

Paul S wrote:

Lots of non-native English speakers here, some with PhDs, etc., and likely more than a few ADHD, etc.  If you are sensitive it is probably best to limit exposure until you become inured.

Romy the Cat wrote:

This perception I linked, even the understanding of this perception is a truly truly evolved moment of audio thinking and very much not for everyone, certainly not for a majority of audio simpletons.

I had no idea it was all so complicated!  Here I was thinking you just turned on your stereo, put on a record or CD and enjoyed the music.  Put me down as one of the simpletons.

I know you wont mind if I don't read the rest of your highly evolved thinking about audio.  I'm afraid that if it contains more howlers like the one about the turntable upgrade, then it's simply not worth my time.  Not that I didn't enjoy driving a truck through the holes in that position!

I'll end my time with you by suggesting you get a document together of your posts about Fremer & co and make an appointment with a mental health practitioner as soon as possible.  I am serious.

Good luck!

Mark

markus46 wrote:

I don't believe that making fun at other people's expense adds value to a point of view.  Certainly not the foul language and vicious name-calling employed by Romy.

markus46 wrote:

Assuming you're in the market for a new component, then perhaps the middle ground is to read the whitepapers, reviews, web sites with an open mind.  Then listen yourself (preferably in your own home with your own gear) and make your own decision as to if there is an improvement and if that improvement is worth the asking price. My point is (again) that even though I am happy with my Linn LP12, Linn Basik LVX+ and Decca London Gold w/Garrot Bros. stylus, and can find no specific sonic shortcomings, I am open to the possibility that there could be something better out there.

markus46 wrote:

Having said that, I won't be spending any more time here.  As I said, I only stumbled across this site and thought I'd take Romy to task for some of his more outlandish comments.  Sadly it is the intellectual equivalent of stealing candy from a baby.

markus46 wrote:

Assuming you're in the market for a new component, then perhaps the middle ground is to read the whitepapers, reviews, web sites with an open mind.  Then listen yourself (preferably in your own home with your own gear) and make your own decision as to if there is an improvement and if that improvement is worth the asking price. My point is (again) that even though I am happy with my Linn LP12, Linn Basik LVX+ and Decca London Gold w/Garrot Bros. stylus, and can find no specific sonic shortcomings, I am open to the possibility that there could be something better out there.

drdna wrote:

Well, I think it is just his style.  He calls 'em as he sees them.  Romy, you don't actually hate Michael Fremer do you, more just despise what he does, right?

This is an interesting question. I think that I am more driven in this by hated then by despise. The state of despise imply actions I do not support.  I do not despise the specific actions of the Fremer and the rest of the reviewing woof pack but rather I contempt the frame of mind that drive those people. This is rather a hate then despise as it directed to the state of being instead of to the specific actions. So, what I hate in those people? I hate a very fundamental and very deep-sited premise that somebody can practice audio for anything else then for himself or herself. I do practice audio and quite extensively as one might say. However, I clearly understand that whatever I do in audio has the only one beneficiary – my own objectives, my iown  nterest and my own  gratification. I do not care about anybody else’s benefits, it might not sound friendly but it is what it is.  The Framer and the Co. claim that the elected group of retarded criminals or just plain idiots made their agenda to practice audio for the benefits of other. What a foolishness! I have no problems juts to generically hate this stupid notion and consequentially to wipe my feet off any idiot-conformist who is involved into the propelling” of this foolish belive.

Then the “style” comes. I truly do not care and do not need those people – so, how would you treat the people whom you do not need and whose mind you hate?

Anyhow, what I wrote the initial satire about the Framer I was not driven by hate but rather by fun. If I have time I would write up the similar about any public audio figure. The Australian Markus’ complains I throw away – he is in too premature state and too far from general audio awareness – a little zombie heard something off the bitten path and he got disoriented and confused… It is like in MacDonald to ask any for a mill with some kind of atypical customization and they look at your like you are a war criminal…

This there is not about the Continuum TT but about the idiocy of Mike Framer, that was so nicely illustrated. Still if someone interested about the Continuum direction then here is David Robinson’s article and his observations.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue45/continuum.htm

I did not read it yet but the format that Mr. Robinson selected suggest that it might be an interesting write up. Since it was not sponsored but this Frameing reviewing retard there is change that the new TT might sound better....

It looks to me like a most commendable review, with considerable time spent in set-up.

clark

Stitch wrote:

Let's see what Framer will find next...got a mail from Australia that Continuum has Production Problems. Also some master brains left the company... Well, I did listen 3x to the big Continuum, 2x it was more or less defect. The last time 1 channel didn't work, probably the connected Phono Stage or the set up "specialists" killed the cartridge...anyway, these guys were absolutely unable to find a problem (or the unit had so much they didn't where to start)... That's High End.