GoodSoundClub - Romy the Cat's Audio Site

05-07-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	151
Post ID:	20792
Reply to:	20790

Nothing to do with ownership, just a market perspective.

Romy the Cat wrote:
dkarmeli wrote:
We've been discussing the price of AF1 all this time and why it costs what it does, nothing to do with what one is willing to pay for it.
Actually I am not " discussing the price of AF1 all this time". The conversation about the general price of TTs started long time before your AF1 become even a subject. I think 10 years ago I wrote in an article "A Foolishness of analog people" where I postulated that $3000 worth Micro RX5000 is sane and reasonable balance between cost, value and performance. I did express doubts that reportedly better TTs, or objectively more expensive TTs in fact over perform RX5000, or at least the level of potential over performance is realized by the system owners. If that proverbial RX5000 cost $3000 10 years back with all complexity of super duper precision manufacturing then how much shall it cost now? The answer is the same $3000. It is not a conversation about adjusted inflation but about the fact that for $3000 is perfectly possible to get a performance level for TT that would be VERY hard to beat, if the objective is not an intellectual masturbation but the actual result.

I just got into this thread form the AF1 comments, didn't realize that it was general discussion. You can't retail the RX-5000 for $3000! Maybe you can sell a few direct but your overhead will change the minute you increase volume and that's without going through the normal distribution chains and selling only domestically. You'll go bust selling the RX-5000 for 3k, even factory direct.

Romy the Cat wrote:
BTW, I do not against TT, or any other pieces of audio, because they cost a lot of money.
I own plenty of super expensive things that I do feel add to sonic result that I'm getting some benefits and I completely voluntary bought them. However, I also admit that I paid just because I wanted to do it and because there are plenty people like men not because the cost of the items presume some kind of quality. I do not say that when I pay for something a huge amount of money then I am fool. I however insist that there is nothing truly "unique" in many items I own and there is no reason for them to cost as they are.

Unique or not apparently you bought them because there was no competing product for less at the time of purchase. I don't see anything wrong with that specially when some of those things actually appreciate over the years. That nothing special 3k RX-5000 is now 10k!
david

05-07-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

steverino
Posts 367
Joined on 05-23-2009

Post #:	152
Post ID:	20793
Reply to:	20789

Around and around depends on lack of comparisons

A lot of assertions are made about this being better or that being the same. In the absence of assessment (and I don't even mean DBT tests, just pooling of expert judgments) this game never stops. There is not a standardized system that can be used to plug in a component although with a little thought 3 or 4 systems could be built around the 4 main speaker types : dynamic floor, dynamic monitor, horn and panel, plus maybe headphones as a 5th category. At least that way there would be a reasonably controlled way to assess a component across the available systems and rank each against other TTs.

It seems clear that much current TT design is upgrading with modern parts as is done with many tube amps without changing the basic design. The only true innovation was the laser turntable which unfortunately supported Alexander and his swordcut through the knot. I mean that sometimes a stylus just plowing through the groove solves many practical issues. Yes sometimes someone comes up with a clever way to reaarrange the same components or mixes and matches better. We could say that Rossini was able to take the old musical formulas and improve them or rejigger them just enough to create something better. That's great and deserves praise. Similarly a TT or tube design that tweaks things a bit better is fine and should be rewarded in the market place. If the market wants to spend 100k on some tweaked TT compared to 3k on the non tweaked version that is the prerogative of the fools with the money (and we are all fools with money in one way or another). But to preserve sanity and the language we should distinguish innovations from tweaks despite the universal PR campaign designed to confuse the two (in all walks of life needless to say).

05-08-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	153
Post ID:	20796
Reply to:	20792

Oh, David, come on, do not bullshit a bullshitter.

Oh, David, come on! Can you for a second to stop to be a pretentious been counter and look at the picture from slightly more elevated perspective? I am glad that you do not worship the expensive parts, unique design, and precession of construction of RX5000. That IS a very simple TT and that IS very cheap TT.

How much today industries sell a pair of let say hi-end SS monoblocks? $20K-$60K and it looks like we all accepted it as some kind of standard: Levinson, Lamm, Spectrlal and many others. They we have a company like Parasound Halo. The full body 200W monoblocks with all high end bells and whistles, expensive construction and price tag I believe $3000 for the pair, at least it was before the industry leeches started to bleed the Parasound. They made the Halo in China and removed from production all drooling about “expensive parts, unique design, and precession of construction”, thus the price is very reasonable. Do not get me wrong - Parasound Halo sound like horrible shit but it is not because they cost less than scrap metal of equivalent mass but it has nothing to do with the cost of the unit and the army of the idiots out there who by own identity deserve very ugly sound welcomed and bout that Parasound devise very aggressively. For all intended purpose, as a product, it was a very successful venture.

The very same goes with let say a TT like RX5000. If the same Parasound would take it to China then it would be $1500 turntable as there is absolutely nothing in there that cost a lot. Pay attention I am not taking about RX5000 specifically but I do insist that RX5000 is better sounding and more stable in sound then 99% of TT out there. Arguably it might beat even heavier TT as RX5000 use grounded bearing. So if you project the price of TT;s pout there though the eyes of RX5000 then it is easy to see that the prices of the TT out there are very irrelevant.

There is another, even more important factor. The level of performance of $3000 worth RX5000 is much higher than most of other associated analog components out there. At the time I was using RX5000 I had Lamm phonostage that I would say is comparable to many other high-end phonostage. So, that Lamm phonostage was incredible garbage, that not even near raised to the pushy level of RX5000. So, why in that time I would need anything better than cheap $60 worth DJ turntable if my phonostage at that time did not allow me to realized even a fraction of what TT was able to do? Considering that many people out there run improperly setup cartridges, badly sounding tonearm or impotently sounding phonostage then why would people even need $3000 turntable. The fancy turntable in 99.9999% of all case is just a fantasy of self-esteem, the Maserati car owned by a quadriplegic person.

If you make any show in Vegas again then make it funny. Put in back room a DJ turntable for $60 from Best Buy and run the signal to the "demo room". Explain to them that this is your ultra-expensive prototype of 500 pounds of steel metal platter is spinning in a bath of boiling mercury and you can't show it to them because the exhaust not finished year and vapor of mercury is very toxic. I very much assure you that not of the "professional audio reviewers" and non from the army of the "analog connoisseur" would be able to tell you any difference. So, your justifications for $30K, $60K, $160K turntables from my perspective is ridicules.

It is not I believe that people should not buy $160K turntables, Sure they might, and I might be one of those people, I have no problem with it. However, do not insult my intelligence claiming that it necessary or has any relation to the actual sound that a person is getting out of his HiFi.

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-08-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	155
Post ID:	20798
Reply to:	20796

Bean counting?

Romy the Cat wrote:
Oh, David, come on! Can you for a second to stop to be a pretentious been counter and look at the picture from slightly more elevated perspective? I am glad that you do not worship the expensive parts, unique design, and precession of construction of RX5000. That IS a very simple TT and that IS very cheap TT.

How much today industries sell a pair of let say hi-end SS monoblocks? $20K-$60K and it looks like we all accepted it as some kind of standard: Levinson, Lamm, Spectrlal and many others. They we have a company like Parasound Halo. The full body 200W monoblocks with all high end bells and whistles, expensive construction and price tag I believe $3000 for the pair, at least it was before the industry leeches started to bleed the Parasound. They made the Halo in China and removed from production all drooling about “expensive parts, unique design, and precession of construction”, thus the price is very reasonable. Do not get me wrong - Parasound Halo sound like horrible shit but it is not because they cost less than scrap metal of equivalent mass but it has nothing to do with the cost of the unit and the army of the idiots out there who by own identity deserve very ugly sound welcomed and bout that Parasound devise very aggressively. For all intended purpose, as a product, it was a very successful venture.

The very same goes with let say a TT like RX5000. If the same Parasound would take it to China then it would be $1500 turntable as there is absolutely nothing in there that cost a lot. Pay attention I am not taking about RX5000 specifically but I do insist that RX5000 is better sounding and more stable in sound then 99% of TT out there. Arguably it might beat even heavier TT as RX5000 use grounded bearing. So if you project the price of TT;s pout there though the eyes of RX5000 then it is easy to see that the prices of the TT out there are very irrelevant.

There is another, even more important factor. The level of performance of $3000 worth RX5000 is much higher than most of other associated analog components out there. At the time I was using RX5000 I had Lamm phonostage that I would say is comparable to many other high-end phonostage. So, that Lamm phonostage was incredible garbage, that not even near raised to the pushy level of RX5000. So, why in that time I would need anything better than cheap $60 worth DJ turntable if my phonostage at that time did not allow me to realized even a fraction of what TT was able to do? Considering that many people out there run improperly setup cartridges, badly sounding tonearm or impotently sounding phonostage then why would people even need $3000 turntable. The fancy turntable in 99.9999% of all case is just a fantasy of self-esteem, the Maserati car owned by a quadriplegic person.

If you make any show in Vegas again then make it funny. Put in back room a DJ turntable for $60 from Best Buy and run the signal to the "demo room". Explain to them that this is your ultra-expensive prototype of 500 pounds of steel metal platter is spinning in a bath of boiling mercury and you can't show it to them because the exhaust not finished year and vapor of mercury is very toxic. I very much assure you that not of the "professional audio reviewers" and non from the army of the "analog connoisseur" would be able to tell you any difference. So, your justifications for $30K, $60K, $160K turntables from my perspective is ridicules.

It is not I believe that people should not buy $160K turntables, Sure they might, and I might be one of those people, I have no problem with it. However, do not insult my intelligence claiming that it necessary or has any relation to the actual sound that a person is getting out of his HiFi.

The Cat

Not sure what you're going on about. If you're talking about the "RX-5000", a real business with a real and real business plan then the "RX-5000" for $3k as a product isn't viable. You can't run and sustain a business without bean counting, specially in manufacturing. You'll know that if you did what I've been doing for the past 30+ years.
Yeah, sure a hypothetical RX-5000 "Type" product at $3k retail with a theoretical business model is possible in always possible! Assuming that we agree on the performance level of the RX-5000, I don't see it as probable.
As for the rest of your post, its a rant and nothing for me to address. I even agree with some of it but what I don't get is why cant the quadriplegic own a Maserati? Who knows he might get his dick sucked for that Maserati!
david

05-08-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	156
Post ID:	20799
Reply to:	20797

What's up wuki?

rowuk wrote:
Can we get back into the "ultimate" turntable instead of the deviation of the AF1 that this guy sees as his personal solution.

Didn't know that I had a problem for the AF1 to be its solution.

rowuk wrote:
There still has not bee one gram of evidence showing how this deck should be better than anything else. Even ignoring the price entirely, there is only one personal "feeling". No reports about the "Sound", no comparative measurements. Just one guy that claims to have bought one to demonstrate a system.

One guys hard-on is not the reason that I like coming here - especially if he doesn't/can't document anything.

I leave all that to you and your expert hands, document away wuki. I'm certain that you're going to come with some incredibly valuable data like the one regarding your horns and the audience. You blame them for not being able to distinguish between the two when it could also be your incompetence to make to make use of the better horn!
david
PS. No hard on for any audio gear!

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

rowuk

Germany
Posts 454
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #:	157
Post ID:	20800
Reply to:	20799

Wuki is a systems analyst and can sort this situation just fine

I guess there are many types that come here to GoodSoundClub. Some to "brag", some to "share", some to "police", some just to learn.

I guess if your turntable is so important to you, then you could at least tell us how it is sonically "better" than the "lesser" tables mentioned here.

As far as my horns go, it fits perfectly. It is not the "job" of the audience to "hear" what trumpet I am using or what it costs. They pay admission for RESULTS at their seats in the hall. It is my job to make sure those RESULTS match the expectations. That is why I have many instruments.The same applies here, the difference being no one has talked about any real results. Only the supposed cost of the business case is getting any attention. If I spent 100K on a turntable, I wouldn't post about it here. There are much better sites where they can appreciate the true value of such decisions;-)

*********************************************************************
Still, my ultimate table needs pitch control. There are enough records in my collection that obviously were cut at speeds other than exactly 33 1/3RPM. I would also consider some centering device for the spindle to be important as I also use a tangential arm among others. A barcode or QR code reader for record deemphasis (and maybe learned spindle centering?) would also be cool. Serious static dissipation would also be great for those times of year where rotating plastic resists all other attempts to reduce/eliminate it (Ionizers/antennas/biased record mats?). Active damping of subsonics (electronic?) would also be something that I would like to play with. Battery driven motors would also be an interesting thing to evaluate in an attempt to minimize the effects of AC garbage.

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	158
Post ID:	20801
Reply to:	20800

I use pitch to control pitch.

rowuk wrote:
Still, my ultimate table needs pitch control. There are enough records in my collection that obviously were cut at speeds other than exactly 33 1/3RPM.

Hm, I do not think if it is the case. During the 78s era there were not standards and anyone cut records with any imaginary speed. I think that when industry switched to 33 RPM they have already an agreement of what would be a conventional speed.

I do think however that pitch control is an important tool not to adjust the speed but adjust ...pitch. many more or less contemporary orchestras or performers tune to A at 440Hz, or even highest as it become "fashionable" lately. I personally prefer much lower A and I do feel that the people who create publicity around 332Hz do have point. Do they have point of not but I do like it lower and I frequently slower TT does, particularly what I am listening Bach's solo works. I wish I had it on my CD player. I even spoke with my engineers asking if it possible to slow the clock from 44.1 to lower rate....

The Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	159
Post ID:	20802
Reply to:	20800

Wrong analysis, analyst Wuki!

rowuk wrote:
I guess there are many types that come here to GoodSoundClub. Some to "brag", some to "share", some to "police", some just to learn.

I guess if your turntable is so important to you, then you could at least tell us how it is sonically "better" than the "lesser" tables mentioned here.

Its only gear, it has a function and that's the only importance it has for me. Its not my table either, I didn't design nor build it and have no vested interest or desire to prove anything. Only reason for my initial response was an automated email from this site, all I said was not to dismiss it outright because of some bias against the price and/or reviewer.

rowuk wrote:
As far as my horns go, it fits perfectly. It is not the "job" of the audience to "hear" what trumpet I am using or what it costs. They pay admission for RESULTS at their seats in the hall. It is my job to make sure those RESULTS match the expectations.

Glad to see that we agree on something but that was my argument to your words;

rowuk wrote:
I laugh my ass off. I would love to play two different trumpets for these special people - one for 600€ and one for $13.000. I own them both (and many more in between) and use them for different situations. Those golden ears seem to fail in the concert hall every time.

Great musicians know how use the unique sound of their instrument distinguishable from others, Hendrix vs Les Paul for example.

rowuk wrote:
Only the supposed cost of the business case is getting any attention. If I spent 100K on a turntable, I wouldn't post about it here. There are much better sites where they can appreciate the true value of such decisions;-)

I see what you mean about some wanting to police!
*********************************************************************

rowuk wrote:
Still, my ultimate table needs pitch control. There are enough records in my collection that obviously were cut at speeds other than exactly 33 1/3RPM. I would also consider some centering device for the spindle to be important as I also use a tangential arm among others. A barcode or QR code reader for record deemphasis (and maybe learned spindle centering?) would also be cool. Serious static dissipation would also be great for those times of year where rotating plastic resists all other attempts to reduce/eliminate it (Ionizers/antennas/biased record mats?). Active damping of subsonics (electronic?) would also be something that I would like to play with. Battery driven motors would also be an interesting thing to evaluate in an attempt to minimize the effects of AC garbage.

AF1 has pitch control!
david

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

rowuk

Germany
Posts 454
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #:	160
Post ID:	20803
Reply to:	20802

Still no word about sonics?

rowuk wrote:

I laugh my ass off. I would love to play two different trumpets for these special people - one for 600€ and one for $13.000. I own them both (and many more in between) and use them for different situations. Those golden ears seem to fail in the concert hall every time.

I am referring to those "special golden ears", not my audience. I also can play Mahler on an american piston trumpet or a german rotary trumpet. The "golden Ears" often don't hear it. People tuned into Sound do.

We asked simple questions about the sound, not the "minimalist functions". You don't seem to have anything to say.

The price is a very good reason to ignore it - not because it is expensive rather because it is artificial. It is focussed at a specific target market where sound is often not the primary goal, rather the confidence that at that price no one can criticize. It is true in many aspects of "luxury" listening and the lack of applied quality is ignored there as well.

Good luck.

I am back in this thread when good sound is the issue again.

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	162
Post ID:	20806
Reply to:	20803

Rowuk, let's stop the pissing match.

I'm not here for that and I'm sorry for getting caught up in it!
Regardless of price like any product the AF1 has a specific market target, only you know if its for you or not.
The reason I never got into the sound is because that no one on this thread was getting past the msrp, so why bother. If you really are interested in the sound from me, I need to bore you a bit telling you about my listening bias. My only criteria for any piece of audio gear is how now natural it sounds, i.e. does it transport me beyond the wall of mechanical reproduction or not. Without this sense of reality and musicality the rest of the audiophile standards have very little or no value to me. That's the only way I judge a system or any part of it. Of course the system should perform at a veryhigh level but when I'm distracted from the music and impressed by any part of the system's performance, it stops working for me. That's when I get analytical and try to rid myself of what I see as strong coloration.
The AF1 has a choice of 3 platters, Acrylic, Duralumin, Stainless Steel, and will deliver all the superlative audiophile goodies with any of them, but there are differences. In my system and setup, the Acrylic platter gives you the so called vinyl sound, like what you used to get from early Linn Sondek prior to all the power supply upgrades, but at a much higher level. The Duralumin and SS platters are what I feel make the AF1 great. If you haven't heard any of the top Micro Seiki tables, its impossible for me to give you comparatives. There's no "vinyl" sound here, and almost no particular character. If the rest of the setup is up scratch then all you get is the recording and you'll forget about they system. Your body and mind will relax and allow you to have the same emotional connection with the music as you'd have in a live venue and any you'll be able to see into the performance with any average or better recording. I listen classical music most of the time but what I wrote is true for all types of music, specially live recordings. I have no better adjectives than "natural" and no other descriptors to communicate with the tts like the AF1, SX-8000II are about. If you want to use a "natural" scale of 1 to 10, 1= best digital and 10= Live venue, then AF1, in a setup of equal quality, can and will give you a strong 7. Most analog front ends don't even get to 1 for me.
david

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	163
Post ID:	20807
Reply to:	20806

Your highly questionable literature.

dkarmeli wrote:
If the rest of the setup is up scratch then all you get is the recording and you'll forget about they system. Your body and mind will relax and allow you to have the same emotional connection with the music as you'd have in a live venue and any you'll be able to see into the performance with any average or better recording.

I am sorry, I do not buy it. I understand that a few days back you called the relationship between music and listening experience and an intellectual masturbation but suddenly you dived directly into pseudo talk about listening experiences and you somehow attributed it to a turntable. My I ask you a question: if you have a hypothetically fine all together installation and experiencing your so called “emotional connection with the music” then what you suggest is that substituting Micro with Linn Sondek you lose all your advanced emotional state? Sorry, this is very faulty viewpoint and I do not subscribe to it.

Since the conversation in this thread is about turntables then from my point of view a better Turntable is enabler to get “different sound” that shaped by the rest of the system. Just an enabler not the source itself. A better TT gives more opportunity to shape sound and offers less marginal restrictions. That is it. Cartridges have own sound, not turntables. Turntables have own limits. You can listening a cartridges with some degree of accuracy can predict what cartridge is playing. You can do it by listening of what cartridge does. When however you are listening a TT you can’t observe any active sonic character but you pay attention where the limits are.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	164
Post ID:	20808
Reply to:	20807

Don't buy it!

Romy the Cat wrote:
dkarmeli wrote:
If the rest of the setup is up scratch then all you get is the recording and you'll forget about they system. Your body and mind will relax and allow you to have the same emotional connection with the music as you'd have in a live venue and any you'll be able to see into the performance with any average or better recording.

I am sorry, I do not buy it. I understand that a few days back you called the relationship between music and listening experience and an intellectual masturbation but suddenly you dived directly into pseudo talk about listening experiences and you somehow attributed it to a turntable.

What I called mental masturbation was the pretense to design of the ultimate turntable, not the musical experience or sound!

Romy the Cat wrote:
My I ask you a question: if you have a hypothetically fine all together installation and experiencing your so called “emotional connection with the music” then what you suggest is that substituting Micro with Linn Sondek you lose all your advanced emotional state? Sorry, this is very faulty viewpoint and I do not subscribe to it.

Do you have a system that gives you that emotional connection? If you do I can send you my Linn and you can see it for yourself when you exchange it for your SX-8000.

Romy the Cat wrote:
Since the conversation in this thread is about turntables then from my point of view a better Turntable is enabler to get “different sound” that shaped by the rest of the system. Just an enabler not the source itself. A better TT gives more opportunity to shape sound and offers less marginal restrictions. That is it. Cartridges have own sound, not turntables. Turntables have own limits. You can listening a cartridges with some degree of accuracy can predict what cartridge is playing. You can do it by listening of what cartridge does. When however you are listening a TT you can’t observe any active sonic character but you pay attention where the limits are.

You can all it enabler or whatever you want, and yes its only a link in a chain. No one's disputing that nor the limitations of reproduced sound, but it doesn't have to be perfect to transport you beyond the mechanical wall, that's what I'm talking about.
david

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	165
Post ID:	20809
Reply to:	20808

I did not buy.

dkarmeli wrote:
What I called mental masturbation was the pretense to design of the ultimate turntable, not the musical experience or sound!

Well, neither you, nor me, nor anybody else at this site, nor anybody else who design turntable professionally, including your AF1 maker, have anything to do with designing musical experiences or sound. If you do not see any interest to collaborate with other, or with yourself, what might constitute ultimate turntable then you have no interest, or ability, for collaboration.

dkarmeli wrote:
Do you have a system that gives you that emotional connection? If you do I can send you my Linn and you can see it for yourself when you exchange it for your SX-8000.

I think the whole “ emotional connection” paradigm is a Madison Avenue’s shrinks metaphor. If I do have any “ emotional connection” then I very much assure you that it has nothing to do with my turntable, with turntable topology or with anything else superficial.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-09-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

dkarmeli
Posts 27
Joined on 01-25-2013

Post #:	166
Post ID:	20810
Reply to:	20809

???????

Romy the Cat wrote:
dkarmeli wrote:
What I called mental masturbation was the pretense to design of the ultimate turntable, not the musical experience or sound!
Well, neither you, nor me, nor anybody else at this site, nor anybody else who design turntable professionally, including your AF1 maker, have anything to do with designing musical experiences or sound. If you do not see any interest to collaborate with other, or with yourself, what might constitute ultimate turntable then you have no interest, or ability, for collaboration.

I seriously have no idea wtf you're talking about Pussy. I replied to a review on AF1 that was emailed to me from you site, and I wouldn't have replied if I knew that the post had nothing to do with AF1. I'm wondering if you're actually trying to build a functioning turntable or is it just mental masturbation like the theoretical symphonies you used to write in your head. Either way, as you mentioned. I have neither the engineering knowledge nor any interest in it.
As far as Nishikawa san, AF1/Micro Seiki designer or Vladimir with his electronics go neither one claims to be designing musical experience, that's the musician's and composer's job. What they give you is a tool of a certain quality and characteristic to use. How you use it, for what purpose or even iif you use has nothing to with them, the user creates the personal experience.

Romy the Cat wrote:

dkarmeli wrote:
Do you have a system that gives you that emotional connection? If you do I can send you my Linn and you can see it for yourself when you exchange it for your SX-8000.
I think the whole “ emotional connection” paradigm is a Madison Avenue’s shrinks metaphor.

You can't talk for me as I can't for you! We've known each other long enough to recognize that we can both hear the same things but our end game and goals regarding home audio and sound reproduction have always been different. I had my ultimate tt 15 years ago and my ultimate system 12 years ago. I told this back then and nothing has changed since. Yes, I have more gear since then and definitely superior in many ways but none that I really care about. Yes, like all the other gear heads here gear turns me on but sonically my sole aim was always as you put it, the "Madison Avenue's shrink's metaphor". The tools we're talking about helped get me there and keep me there!

Romy the Cat wrote:
If I do have any “ emotional connection” then I very much assure you that it has nothing to do with my turntable, with turntable topology or with anything else superficial.

If that's really what you believe then let me start by swapping out your SX-8000 with a Clearaudio table, complete with arm and cartridge and then your electronics with MBL or Burmeisters!
david

05-10-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

rowuk

Germany
Posts 454
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #:	167
Post ID:	20811
Reply to:	20810

No mystery anymore in the detour in this thread

David,
everything is clear now. What is a "dealer" supposed to say? What does a dealer have to do to "capture" their markets? How does a "dealer" behave on a forum dedicated to applied Sound and not commerce. It should be apparent from ALL of the responses that you received that your reality is simply yours and does leave plenty of room for doubt as to motive and ultimate goal.
http://www.damoka.net

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/he2005/1.html

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/PrintPost.aspx?PostID=1929

My suggestion before posting again is to spend some time looking around at how things work here. You simply got off to a bad start because you didn't test the waters before jumping in. We are not interested in dealer speak. The issue here was NEVER the price tag per say, rather the assumption that a state of the art turntable built in the automotive industry or any other "competitive" environment would be calculated much differently. We understand that you can not publicly undermine the industry price points. Your credibility as a dealer would be comprimised if a 20K turntable offered everything that the AF1 does.

So in your world you do fine with your situation, but have received no applaud here. That perhaps should tell you something. We never had a pissing contest. You simply never answered direct questions, rather defended the price point - important for a dealer but for many of us definitely not so interesting.

I do not question your ability to give your customers some kind of value for their investment. That value may be Sound (the only real issue here), it may be confidence that they did the right thing, it may simply feed a geek drive or the idea that they bought the "ultimate" and at that price no one can question the results. All points (and many more) are valid but not what this site is about.
Good luck

Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.

05-10-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	168
Post ID:	20812
Reply to:	20810

You need to pause, David.

David, that is funny that you are stressing my SX8000 or even mention it, if you ever invest the effort to read the site, or at least the thread then you would understand how out of context your manner. The AF1/Micro is kind of irrelevant, this thread mention many different turntables and from a completely different perspective. Why you got defensive about the comment of AF1 value is beyond me. If you understand the subject of the thread then I do think you might feel that you have slightly aberrated perception of what value.

Anyhow, the advice that I would like you to give is to pay attention to word “impartiality”. The impartiality of judgment is what intelligent people use when they are trying to think about general tendencies and when they try to elevate own thinking over their own parochial sentiments. I do know that you are capable for detached thinking, why you suddenly got soft over this irrelevant AF1 is a surprise to me.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-11-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Stitch

Behind The Sun
Posts 235
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #:	169
Post ID:	20814
Reply to:	20812

The King Is Dead - Long Live The King

Romy the Cat wrote:
David, that is funny that you are stressing my SX8000 or even mention it, if you ever invest the effort to read the site, or at least the thread then you would understand how out of context your manner. The AF1/Micro is kind of irrelevant, this thread mention many different turntables and from a completely different perspective. Why you got defensive about the comment of AF1 value is beyond me...... is a surprise to me.

It is the simple Marketing mechanism:
1. The most hated Hifi owner in the world (seen from the side of Manufacturers, reviewers ...) wrote a remarkable Article about the foolishness of the analog people (99,5 of the reviewers, manufacturers, owners, Big Spenders, Distributors on this planet hate him deeply for that)

2. That guy uses an old Seiki 8000 and writes, he can live with it because it isn't the usual ultra bullshit which is normally served as "Reference"

3. No one can write anything against it, because that table is simply too rare or / when you want one, it needs time, work, money to get one

After 25 years this is History... now we can :-)

now "we" can tell that guy and his followers with the longest middle finger on this audiophile planet that he is no longer in the position to show his analog middle finger to anyone...when he wants to continue that, he needs that AF-1......

Some of those Seiki people are back and they offer the new Seiki (in reality it is the King's new clothes, but who cares), of course "in modern" Design with the pricing of today to show the world that something serious is now available, the TechDas AF1 (in detail a Seiki 8000 II but a modern motor management)

And now we can write to that owner who believes nothing that this "new" unit deserves all the praises the world can deliver ...blubber..

Ok, why not

From here we are at the same starting point we have with every new unit which is ready to show its real performance

- Goldmund Reference was such one ( missed sonic target by a mile based on its awful T3F Arm)

- Rockports (missed sonic target by a mile based on its awful Arm and awful platter electronics and their Arm make EVERY cartridge sound thin, analytic, dead, lifeless and ultra boring, same call it "detailed :-) )

- Seiki 8000 II (the vacuum destroys the sonic potential which the table can deliver without that option ---> Seiki 8000 is better from sonics)

- Continuum whatever (too complicated and the sound - when they work - is ok, but it is more or less in the area of Basis Debut vacuum which is MUCH cheaper and more reliable ...so what ????...)
- Thorens Reference (looks very impressive but from sonics it is weak)
- or the lastest toys in Europe ---Studio units---sold for a penny and now they are hyped as ultimate machines (All EMT's, Garrards or Technics Sp10 MK whatever...) no one from those guys has any idea about their background at their time and when you tell them, they don't want to hear it....they are like children with their beloved toys...

- and so on and on and on and on and on ... it is like a record with a scratch

I listened to all of them, in private Systems and I can seriously guarantee you one FACT:

None of these owners bought it because they can hear a difference, they are absolutely not interested in that and they have absolutely no idea about it!!

They bought it as a toy and to get a position in an audiophile community as a well respected, "experienced Audiophile".

And when someone shows them why their bellowed unit is weak in some areas, not one of them say "thank you for stretching my horizon", their first reaction is always negative because their "position" is no longer on the top.... they have no problem when you tell them that a better unit is 50k more, they buy it at once.....but they have a serious problem when you show them that a 15k table beats their 100k unit in 5s....
The article from Romy about analog people is still valid.

Kind Regards
Stitch

05-12-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	170
Post ID:	20817
Reply to:	20814

Owning a expensive Turntable

Stitch wrote:
None of these owners bought it because they can hear a difference, they are absolutely not interested in that and they have absolutely no idea about it!! They bought it as a toy and to get a position in an audiophile community as a well respected, "experienced Audiophile".

Yes, I think from many perspectives you are right: most of owner of high flying TT do not have any idea of sonic identity of own turntables. However, to be honest I need to say that it is incredibly hard to give an objective judgment about a TT sonic capacity. I have seen/herd many different installations with different turntables involved and I need to say that in many instances listening a complete installation I could with more or less high degree of probably to say what let say cartridge, amp, cable or driver is being used. I however never was able to make a guess about TT. Partially it is because I do not have an experience to personally use different turntables. I got my RX-8000 14 years back and since then I did not play home any other TT besides a few experiments with RS-5000. However the largest part of that meaning "Partially" is juts because it is very hard to extrapolate sound of TT out of sound of complete system .

I presume that somebody who all their life deal with setting up and playing turntables might have opportunity to talk about the "sound of turntables" credibly but the problem is that the quality of the people who do it professionally is very low. If you see a dirty homeless person on the street, laying in a pull of own urine then you would not have an interest for this man to read a lecture to your kids about hygiene, would you? The very same with the "pro" people - they are some subordinated to wrong things that it is in a way acts like brain virus. I spoke a few years ago over a phone with a guy who in order to convince that he had upper hand in debate we had informed me that he have already set up in his live 26.000 turntables (it was 26 thousands). I asked him that since he presumably sitting up 8 turntables a day then does he has time in his live to read books, go to theaters or juts to do anything other than BS other about turntables?

So, I generally very much not at ease when people talk about "turntable sound". Yes, bad turntables have own sound but many turntables do not have own sound until you push them. I have a friend right here in Boston. He is mostly jazz listener and has playback based upon small Canadian monitors. He has a custom made Thorens in big wooden box. It is known contraction for all intended purpose it shall not be considered as "Ultimate Turntable" or even "reputed turntable". However, I do very much like his turntable and I feel that it would be criminally stupid for him to change it for anything "better". The performance of that turntable is very much NOT limiting factor of that installation and the whole experience of that listening room is very pleasurable. My rule #1 of audio:

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

... I never demoted and I feel that in context of my friend audio demands the performance of his TT is very very good, in fact he would need much different round of playback, music and room complexity to feel that his TT might be underperforming.

Here is we hit a very interesting point that I would like to explain. I naturally see a connection between the quality of feedback about turntables and the overall amount of affords a person spend for own playback setup. I might not know difference between two specific turntables abut I do know, like few others, the efforts a person shall spend with his/her installation in order to accomplish this or that quantifiable result. It has not only to do with amount of purposefully used equipment but most important a depth of subjects understanding. Many thing in audio is unavoidable. You might have money/lack to accidently buy out an unreasonably smart solution for your given playback but it still will take inescapable listening time for the system owner to understand what/how to listen.

So, what it has to do with my assessment of other people comments regarding turntables? Well, it is a very direct relation. When I see an parson with let say Continuum turntable and a set of ported speakers where drivers are made from toilet paper then I have a very un-confused answer about the person relationship between sound, demands and turntables. A better turntable is an enabler in my view and it pushes the owner to explore in his/her playback expression the horizons that would not be available by other turntables. That is how I see the things. I do understand what I person pushes let say one specific aspect of sound reproduction further and further and then release that he is impotent to push it further as his TT act as a limited factor. THAT and ONLY that I would recognize as a sensible feedback about high-flying turntables.

Rgs, Romy the Cat

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-19-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Stitch

Behind The Sun
Posts 235
Joined on 01-15-2009

Post #:	172
Post ID:	20844
Reply to:	20838

Specs TechDas Tables One and Two

Specs for TechDas AirForce One

Air bearing main platter 19 kg of non magnetic SUS316L stainless steel
Upper Platter of choice
A7075: super duraluminum 3.5 kg
SUS316L: 10.0 kg
Acrylic resin: black methalcryalate 1,5 kg
All those upper platters are for vacuum and the customer can also order those for non-vaccuum hold down - resulting in a total of six options
Suspension: full air suspension
Chassis: three-part suspension sandwich, weight 43kg in total + Platter max. 29 kg, Motor 6.6 kg
Motor management active, speed detected by a sensor on the bottom of the main platter
Tonearm right hand side: 9 or 10 inch, left hand side optional extra base for 9.10 or 12 inch Arms

Specs for TechDas AirForce Two

Air bearing platter 10 kg of aluminum (A5056) with vacuum hold down (from AirForce One)
Suspension: oil damping air suspension System
Chassis: Aluminum casting (AC4C), dual layer structure weight 45kg in total + 10 kg Platter
Motor management active, speed detected by a sensor on the bottom of the main platter (I forgot to ask but I think it is comparable to AirForce One)
Tonearm right hand side: 9 or 10 inch, left hand side optional extra base for 9.10 or 12 inch Arms
Price: 50% of AirForce One

I listened to AirForce One with 9” Graham Elite + TechDas TDC01 Cartridge in a Demo with Records I know very well. It was a very impressive analog Demo, I never heard something like this in the past 10 years be it Rockport’s latest, Goldmund Reference, Clearaudios biggest ….
That Table showed from the first second a H-U-G-E soundstage, deep and wide, the speakers didn’t exist, the Tones had a “Gestalt” and rightness of tone which is very, very, rare to hear.

Separation of the musicians was right from size and height and the dynamics are not smeared.
For me - or my kind of Standard - it is a truly great table.

They developed the Seiki 8000 series in a way which made sense and improved it. I saw - and listened - at various High End Shows (or private owner systems) a lot of ultra expensive Turntables which missed the sonic target by a mile and their designers may have an idea about polishing parts but they have none about music reproduction. Here is the main difference to all others. They made it right.

Kind Regards
Stitch

05-19-2014

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	173
Post ID:	20845
Reply to:	20844

Two things.

Even I do not share the Stitch's pessimism about the new Air Force TT but I do see his point that the new Air Force is kind of light version of or Micro 8000. The platter base of Air Force is 43kg but had 35Kg. The stainless steel platter of the new TT 19kg but the 8000 had platter 28kg. So, it looks like they added mass to the base, primary due to the service surfaces but removed from the platter. I do not say that mass meals anything but they do for sure change the mass balance. Frankly: the only 2 things that I do not like in the new Air Force TT is color (to me white sine finish feel too gay to me) and the fact that they offer an acrylic platter. That is kind of cheesy and stupid. It is like you are a gourmet chief in a fancy French restaurant and you offer to you pantones a sophisticates soufflé and by the wish of your customers you willing to sprinkle it with bowel movement. Ridicules! It shall be some integrity in what people do. It is as ridicules as Lamm making $ his 140K amp and allow user to have manually adjustable global feedback - the summit of idiocy!

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

05-18-2015

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	175
Post ID:	21663
Reply to:	21662

Who knows...

It looks like the Air Force prodigally follow the rule of the game: to introduce some kind of flashy avantgarde model, make a lot of noise over it and then while the noise up to introduce a less expensive model that collects the publicity of the flashy brand. All audio companies follow the pattern and the Air Force is no exception.

I do not know a lot about the Air Force table. They look fine to me and I do not know what is the difference between the new models they produced. I also do not know what would be the difference between the old Micro TTs and Air Forces. It is very possible that the difference never will be know. It is not to mention that Air Force very much might not make publicity in US, the way as Micro never was know. Until Air Force will not give this table to some kind of big name audio-reviewing whore not US consumer will buy it or express interest. I do not follow the publications recently but I did not hear that Air Forces was advertised in a “big way” in US.

For sure it would be interesting to learn if the new Air Force tables can push envelop of what we know about TT but I very much doubt that neither me and nor the few people I know who used the TT are in position to state it.

Rgs, Romy

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

	Target	Threads for related reading	Most recent post in related threads	Forum	Replies	Views	Started
»	New	Michael Fremer Continuums…..	Pre-manufactured box speaker...	Audio News Forum	54	613276	01-21-2006
»	New	The Foolishness of Analog People..	Late to the discussion but cannot resist...	Analog Playback Forum	56	584818	01-30-2006
»	New	A longer turntable belt...	SP10 and the Japanese contribution to audio...	Analog Playback Forum	60	518187	02-02-2006
»	New	My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..	My analog setup update....	Analog Playback Forum	9	119446	04-04-2006
»	New	Micro Seiki SZ-1T..	I guess it's my own fault....	Analog Playback Forum	2	36903	06-10-2008
»	New	Dynamic viscose stabilization of turntable’s platter...	JA Michell Hydraulic Reference...	Analog Playback Forum	15	120189	11-26-2008
»	New	Active Tonearm Monitoring System...	The most idiotic idea I’ve ever seen...	Analog Playback Forum	2	37848	07-14-2009
»	New	The HoroMusic turnable...	And the 27" long tonearm might be a Moronic as thi...	Analog Playback Forum	6	67832	08-05-2009
»	New	Audio Note new turntable and inflation..	Audio Note Ginga Turntable...	Analog Playback Forum	14	157708	01-03-2010
»	New	How much does it cost to stabilize a turntable speed?..	How much does it cost to stabilize a turntable speed?...	Analog Playback Forum	0	18720	03-13-2010
»	New	A turntable platter as a turbine?..	A turntable platter as a turbine?...	Analog Playback Forum	0	16753	10-27-2010

	Target	Threads for related reading	Most recent post in related threads	Forum	Replies	Views	Started
»	New	Michael Fremer Continuums…..	Pre-manufactured box speaker...	Audio News Forum	54	613276	01-21-2006
»	New	The Foolishness of Analog People..	Late to the discussion but cannot resist...	Analog Playback Forum	56	584818	01-30-2006
»	New	A longer turntable belt...	SP10 and the Japanese contribution to audio...	Analog Playback Forum	60	518187	02-02-2006
»	New	My Analog Playback: the fat lady has sung..	My analog setup update....	Analog Playback Forum	9	119446	04-04-2006
»	New	Micro Seiki SZ-1T..	I guess it's my own fault....	Analog Playback Forum	2	36903	06-10-2008
»	New	Dynamic viscose stabilization of turntable’s platter...	JA Michell Hydraulic Reference...	Analog Playback Forum	15	120189	11-26-2008
»	New	Active Tonearm Monitoring System...	The most idiotic idea I’ve ever seen...	Analog Playback Forum	2	37848	07-14-2009
»	New	The HoroMusic turnable...	And the 27" long tonearm might be a Moronic as thi...	Analog Playback Forum	6	67832	08-05-2009
»	New	Audio Note new turntable and inflation..	Audio Note Ginga Turntable...	Analog Playback Forum	14	157708	01-03-2010
»	New	How much does it cost to stabilize a turntable speed?..	How much does it cost to stabilize a turntable speed?...	Analog Playback Forum	0	18720	03-13-2010
»	New	A turntable platter as a turbine?..	A turntable platter as a turbine?...	Analog Playback Forum	0	16753	10-27-2010