View Full Version : SME IV Wins HFN Group Review
Who would have thought that Hi-Fi News would ever again feature a group review of tonearms? Analogue is back! Anyway, it's interesting that the SME IV won the group review, also featuring Linn Akito, Ortofon TA-100 (is this a Jelco?), Pro-Ject 10cc Evolution, Rega RB1000 and Roksan Nima.
The SME IV's "bass power was truly visceral, the bass synth and kick drum combining depth and muscular energy in equal measure together with an ability to stop and start with commanding precision". Yep, pretty much as I remember when I owned one.
I don't give a stuff how the SME does ;) But I *would* like to read how the Akito does in such exalted company....
The Ortofon arms are Jelco derived I think and possibly "great" because of the prices asked. Sad that the people in the middle take so much slurp from them, grossly inflating the retail prices to double what I think they're really worth..
Oh good God............
The Akito mk2 I remember from not many years ago sounded grainy and ballistic with none of the musical "freedom" I hear from the Nima or ARO, let alone the Rega R200 from 30 years ago... I know Linn told us it was as good as an early thin-pillar'd Ittok, but I personally didn't think so and it certainly was a clumsy thing to set up, with no finesse over the counterweight movement or bias setting, which is still similar to the old Basik arms IIRC...
Was it a joke? I was surprised by the Hi-Fi News review that the Akito mk2 came out second in the group. I did a direct comparison with the Ittok some time ago and the Akito did not fare that well in the sonic department against its bigger brother while using the same AT OC9 mk2 cartridge on both arms.
The mk1 Akito was a total joke and was made with plasticene, or the metallic equivalent thereof. The mk2 is supposed to be better, with harder materials used. Linn claimed (to justify the huge price hike?) that the performance was as good as the early thin pillared Ittok. Thing is, the very early Ittoks had superb bearings and the "feel" of the controls (especially the tracking force dial) is in a different league IMO.
hifi_dave
25-04-2010, 11:15
Who did the review and how were the 'comparisons' supposedly carried out ?..
chris@panteg
25-04-2010, 11:40
Yes what Deck and cart ' Phono stage ' and so on though i am a little bias towards SME as i love the 309 .
But the Nima is in a different price range to the others though it does punch above its weight , having owned one i would say it has an open and fluid sound but gets muddled on complex music (classical) and is fiddly to use .
John Bamford did the reviews, Paul Miller the lab tests. Equipment used was Clearaudio Innovation Compact deck on a Townshend Seismic Sink stand with Ortofon Cadenza Blue cartridge. The rest of the equipment is not stated.
chris@panteg
25-04-2010, 12:10
Thanks for that Martin
I have always respected John Bamford ' i remember him being a big fan of the Voyd and Townsend decks years ago .
I had a silver wired iv for awhile but the terminator blew away bass power was just awesome i was using a zxy r100h which should of run well with the iv so do not think it was a synergy issue
maybe this test just goes to prove that user pride-in-ownership is all important in much of the gear we talk about. The Akito is finished like a very inexpensive product and has no "cachet" at all except for the maker's name on it, yet I'm sure it's performance probably is good these days, the appearance and "feel" of the thing severely letting the side down IMO.
By comparison, the SME's (all of them) are like exquisite pieces of precision machinery with a wonderful "feel," especially on the old 3009 "improved" models, whatever the sonic result (which is fine with a suitable cartridge IMO).
gawd, there are plenty of circa 1000 quid 'upgrade' tonearms, while its great HFN are reviewing Analogue.....what a boring bunch of arms....almost like its 1990 hifi review all over again
linn akito? :doh:
DirectDrive_Gordon
01-05-2010, 21:11
I pay little attention to what wins group tests in UK hi-fi mags these days (with the exception of HFW) as they are all corrupt! Do they really expect us to believe that an Akito is better than a RB1000 (the Akito apparently came second after the SME)? I miss the 1970's when one could actually believe (in most cases anyway) what one read in Hi-Fi choice and HFN!
I'll comment more on this later, but I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned the £1000 'Ortofon TA-100', which is merely a re-badged Jelco SA-750!!
Why on earth would anyone pay a grand for one of those when the same arm sold under the manufacturer's name (Jelco) costs half that?? :mental:
This is exactly what I mean by the ludicrous 'prestige value' of certain brands, and how one can pay through the nose for it.... It's this sort of crap which AOS is completely against, as it offers the worst possible SPPV!
I'll get to the Akito coming second later!! That's the best joke I've seen for ages :lol: :lol:
Marco.
Ammonite Audio
02-05-2010, 14:40
I'll comment more on this later, but I'm surprised that no-one has mentioned the £1000 'Ortofon TA-100', which is merely a re-badged Jelco SA-750!!
Why on earth would anyone pay a grand for one of those when the same arm sold under the manufacturer's name (Jelco) costs half that?? :mental:
This is exactly what I mean by the ludicrous 'prestige value' of certain brands, and how one can pay through the nose for it.... It's this sort of crap which AOS is completely against, as it offers the worst possible SPPV!
I'll get to the Akito coming second later!! That's the best joke I've seen for ages :lol: :lol:
Marco.
Is the Ortofon really the same as the Jelco? I don't know, but it may be built by Jelco for Ortofon to a much higher specification. It's easy to sneer, but the facts would be useful.
As for the Akito, the article makes it clear that the present Akito is not the same as the one that went before that everyone seems to slag off, rightly or wrongly. On top of that it's made in Scotland, by skilled people who are presumably very grateful for their employment. Good for Linn for promoting British (eg Scottish) manufacturing! Again, it's easy to sneer, but I reckon £750 for a UK built arm that probably works well is not too bad and I'd happily try one if I was in the market for a new tonearm. This anti-Linn bias that exists across pretty much all audio forums is in my view getting tiresome.
I pay little attention to what wins group tests in UK hi-fi mags these days (with the exception of HFW) as they are all corrupt! Do they really expect us to believe that an Akito is better than a RB1000 (the Akito apparently came second after the SME)? I miss the 1970's when one could actually believe (in most cases anyway) what one read in Hi-Fi choice and HFN!
Corrupt? That's stepping a bit too far over the line. As for the Akito being better than the RB1000, why not? And, why praise HFW at the expense of HFN? It seems to me that HFN are making a determined (and pretty successful) stab at being broadly interesting across a number of topics, while being (to my mind) fair and objective when it comes to reviewing hardware. In this case, we have to trust John Bamford's and Paul Miller's collective judgement, but I for one would rather do that than trust that of the editor of HFW who has his own hobby horses.
I subscribe to HFN and HiFi Critic, and shall continue to do so. There is no way that I'm going to pay for HFW while the contributor columns appear to be the same every month. Thank God for the WH Smith "try before you buy" service.
I still pay for HFN, Hi-Fi Critic and Stereophile subscriptions. They all have their biases but they're all good reads and continue to champion analogue.
Hugo, as far as I'm aware, the Akito came in two versions, the original "plasticene" one which all the supplying dealers damaged as they tightened everything up and a Scottish built variety using stronger components. The latter was still a dogs dinner to use/set up and by comparison to the likes of an SME M2 it's a total joke.
Look, the Jelco 750 at £400 or so is a profitable thing for SoundHiFi and the fleabayers to sell, otherwise they wouldn't bother. I've thought for ages that Ortofon are on-the-slurp regarding the current pricings of their product lines and I could almost guarantee that they pay 1/10th the retail price for them from Jelco, as metal parts and better ball-races shouldn't cost a huge amount once you have the the line set up and the custom-finished parts are ordered up.. Remember the TA100 has three middle men (dealer, distributor and Ortofon) in addition to Jelco themselves, who probably make least of all per individual tonearm..
Hi Hugo,
Is the Ortofon really the same as the Jelco? I don't know, but it may be built by Jelco for Ortofon to a much higher specification. It's easy to sneer, but the facts would be useful.
It certainly looks the same, but I *suppose* anything is possible, so the Ortofon might be different in some way... Personally, though, I can't see how it could be built to a "much higher specification" than the Jelco already is, given that the two look identical :scratch:
Let me put it this way: if I was a betting man, I'd wager any amount of money that there is bugger all difference, other than that one has 'Ortofon' written on it. I could find out by contacting the distributor, Henley - that is if they'd tell me the truth..... ;)
As for the Akito, the article makes it clear that the present Akito is not the same as the one that went before that everyone seems to slag off, rightly or wrongly.
Where in the article does it "make it clear that the present Akito is not the same as the one that went before"?
All I can see in HFN is this:
Linn Products provides scant information about the specific design elements of its 'budget' Akito....
:scratch:
On top of that it's made in Scotland, by skilled people who are presumably very grateful for their employment. Good for Linn for promoting British (eg Scottish) manufacturing!
Oh I see, is that what you mean by it being "different" - because it's made in Scotland? Even my natural bias from being born in Scotland wouldn't influence me that way.
Possibly the new Akito might be different because it's manufactured in Scotland (different how though I wonder?), but that hardly absolutely guarantees that it's better than the 'old Akito', wherever that was made. It might be - or it might not be. We don't really know....
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for supporting British products and manufacturing when I can, but only if it translates into me owning a product that gives superior audio performance. In that respect, if something Japanese, Chinese, Mongolian or whatever, is better to my ears at a specific price point (tonearms or anything else), then that's what I will buy. Generally though, I couldn't really give a monkey's where the kit I buy is made, as long as it fulfils my purchasing criteria.
Again, it's easy to sneer, but I reckon £750 for a UK built arm that probably works well is not too bad and I'd happily try one if I was in the market for a new tonearm. This anti-Linn bias that exists across pretty much all audio forums is in my view getting tiresome.
It's got nothing to do with anti-Linn bias, Hugo - I'm talking here from practical experience (as I always do). I had an Akito on my LP12 in 2005/6 and it was one of the worst arms I've ever heard! I changed it for a Hadcock GH242 Integra, which pissed all over the Akito for roughly the same money.
The Hadcock (being one of the later varieties) was a thing of beauty in comparison - a real hand-made enthusiast’s device, whereas the Akito looked like a piece of mass-produced plastic pish (and sounded like it, too)...
I'll reserve judgement on the new one *if* it can be proven that it is genuinely better built (and outperforms the old one), but on the surface, it doesn't look like it. Therefore unless Linn are more forthcoming with information as to its design details, we'll be none the wiser until someone carries out an A/B comparison using the same T/T and cartridge.
I will then gladly stand corrected if someone reports that they've done the above and found the new Akito markedly superior to the one that went before it. Until then, my opinion is that it's vastly overpriced for what it is, and that if you want a 'real' Linn tonearm, then buy a good second-hand (late) Ittok, Ekos, or Ekos SE.
Personally though, I'd only use one on an LP12 - nowhere else - where it's distinctive sonic signature has been factored into the equation in a Linn system context by those who designed it, otherwise IMO there are plenty of other manufacturers out there who make better tonearms, often much cheaper too :)
Marco.
I've thought for ages that Ortofon are on-the-slurp regarding the current pricings of their product lines and I could almost guarantee that they pay 1/10th the retail price for them from Jelco, as metal parts and better ball-races shouldn't cost a huge amount once you have the the line set up and the custom-finished parts are ordered up.. Remember the TA100 has three middle men (dealer, distributor and Ortofon) in addition to Jelco themselves, who probably make least of all per individual tonearm..
Spot on, Dave!!
Marco.
may I add this regarding Linn "knocking?"
Ivor shouted, often rudely at the time, VERY LOUDLY about his view of record reproduction and I feel that we do owe him a lot. BUT, Linn have made some real shite in decades past along with the great stuff and they've learned as they went along, using the end users as guinea pigs IMO with a lot of it. I'm afraid they do deserve what they get and they've made themselves VERY easy and open to criticism IMO.
The Akito, like much of this company's output these days, is profit driven, helping to keep Linn alive IMO. I don't know how much of this arm is made from scratch (sorry ;)) in Scotland, but it may be that they buy ready made parts and glue them together there, as the bias/arm rest is definitely a Jelco/ADC part, although the arm base is an inferior (IMO), simpler casting to that of the Ittok/Basiks of old.
Ammonite Audio
02-05-2010, 21:19
My views on Linn are formed by my experience, nearly 30 years ago, of buying a new turntable, and of their subsequent customer support. Of course, all the mags at that time were pro-Linn, but I did take the opportunity to compare the LP12 with the Logic and Pink Triangle alternatives. The Linn was simply better sounding and of much better quality (very much better quality than the Pink Triangle which was a shoddy thing indeed). All of that shows in the continued existence of Linn as a company. Say what you like, keeping a company of that size going, employing so many people, in Zanu-Neue-Arbeit's self-inflicted economic and business environment, means that things are not cheap. I am very happy that Linn are still making tonearms and record players and sincerely hope that they continue to do so. That there are cheaper products out there that may perform better is not disputed, but ultimately not important, as long as Linn as a company continues to support their products in the way that they do. If the Akito makes them a profit, then good, since profit is required for existence of both the company, its staff and dealers etc.
Of course, Linn have produced some crap too. I remember in the mid-80s hearing the new LK1/LK2 amps at Stilton Audio, and they were really foul - unlistenably awful. That same day I also heard NVA amps, and I bought a P50/A40 combination. There was no way that those Linn amps would ever do music like the NVA, but some years later I did hear their entry-level CD player (I forget the name) and it really charmed me, so perhaps everyone is entitled to produce the odd dog as long as they move on.
Was Ivor right about music and the LP12? I happen to agree with what Dave has written above, and believe that he was right; and that we have, indirectly, a great deal to thank him for, although he could have been a tad less forthright sometimes. But we do need 'characters', in all walks of life, don't we?
There should be room for everyone in this hobby of ours. Tolerance, peace etc............. :)
Hypnotoad
16-05-2010, 14:19
As we all know, you have to take recommendations in a magazine with a grain of salt.
In Stereophile for example they have different grades. a grade C will cost less than a grade B which is less than a grade A recommended product.
Also how much "real" difference is there between products. So called golden eared audiophiles are able to describe the sonic difference in great detail between one product and another.
But when they are subjected to a blind trial they fumble and give scores that contradict their findings.
When was the last time you heard someone say, that LP12 I bought for a thousands was lousy.
Yes there are real differences but the placebo and pride effect in the audiophile world is very strong.
Just look at Bose.
So called golden eared audiophiles are able to describe the sonic difference in great detail between one product and another.
No such thing. We all have perfectly good ears.
Just look at Bose.
I'd rather not. It would be hard to buy worse sounding crap. Bose is the ultimate example of marketing over product.
Hypnotoad
16-05-2010, 14:41
No such thing. We all have perfectly good ears.
I'd rather not. It would be hard to buy worse sounding crap. Bose is the ultimate example of marketing over product.
Here in Houston one major store that sells Bose has a specially "setup" room that they fill with people and put on a computer controlled show of special soundtracks, jargon and hype.
The aim is to convince the listening audience that Bose is best.
You never see Bose products in rooms by themselves so you can't A-B their products against others.
For my two pennies worth, for me the problem with Linn, is that recommendation of Linn kit is often a sign of lazy retailers. I think there are too many "expert" hi-fi sellers who simply sell Linn/Naim and are too lazy to consider the alternatives. A lot of the kit is good, but you do pay a premium for the label, and because too many customers don't do any research, and simply accept what they are being told by their local hi-fi retailer. So they pay too much, and Linn can keep their prices high.
Spectral Morn
16-05-2010, 20:41
As we all know, you have to take recommendations in a magazine with a grain of salt.
In Stereophile for example they have different grades. a grade C will cost less than a grade B which is less than a grade A recommended product.
Also how much "real" difference is there between products. So called golden eared audiophiles are able to describe the sonic difference in great detail between one product and another.
But when they are subjected to a blind trial they fumble and give scores that contradict their findings.
When was the last time you heard someone say, that LP12 I bought for a thousands was lousy.
Yes there are real differences but the placebo and pride effect in the audiophile world is very strong.
Just look at Bose.
Not so, quite often cheaper items are Class A. In recent times Musical Fidelity and Pathos with the Classic One mk2 (This is the case with other brands as well) were class A over other dearer items. Your statement is imho a sweeping generalisation.
Regards D S D L
Reggie, it's more to do with these dealers needing to join a club (maybe part of the human condition for many). Linn/Naim is a good place to be, or was at one time, as B&O Solus dealers are now (in the UK).
In my day, it was possible to be a Bose dealer and sell other lines too. SOME Bose is good IMO (the 301 mk4 was an excellent little box) and the Acoustimess moddels fine in an AV context, if not a music one.
Spectral Morn
16-05-2010, 21:03
In my very humble opinion the biggest issue with any group test is System Synergy and Room Synergy (in the case of speakers) These issues are vital and getting them right is very much the trick and with dead lines weighing on the reviewer it is virtually impossible especially with printed magazines to devote the time to getting things right. One has more time online to get these things right but only a little bit more time as deadlines also exist here too.
One of the biggest problems, other than making sure system synergy is right, is whether the item in for review is run in fully and set up fully so it can reach its full performance level. Group tests don't allow for this at all. Some items need 100 + hours to reach this performance level, so how can this be reached for a group test never mind a one item review ? It can't !
In my opinion group tests are a waste of time (does not matter what type of kit it is) and tell you very little except as to what components didn't work in the room, on the end of the amplifier (etc) or in the case of the review you guys are discussing turntable, arm, cartridge synergy.
The chance of any of these arms working to their very best level on one type of turntable only is asking an awful lot, never mind if the cartridge used was compatible with all the arms.
This review is completely useless imho and its findings deeply flawed.
I learn't this arm turntable, cartridge thing very early on (20+ years ago), when I changed a Rega RB300 arm VDH MC10 cartridge on a Voyd Valdi for an SME 309 arm on the same turntable, it didn't work I lost all the magic of the first set up. The SME is a great arm (imho) just not on a Voyd Valdi. The same will apply to this group test.
Regards D S D L
Hypnotoad
17-05-2010, 02:36
Not so, quite often cheaper items are Class A. In recent times Musical Fidelity and Pathos with the Classic One mk2 (This is the case with other brands as well) were class A over other dearer items. Your statement is imho a sweeping generalisation.
Regards D S D L
Maybe in some cases but more often that not it's the case.
And it would be folly to purchase any item over another based on a recommendation from a magazine.
That's why places like AOS are hugely valuable for us, because we can get fairly unbiased opinions from people who own and use the product in question.
But in the end it's up to the buyer to try before they buy.
In my opinion group tests are a waste of time (does not matter what type of kit it is) and tell you very little except as to what components didn't work in the room, on the end of the amplifier (etc) or in the case of the review you guys are discussing turntable, arm, cartridge synergy.
The chance of any of these arms working to their very best level on one type of turntable only is asking an awful lot, never mind if the cartridge used was compatible with all the arms.
This review is completely useless imho and its findings deeply flawed.
I couldn't agree more, Neil, that's why I made the original post. They used a single turntable and, as far as I can read, a single cartridge for the group tests. This is guaranteed not to bring out the best in certain arms as the arm/deck/cartridge need synergy in spades to work correctly. A good example is all Rega-based designs; can sound wonderful or flat and grey depending on what turntable they are mounted.
I completely agree too, but I guess it comes down to time limitations, which although not conducive to thorough testing, can be understood.
Although the tonearm test was less than ideal from a synergy point of view, in these days of reviews of (let's face it, in comparison) rather boring computer audio, I have to congratulate HFN for supporting 'legacy hi-fi' and reviewing a selection of tonearms, which was an interesting read, if not a highly informative one :)
Marco.
Spectral Morn
17-05-2010, 17:57
I completely agree too,but I guess it comes down to time limitations, which although not conducive to thorough testing, can be understood.
Although the tonearm test was less than ideal from a synergy point of view, in these days of reviews of (let's face it, in comparison) rather boring computer audio, I have to congratulate HFN for supporting 'legacy hi-fi' and reviewing a selection of tonearms, which was an interesting read, if not a highly informative one :)
Marco.
See my post 29 as I mentioned this.
I agree with your final paragraph.
Regards D S D L
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.