LOL - it's already written in stone, mate! Let's not forget too, the role AoS has played (and continues to play) in that... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_New
Marco.
Printable View
LOL - it's already written in stone, mate! Let's not forget too, the role AoS has played (and continues to play) in that... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_New
Marco.
It would seem that two posters in particular are reading this thread and only seeing the negatives, which is somewhat disappointing. I refer the gentlemen concerned to one of my earlier posts http://theartofsound.net/forum/showt...rs/page15:hmm: #143
Thanks Marco
I appreciate I go on about P*** T****** and F*** F*** a lot, but as you rightly point out we all tend to talk about what we know about and have experience of, and I lead a sheltered life. I have also recently posted about ligament strains, storm damage and the death of a friend of my stepsons, Morris Oxfords, Weatherspoons pubs, Dacs and power supplies, Firebottles lovely VALVE phono stage, and of course the usual Steadman bashing, and a few others I forget about.
I prefer enthusing (even a bit too much) to denigrating. I'll try to get out more :cool:
Hi Marco,
Two back in the eighties the New Yorker magazine ran a cartoon of two tramps sitting on a bench in central park looking at the bumper sticker of a car that said I heart NY and one says to the other "I dunno I LIKE New York". My problems not with the products, I'd like to hear them, it's the religious zeal with which PT/Funk is relentlessly punted. In the flat earth days, when I was first in the trade, with two far superior TTs to the LP12, ( a precursor of the 1200 as it happens) I expected to be burned at the stake for heresy :) I haven't felt that for years, until now :( Personal attacks on people you disagree with have no place on well run forums, I half expect the inquisition on my doorstep for the "Crime" of not thinking that the Pip is the hifi version of the Ark of the Covenant. :)
In my opinion there needs to be a lot less hyperbole and a lot more accuracy, FYI Richard I have a degree AND a doctorate, both in audio related fields and I never said the Pip was no good, I said I've heard ones I feel are better, each to their own.
Regards to all
It's no religious zeal. Marco has said many times that if something better comes along he will give it a fair listen, and I agree with that. It's hardly blinkered flat earthism that only allowed a few brands to exist.
The fact is that my combination of Mike New and Funk components has given me the best sound I've heard in my system, and one which approaches what I've heard from the Air Force and Continuum when I've heard them. I'm not saying 'equals' but then I've spent less than 10% of their entry ticket. If a significant improvement comes along that will fit my deck, I'll give it a try and report fairly on it, just as I've always done.
Hi Martin
My complaints of zealotry are not aimed at you in any way
Paul S
I hear you, Paul - and rest asssured that your comments have been noted. Let's move on now and get back on-topic :)
Marco.
Paul,
It would seem that maybe you would have the abillity and equipment to persue an experiment I have been
considering for some time now. There is always discussion on the type of mat to use (and platters for that matter)
My idea is this: to actually try to measure the amount of reflected/transmitted energy through the record material.
This could be done using a second arm running on a perfectly smooth surface, I have used a CD (recorded side) on my single SME V
and the surface noise is very low. I guess a piece of thin plate glass would be better. I know this is what we used to check the surfaceometers (which used a MM cartridge) when I worked at AWRE in the metrology section for a while. Now the second arm could be connected to the required electronics and a speaker, whilst the first arm is actually reading the track but not being output to a speaker. What do you think?
With some extra effort an annulus (annuli?) could be made so that various positions on the record could be measured.
This way even the effectiveness of centre weights and maybe bearings could be measured.
Effective sonic connection of the plain medium to the record could be a problem.
The ultimate perhaps would be a laser sensor.
PS: If you think this is off topic Marco then move it to another thread.
It's nice to see we've all decided to be civilised again in here.
The quality and precision workmanship in Mikes work speaks for itself and certainly doesn't require any shilling now that MCRU is distributing his products. I'd certainly be interested to see the results of a shootout between all the available platters as this may well prove to be my christmas pressie. :eyebrows:
The semantics of the language. I almost cringe when statements like that are made, not because I don't know what you're really getting at, Martin; but, because of how some folks quickly read a statement like that without tagging on, in their own minds, "...to me." In other words, failing to acknowledge personal preference in audio. It's that out with the old, in with the new, mentality. To actually say something sounds better, objectively, requires the only tools we have at our disposal: scientific measurement and a goal. Nevertheless, justifiably and again based on preference, measurements are rarely the deal breakers for audio loving folks.Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
Is your Dynavector "better" than my "Trans-Fi"? It just depends on whether you or I are listening and what we are listening for. ;) I'm not singling you out, Martin, you know that. Moreover, this maybe for others out there, in general. The different platters, all of them, like cartridges, have different sounds. Not a one of them is "better" than any other, except as a preference of the listener/owner. In that respect, they are all equally as good as the other, including the stock platter.
Now, to Mike's point. Measuring the reflectivity of platters (and mats) back to the cantilever/stylus of a cartridge for specific frequencies (if it could be done in an agreed upon scientific way) would give us the plain facts about, indeed, how "dead" they are or how effective they are in "not offending" the music. I already know what the outcome would be; because, even if a platter was found to egregiously color parts of the audio band, those who prefer a particular combination would still continue to use it; as well they should if it suits them.
As an aside, out of curiosity, (Arthur), how will the sub and main platter be joined on the Mk. 2 version? Will the torque of the 1200 motor effect that join over time (start up / quick electronic braking especially with a 78 rpm mod)? Will the two platters "slip" if one tries to clean a record on the table with that setup? Perhaps, dumb questions; but, these are the things I think about. (I should get out more.) There are things that I, personally, take for granted because the Techy is such a tank. I've never owned a sub/main platter TT and reading about some TD 124s with warped platters and some Regas that "crest and trough" give me pause. I'm assuming the bottom of the main platter and top of the hub would have to be near perfectly flat and level. Just asking... ...I generally do a stupid amount of research before plunking down my coins. As I posted earlier, what are your thoughts on replacing the lettering that doesn't seem to be too popular with polishing the sides (less noticeable glue join) at the same cost?