+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Inspire Enigma(Lenco) comparisons with LP12

  1. #1
    Join Date: Sep 2014

    Location: donegal

    Posts: 16
    I'm patrick.

    Smile Inspire Enigma(Lenco) comparisons with LP12

    Having purchased an Enigma late last year I've recently added an Origin Live Silver Arm & Goldring 1042 Cart to it & having allowed a few weeks to pass I thought I would share my thoughts, such as they are. Initial comparisons with my LP12/Funk/Ekos11/Arkiv B were unfavorable but I continued to use the Enigma & now feel that I can appreciate it more. As this was my first non belt drive 'table I was unsure what to expect so the sound has been a surprise to me. Compared to the LP12 it seems leaner, more taut. The soundstage isn't as deep or as 3 dimensional as the LP12 but details within are much clearer. Both 'tables have their strengths and both are thoroughly enjoyable to listen to. I'm slightly favouring the Enigma at the moment. If I may use a boxing metaphor I would describe the LP12 as a good heavy weight & the Enigma as a great middleweight. Obviously the choice of cartridge limits the validity of my review and I will certainly look to add a good MC when funds allow. In the meantime its back to listening to the recent vinyl reissues of the Nick Cave catalogue.

  2. #2
    Join Date: Mar 2015

    Location: Finland

    Posts: 237
    I'm Kai.

    Default

    Seems to go sort of parallel to my own experience with idler vs suspended belt drive, though my tables are far more modest (Dual 1019 in a heavy plinth with Denon DA-305 tonearm & slightly modified Thorens TD-160 with the original TP-16mkI arm). The idler has tighter and more focused bass range and drier sound overall, while the suspended belt drive delivers more holographic soundstaging and more bass, but the bass range I feel with the Thorens is perhaps a bit colored and looser. With some material that results in a slightly confused overall presentation (think electronic music with very full production, or punchy rock etc, where you really want tight and focused instead of loose and rich), but with something like acoustic jazz it's a very tough act to beat, because the things it does well compliment that sort of music and the slight looseness in the bass range doesn't really matter. Both tables are very enjoyable to listen to and do everything well enough that mostly I notice or think about their comparable shortcomings & differences only when listening to the two tables back-to-back.

  3. #3
    Join Date: Sep 2014

    Location: donegal

    Posts: 16
    I'm patrick.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helma View Post
    Seems to go sort of parallel to my own experience with idler vs suspended belt drive, though my tables are far more modest (Dual 1019 in a heavy plinth with Denon DA-305 tonearm & slightly modified Thorens TD-160 with the original TP-16mkI arm). The idler has tighter and more focused bass range and drier sound overall, while the suspended belt drive delivers more holographic soundstaging and more bass, but the bass range I feel with the Thorens is perhaps a bit colored and looser. With some material that results in a slightly confused overall presentation (think electronic music with very full production, or punchy rock etc, where you really want tight and focused instead of loose and rich), but with something like acoustic jazz it's a very tough act to beat, because the things it does well compliment that sort of music and the slight looseness in the bass range doesn't really matter. Both tables are very enjoyable to listen to and do everything well enough that mostly I notice or think about their comparable shortcomings & differences only when listening to the two tables back-to-back.
    Hi Kai, your experiences do seem to mirror my own. I wonder are these universal differences between idler drives & belt drives?

  4. #4
    Join Date: Mar 2015

    Location: Finland

    Posts: 237
    I'm Kai.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cookstown View Post
    Hi Kai, your experiences do seem to mirror my own. I wonder are these universal differences between idler drives & belt drives?
    I think it comes more down to the suspension in the Thorens (and likewise in the Linn, basically same design, just different execution). I also have a Telefunken S-600, another suspended sub-chassis table, though with a bit different suspension and it's pretty close to the Thorens in sound, while the Connoisseur BD-2 isn't like it at all. The Connie is a belt drive but no suspension. Also the tuning of the springs makes a significant difference, so I think that's where the magic happens. Probably a somewhat colored presentation, especially in the bass region, though the soundstaging with the Thorens (and to some extent the Telefunken) seems more realistic than most non-suspended designs, so I'm guessing that's not really coloring but just doing something well.

    The better idlers usually have a lot of torque, I'm guessing (again) that's where the very controlled bass comes from.

    I find it a bit difficult to understand exactly what goes on when comparing tables without a reference, though with more and more listening experience with different gear I suppose your brain starts to provide you some sort of 'interpolated reference' It would be awesome to compare different turntables / arms / carts etc. against a mastertape.

  5. #5
    Join Date: Sep 2014

    Location: donegal

    Posts: 16
    I'm patrick.

    Smile

    I finally got round to trying a decent MC Cart on the OL, a ClearAudio Sigma, & boy does it make a difference. Strangely the perceived difference is not so much with the Enigma but with the LP12. Compared to the Enigma the LP12 now seems to be adding something that the Enigma doesn't. I've heard it described as a mid-range bass bloom. It may well be down to software choice but certainly from the first few sessions comparing the two 'tables I would have to say the Enigma is much more "honest" in protraying what is on the record.
    One peculiar exception I found was on a Sade LP. For some reason the LP12 sounded much better than the Enigma, this despite the fact that the Sade LP enjoys a lot of reverb. I was expecting the mid-range bass bloom but it just wasn't there. Interesting times ahead...

  6. #6
    Join Date: May 2013

    Location: Yorkshire

    Posts: 99
    I'm John.

    Default

    Patrick,

    Did you run the comparison between tt using the same cartridge?

  7. #7
    Join Date: Sep 2014

    Location: donegal

    Posts: 16
    I'm patrick.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ulysses View Post
    Patrick,

    Did you run the comparison between tt using the same cartridge?
    No John I was only able to compare using different carts. The strange thing is I've never really noticed the Linn "bloom" in the past, even when comparing it to the Enigma with the Goldring 1042 cart. It was only when I swapped to the ClearAudio Sigma that the bloom became noticeable(to my ears). I've had the LP12 for 15 years or so & I wouldn't swap it for anything but I'm now also happy with the Enigma.
    As an aside I wonder if the Linn "Kore" would alter the "bloom"?

  8. #8
    Join Date: May 2013

    Location: Yorkshire

    Posts: 99
    I'm John.

    Default

    Don't know about the Linn Kore, but if I was comparing TTs I would want to use the same cartridge to make it a fairer comparison, otherwise you would not know for sure if the difference was due to the TT or cartridge. Without doing this you can never be sure. You could try making a recording using audacity software (using the same cart) and compare TTs that way via A/B switching of recordings.
    Last edited by Ulysses; 02-12-2015 at 06:31.

  9. #9
    Join Date: Oct 2017

    Location: Kingston

    Posts: 30
    I'm Winston.

    Default Leaning toward a 'lean' Lenco?

    Compared to the LP12 it seems leaner, more taut
    Been looking for a comparison like this for a long time. Thanks!

    Reassuring to know that everything you found is pretty-much what I’d also found – with both my Linn and Thorens 125, compared to my Lenco; all tested with either an Ittok or SAU2 with the same carts: First test revealed that the Thorens/Ittok or Thorens/SAU2 was better than the same Thorens and the arm it was supplied with. And, secondly, it was also preferable (to me) compared to the Linn, which displayed the midbass bloom you referred to, while the Thorens/Ittok or SAU2 was more neutral at midbass though thankfully sounding nearly identical to the Linn in midrange tone.

    So this left a straight fight between the Thorens and the Lenco, testing with the same arms and carts. And, yes, the Lenco was slightly more dynamic, and slightly tighter, ‘punchier’ at midbass, but it was also ‘thinner’ or ‘leaner’ in the mids/low-mids, with the Thorens seeming fuller or weightier in tone, with singers and instruments like the acoustic guitar and piano seeming more realistic and with more natural body – a ‘bigger’ more lifelike sound overall.

    It’s a fact that I like almost everything that the Lenco does, but I wish it had more of the midrange tone of the likes of a 125 or a Linn (or my Techie). I’ve gained improvements first with the use a Techie mat, then with double mats (i.e. Techie & Lenco mats) and now with stacked platters & double-mats. All these measures have garnered increments of tonal improvement, but the Lenco is still a bit lean, compared to the others mentioned. (I’m inclined to believe my own Lenco might be a bit extreme in this regard, for some reason).

    Any further solutions? Anyone?

    Still, your Linn and your Lenco/Enigma constitute an awesome combination, IMO. And, yes, I’m sure the ‘Kore’ would cut the ‘bloom’ and make your Linn more neutral, but I’d suggest you listen to a similarly equipped Linn Akurate LP12 at a dealer and make sure you like the sound. (There are also other sub-chassis upgrade options like ‘Greenstreet’ and others which may be even less costly).

    It’s a very late post, I know, but enjoy your two great TTs (if you still have them). And thanks again for posting about your own findings.

    Cheers
    Main system: Lenco L75, Thorens TD-125, Technics SL1700, ReVox A77 two-track 15 ips, Sony PS-1, Dell laptop, mxr, eq, Audio-Research LS-3, UREI 6150, DIY two-way speakers with Altec 802/811 & Goodmans 18” midwoofers.
    Author of; “HIGH-END AUDIO on a BUDGET”

  10. #10
    Join Date: Jan 2017

    Location: Bournemouth Dorset england

    Posts: 31
    I'm Steve.

    Default opening up the sound of you're idler

    Yes yes i know it's a bit late ! However..............to help the opennes and air around you're midrange with you're enigma might I suggest you try to listen to a unipivot arm, they are noted for a lovely open airy sound and mixed with the sheer grunt of an idler you just might find it the answer,I have a heavily modified lenco and a garrard 301 and both have unipivot arms on them and to my ears that is a very good combination.
    Unipivots are noted for a slightly weak bottom end but beautiful midrange, idlers are famous for there timing and total control over bass but there midrange is not up with the best , so to me the combination of the two makes a very serious high end turntable
    I hope this can be of some help ,
    Regards Steve

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •