Lacking Bounce

WM said ..

>>> Jason, this was no ordinary One , trust me You would Like it,

I am sure I would and I am intrigued, what causes teh lack of ordinariness?


>>> Plus I've been reliably informed the Ref is only slightly better WM

LOL ... the record player, classic and reference all sound very similar overall. BUT the reference is in a different leagur in terms of stability, dynamics and most of all MUSIC.


Cheers

Jason

 

Don't tell me it's got musicality Jason.

Groannnn.

 

Jason, I do have regular access to both, at any time and with a selection of decent carts and arms and phono's, and still I wouldn't swop my CDP, although the TT runs it very close, and I have to say, IT's one of the most musical reproductions of any piece of kit I've heard (and thats from a guy how hates TT's, Bub could learn a thing or too about music and dynamics if he had one).
Prehaps you should drag yourself along for a listen, might just raise an eyebrow. the dynamics on the ref are ok, but they are more dynamic pieces out for sure (without the use of ferrite enhancement ).
At least you have the ability to play music pretty well, which is always good sign WM

 

Hello WM

You could learn a lot from listening to my Ninja TT.

 

James, I'll do you a Deal, you make the effort to come and have a listen (weather you make your mind up in 30 seconds or not) and I'll will drop in and Listen to the Ninja, I have Ow my god audio business in the land of the Tartan army from time to time. and could easily swing by.
Not too fussed if it tickles you or not, just the fact you can hear what a 'interesting cdp' can do. Tone

 

Don't know what that is, I just know I prefer to listen to music with the WT Ref than any other deck I have heard so I guess it might have more musicality to me, sound fair?

btw dictionary.com says:
2 entries found for musicality.

n.
1. The quality or condition of being musical.
2. Musical sensitivity or talent.

musicality: n: the property of sounding like music [syn: musicalness]


WM said:
>>> IT's one of the most musical reproductions of any piece of kit I've heard (and thats from a guy how hates TT's, Bub could learn a thing or too about music and dynamics if he had one).

I think lots of people could learn that, took me a long time to accept it in listening to various systems. It was only so obvious when my system had reached a certain level. I think the partnering equipment has to be up to it. In Bubs case his system should easily tell the difference but he would need a better cart. and maybe pre-amp, imho, and the reference at least may be too heavy for his preferred support.

As to dynamics, I am sure there are more dynamic components out there, but again I haven't heard any that are more real sounding and that can blend the power with the discrimination and realistic tone, definitely not from CD (sorry) even mega-bucks Wadia and Levinsons.

Cheers

Jason

 

Jason,

I have to confess I have never heard a TT sound like anything other than record player Never heard one sound real, never heard one that presented the sound of master tape, and never heard one that was uncoloured

For all it's limitations, CD does not suffer from many of the failings of vinyl replay, that I guess I am highly susceptable to (ie. background noise, low dynamic range, pitch instability.....) Vinyl does have a certain beauty I accept, an intangible something that marks it out from alternative media. I guess some people are more sensitive to it's shortcomings than others.

But, so often I read about the superiority of vinyl and sorry but it's bollocks. It's purely subjective, and I understand that there are those who prefer the unique qualities of black pizzas. Maybe someone can convert me, I'd love to understand just what it is that is so fabulous about vinyl replay. Now where should I start

 

Point by point ...

>>> background noise, low dynamic range, pitch instability.....)

Background noise: will always be worse with a TT. Any silence in a track at decent volume will sound worse BUT it is sometimes surprising how non-distracting that is and teh better the deck teh less distracting.
Low Dynamic range: Disagree with this. Spec sheets say that CD has a better dynamic range in reality vinyl done right has a more realistic and larger dynamic range to my ears. It also handles small dynamic shifts more naturally as well.
Pitch instability, been listening to too many Linns and other suspended decks ;->


>>> I guess some people are more sensitive to it's shortcomings than others.

... which will always be the case.

This comment ...
>>> But, so often I read about the superiority of vinyl and sorry but it's bollocks.

and this comment ...
>>> It's purely subjective

Don't make sense to me. Whenever anybody is making a statement about superiority they are making are giving a subjective personnal opinion, so you saying its bollocks is effectively saying I know what you like better than you, you don't. OK perhaps more imho's are needed but that gets very boring very fast ... imho.


>>> Maybe someone can convert me, I'd love to understand just what it is that is so fabulous about vinyl replay. Now where should I start

Start with a decent vinyl optimised system and go from there. At the end you will probably not be convinced in the same way that many still prefer Musical Fatality gear which is totally beyond me and I dout you would have agreed that the Rega phono-stage I had for review recently was better than a Lehman Black Cube. In almost every measure (dynamic range, noise, tonality ...) the Rega was worse but in some indefinable way the Rega was simply more enjoyable to listen to (imho of course ;->)

Cheers

Jason

 

How about saying that you personally prefer the presentation of a good vinyl playback system to a digital one? That would be an accurate summation. Something cannot be classified as "better than", the use of the words is too far reaching. I would only consider the words "better than" apropriate when used with empirical evidence. The same words are however, totally acceptable (and more meaningful in a hifi context) when preceded by the word "like"

 

Hi Jason

I read that review in HIFI+
Also by coincidence, hifi world have done a vinyl issue this month, again with a feature on phono stages.

I found it very informative and enjoyable to read.
It was a shame however that no valve phono stage was included in the group phono stages in hifi +.

In the world review, they included the 834P. They quite fairly I thought described its nature, and concluded it to be both 'musical' (theres that word again) and yet additionally less dramatic at frequency extremes - not an unusual trade off in SS vs valve products of course.

It was a shame that the review in hifi+ did not include any valve phono stages, as I certainly feel they have something to offer, which is a viable alternative to their solid state cousins.

In fact, editorially I would say that it appears that hifi + promotes the use of valve power amplification with solid state line and phono stages.

I know that is a slightly odd-ball statement, but having read between the lines in the magazine for a few years, the magazine seems to prefer solid state when using line and phono stages, and valves in power amplification. Do you feel this is reflecting opinion of some of the editorial team?... who perhaps have a preference for ss line and phono stages?...and valves for power amplification?

NB
If you are shaking your head at that comment - can you recount a valve phono or line stage that has met a rapturous reception?.. (I cannot)

Finally, if you live in London, you should check out Graham Trickers reference 4 box phono stage (his own personal model). This behemouth I feel would be considered a reference product should it be known to more people I feel.

All the best
Chris

 

>>> It was a shame however that no valve phono stage was included in the group phono stages in hifi +.

Good point. The reviews were not intended as an exhaustive list and since we were largely aiming at the cheaper end and the original intention was to stick to MC capable stages, valve stages were not included. I also think there are many solid state stages out there and less valve ones although that could be naivety on my part.


>>> I know that is a slightly odd-ball statement, but having read between the lines in the magazine for a few years, the magazine seems to prefer solid state when using line and phono stages, and valves in power amplification. Do you feel this is reflecting opinion of some of the editorial team?... who perhaps have a preference for ss line and phono stages?...and valves for power amplification?

I think from recent reviews that conclusion could be drawn. But I think it is probably more a function of which products are released at a given time. Thinking back the Lamm and Hovland line stages recieved good reviews fairly recently as did the CAT stage a while back and I am almost certainly forgetting a few boxes. I think the biggest issue with valve phonostages is compatibility with a range of cartridges.

I think the HiFi plus reviewers are pretty evenly split. Chris Thomas, Jason Kennedy and myself use SS pretty much exclusively, Paul Messanger likes valves but is a Naimee. JMH and Chris Binns use vlaves and the editor was all valve before his system stopped existing because of review constraints.


Cheers

Jason

 

>>> How about saying that you personally prefer the presentation of a good vinyl playback system to a digital one?

I agree, but again the language will start to sound unnatural if we are overly careful about this stuff. I always read posts that say "X was better than Y because it had improved Z" as "I thought, in my system, in my room, with my music, X was better than Y because it had improved Z"

Anyway vinyl is better ;->

cheers

Jason

 

Yes I do believe one of the behind the sence comments about the Ear was 'warm and cuddly' with a dash of soft thrown in I could be completely wrong, nice to see the delphini getting full marks

 

Hi Tone,

thats not a million miles off really. It is warm and cuddly. Its also fluid and beguiling to listen to too - very natural. A bit of a classic really.

On mine, I use a nu-vista MC step up (hum free at last) which adds some bite to the frequency extremes and a little grunt. Im not sure it improves things, so much as changes them....

 

The Aro tonearm was designed for the Troika (I think!), so what would you suggest instead? Sounds OK-ish to me at the moment.

Preamp better than a 52? Suggestions again please, as I wouldn't mind changing if something was startlingly better, same goes for the cart, btw.

How much does it weigh?? My speakers weigh about 65kilos and they are on Mana stands.

The problem with all this on-line oneupmanship is that you don't know what my gear and room sound like.

"Musicality" may have a dictionary definition, but that doesn't guarantee that it means anything at all.

Vinyl is so obviously better than CD that anyone who thinks otherwise is either deaf or hasn't heard a decent turntable.

 

On that, I think SCIDB (dean) trumps the lot of us - he has the biggest record/cd collection - and surely thats the ultimate?

Id gladly downgrade all my kit for that number of records and CD's... but I think Id have to do a LOT more than that.. maybe sell the house? ermm no ta.

 

As red smarties are so obviously better than blue ones. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either devoid of a functioning tongue, or has never sampled a tube of delights that is within its sell by date.

'objectivism' may have a dictionary definition, but that doesn't guarantee that it means anything at all.

Of course, you were being facetious.

 

I've got ten records and seven CDs, beat that.

 

And how many of them are Stereophile test disks, Bub?

-- Ian

(Nice to see you here, btw)

 

LOL,

I like that description