Grand Prix Monaco review in new Stereophile- OUCH

Dear friends: I think that the Monaco " takes " by surprise to Mr. Fremer and he " resist " to think that what he was heard is right.

For many years Mr. Fremer, like many of us, were accustom to the belt drive distrortions/colorations, our brain is already equalized to the belt drive " signature " sound and because we are accustom to it we think is the right and only way to heard the analog magic in a TT.
Suddenly Mr. fremer heard something that is really accurate with lower in distortions/colorations ( against a belt drive system, including what he owns. )and these facts are " news " for him/us and does not like him and that's all.

Now, the opinion of Mr. fremer is only one very experience opinion but does not means that the Monaco is not a great top quality performer.

Maybe, IMHO, the question for Mr. Fremer is not what he likes or what he does not likes about the Monaco performance but which one is truer to the recording, the Monaco or his Caliburn?, because one thing is what Mr. Fremer or any of us likes to hear/heard and other very different what is on the recording.

Accuracy is a must on audio and specially on a TT and specially for real music lovers, which one leave us nearer the recording the one with almost perfect accuracy or the one not almost perfect accuracy?. Very hard to say because how Mr. fremer or any one of us could know what is really on the recording, very complex.

Now, like I say Mr. fremer is one opinion, here is another expert opinion: http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue25/monaco.htm

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

I tend to agree in part with Rauliruegas and I am the one who wrote the review in Stereophile. I do agree that people considering the table should read other full reviews and listen to for themselves, which is something I think should be done with any product being considered regardless of what any reviewer writes.

However, I do not agree that the Monaco is "truer" to the recording. I think it introduces a different set of colorations compared to a good belt drive. In particular, it definitely imparts a "drier" sound and truncates harmonic development. This was repeatable, record after record, and can be recognized even on an MP3, just as, if you read the Kuzma review I wrote, the Airline arm on the big 'table imparted a noticeable brightness compared to my reference and compared to other tables.

It is definitely true that unless one knows the recording it's impossible to tell. However, I can tell you that Greg Calbi, who mastered "Graceland" among hundreds of other LPs heard that album played back on the Caliburn and he was amazed to hear things he did not hear on the master tape. Now part of that was the resolution of my system which surpasses what he had in the mastering suite back then.

In addition, a gentleman who owns a Monaco visited me and while the 'table was gone, when I played him a CD-R of the same material transferred using both my reference and the Monaco, he heard precisely what I described in the review.

Now while I believe what I wrote about the sound of the turntable is accurate (how could I think otherwise?) I tried not to make value judgements because different tastes come into play. My aim was not to "damn with faint praise," I was just trying not to get either too effusive or too damning, which is what I try to do generally.

In fact, a guy who bought a Continuum Caliburn complained to me that my review was too mild mannered. He accused me of "holding back." Remember: I compared the Monaco to both the Caliburn and the Merill-Scillia.

If one wishes for "accuracy," you're better off with a CD player, which "measures" far better than any turntable. Of course speed accuracy is important but given that virtually every record is pressed slightly eccentric, (few are pressed 'dead center' is claimed perfect speed accuracy really the most important consideration?

Ultimately, I think anyone considering the Monaco should try to listen to it. It has many outstanding qualities and I tried to make those clear. It also has a distinctive "solid state" dryness that I could not deny. My reference is both recorded music and live: I attend the symphony monthly and attend other live events.

Yesterday I was at an event in Chicago and brought a CD-R along containing the same material transferred using my reference and the Monaco: same arm (Graham Phantom), cartridge and phono preamp. I played both without comment and the reaction was in line with what I wrote. I am sure that what I expressed in terms of sonics are accurate.

Why does the Monaco sound as it does? Read about Hall sensor commutated motors. The 'table does use sine wave commutation (as opposed to the less expensive square wave commutation) but just as belt drive has 'issues' (that can be addressed but not to perfection, which is what Continuum has done), so can direct drive but NOT to perfection, something I believe it can be inferred, Monaco claims for its design. If you look at how these motors work and do some online research, I just don't think "perfection" is possible and that what I heard is the characteristic of that lack of "perfection." Whatever the cause, I'm quite certain I described the sound accurately (of course I'd think that!).

As for the price, I disagree with whoever wrote that it didn't seem like it was worth the price. It is easily worth the price. The build quality is exquisite and the engineering superb, and everything about the presentation is first class. The 'table is a major achievment, it really is. I just found the sound dry and harmonically "tight." Play a piano recording on the Monaco and then on something like the Merrill. You'll hear it. That said, the Monaco stomped all over the Merrill (and most suspended 'tables I've heard) in the bottom octaves.

I was happy to see the posts here were very thoughtful and didn't attack me personally....--Fremer

Actually Monsieur Fremer, in all seriousness, thanks for giving us a "warts and all" review. Having seen your post, I reread your review... and yes, "damning with faint praise" would be, in retrospect, an overharsh opinion. It is obvious that there are things you have a hard time with on this turntable, and things you really like about it.

The sad fact is, for most of us, we cannot hear 4 tables with three arms and 4 cartridges, etc, the best we can do is maybe a dealer comes with one recommended setup to your house, in my experience. So sadly, we have to depend on turntable, cartridge and arm reviews way more than either you or we would like, I am sure. Many dealers will schlep an amp or a cd player, or ship one for an inhome demo, the same cannot be said for turntables.

Cheers,
Chris

Dear Grooves: +++++ " If one wishes for "accuracy," you're better off with a CD player, which "measures" far better than any turntable. " +++++

I don't mean it in that way, I speak of accuracy because reading your review and the white papers of the Monaco design the word accuracy takes a very wide meaning and along with that the Monaco people are experts on damping/vibrations/dissipations devices. His design was very well thinking, unfortunately I never had the opportunity hear it for to have a more precise idea of what you report on your review and what other report on different reviews on the Monaco.

Obviously the Caliburn is a top performer ( well at that price anithing must be. ) and between other advantages it has a vacuum hold down record that is a real advantage over any other TT design with out it.

Any way the Monaco is an audio item that any of us have to hear and it looks like a top TT alternative for any analog music lover.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

Good for you, Rauliregas, for coming out and saying that you had not heard the Monaco.

Mr. Fremer, thanks a lot for taking the time to post the horse's-mouth info this discussion needed (and outing your nick).