Grand Prix Monaco review in new Stereophile- OUCH

This is an interesting thread that drives home the fact that vibration control and stand construction material is a key determinant of sonic signature. From reading the review and now Mike's follow up here I wonder what the table would sound like on 2" thick or more maple. I test (mostly) vintage equipment and I have a thing for the big Luxman tables. Unfortunately, without proper stands these tables are two dimensional with the sound stuck on the speakers. You have to build a special platform with a sandwiched elastomer to exploit the big Lux tables. Once you do they are in the same league as the Walker.

Bet this table could benefit from these stands.

Good job, Mike.

Peter

Raul, I am now forgetting what Mike Fremer actually did, but did he not test both tables with the same tonearm and cartridge? If so, then the only variable was the use of two different stands (assuming also that he took the elementary precaution of using the same interconnect and phono preamp in both cases). So, the deficiency of his review is that (I agree) it would have been nice (and very interesting) if he had tested both tables on the same stand. As he wrote here more than once, he used the GPM stand, because the maker of the GPM table insisted on it. SO, if all the above is true, then one can fairly say that the perceived differences in sonic character between the two tables are valid, for Mike's ears and given the difference in stands. What you are saying is that some tweaking of tonearm/cable/cartridge used on the GPM might alter the sound of the GPM for the better. Who could argue with that? I certainly don't, but that's asking and answering a different question. To me, the Fremer review is a very rare instance where a reviewer actually compared two high end products head to head and gave us the straight poop, in his opinion, whereas in most cases we are fed verbal pablum that tries through metaphor to describe the sound of a piece of gear in isolation. JV of TAS does this all the time; he has a boatload of high end gear in his living room, but when he writes his (usually elegaic) reviews, he typically does not mention how the equipment in question compares to his various references.

Peter,

Can you elaborate on the description of the stand you refer to?

Scott

I think Mikey does a very good job at reviewing, as he is consistent in his listening approach and generally has more than one arm / cartridge combination to makes his assessment on its sound.
As long as you understand Mikey's musical tastes and tonal/sonic preferences you can get a pretty good idea of what an item sounds like.
No - that does not preclude listening to it yourself, however it is nigh impossible to listen to everything.

Take his review on the Einstein phono pre amp - it is pretty much spot on. I have it at home on demo and it is extremely dynamic, pure and transparent. It has the BEST bass drive I have ever heard. However it can sound a little forward and uncompromising on top. pretty much what Mikey said.

I was thinking about the Monaco, but its inherent sonic signature is enough for me not to pursue a lot of time in trying to have a listen to it. I prefer a more euphonic on top, but still dynamic view of preceedings.

I think Mikey has more than done enough for us audiophiles. We can look at our own listening preferences and use Mikey's view's to allow us to at least narrow down potential opportunities and have a listen for ourselves..

happy listening

Dear Lewm: I'm not saying that MF does not heard what he say, certainly he did.

What I'm saying ( please read again carefully what I posted )is that if any one is comparing/testing two different TT's surrounded for the same around analog rig: tonearm/cartridge/cables/phonolinepreamp, etc etc, we must try to make an individual set-up to achieve the best performance on both TT's: VTA/SRA/VTF/load impedance, due to their different " colorations/distortions " ( like you say: " I suggest that one is always trading one set of distortions for another " ). Maybe one specific load impedance value makes synergy with the " colorations/distortions " of one unit but the same load impedance value could not make the same synergy with the other TT and this could happen too for the other parameters: VTA/VTF/etc,, that's why is mandatory to make a precise individual TT set-up taking in count any single parameter that can/could affect the quality sound individual TT performance.
We have to compare apples with apples, this means: the best performance of both TT's and from here decide about.
For what I read elsewhere the Monaco set-up was far away from ideal and is unfair to judge it or make any valuation on that un-friendly environment.
Like I told you I don't care about the Monaco but if I was its designer I would like that any review/test/comparison take place in the same performance level ( set up ) conditions. Yes, IMHO MF had to tweaked the whole Monaco set-up and ( for what I read and for what he already say ) he did not: I wonder why????????, totally unfair: the Monaco and more important the Stereophile readers don't deserve that in any professional product review, well at least this is what I think about.

Take a look for the MF's " force " ( brutal force ) he has: in this thread Downunder ( and I can assure that other people too. ) already post +++" I was thinking about the Monaco, but its inherent sonic signature is enough for me not to pursue a lot of time in trying to have a listen to it. I prefer a more euphonic on top ... " ++++, because MF opinion, WOW!!!!!

Lewm, MF has a great great responsability in its hands ( like no one in the analog domain. ) and that's why I think he has to be more carefully about.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.