SAEC Making Tonearms Again!
covenscables.com |
Pindac, I was quoting from your post of 5-23-22. You can be forgiven for not recognizing something you wrote a year ago, nearly. I do not at all challenge your judgment of the copper wire that you have been discussing. I have no basis to doubt your testimony. I only wondered at that comment about how the wire is made. |
@lewn I am not aware of any posts I have made where crystals are part of the content, but maybe I have? early mornings and older age cam create a absent mind. I am assuming this post from you is a response to my making it known, as a result of experiences, I am a advocate of PC Triple C and D.U.C.C Wire. This may be if interest or not, but there are other Gon forum members, in a small number making it known they are trying out PC Triple C signal wire in a cable, following witnessing my commentary on the experience I have with it. Reports are now beginning to feed back where there are claims that the Cable used has made a very good impression and is likely to be the replacement for previous used Cables. There are now approx' 5 x Tonearms having been upgraded to PC Triple C by the designer of the Tonearm I own. As stated in a previous post in relation to PC Triple C being used as a signal wire in a Tonearm, "The newly adopted use of the PC Triple C wire is the one I would promote as the must have element of the available design changes." Keeping D.U.C.C signal wire in the Loop, I took a 0.7mtr and 1.2mtr length of Cable to a demonstration very recently. The intention of the day was to be demonstrated a new to the HiFi Groups system. The usual schedule was in place, the owner presents and following this the Group adds devices to enable the owner to experience a different presentation, sonic, SQ. When having been through different permutations of digital sources to DAC's, Cables as connectors between DAC's was on the menu. The D.U.C.C has thoroughly impressed, this was a unanimous agreement. The system owner now has a Cable Pair retained as loan items, to extend the use of them at other interfaces. |
SAEC are trying out something very new, they are pioneering the use a State of the Art Signal Wire in their Tonearm, their choice for the signal wire is produced by a Company that really does know a thing or two about wire production. I can’t fault the use of PC Triple C wire in any way, as a Signal Wire and Umbilical Cable when attached to my owned devices. When used on my system as an external Cable, throughout a Sources Signal Path and being compared to the older produced wire designs used in Cables, especially OCC wire, the PC triple C, is out in front and not really in the company of a competitor. For this reason the wire has become notable and is a material worthy of being referenced and made known. I turned away from Silver Wire quite some time ago, a owned Tonearm that has Silver Wire used as continuous signal wire was put on the Subs Bench quite a few years ago, even though I did recently give it an excursion, where it was out being used during a TT demonstration at another home. My earliest experience of PC Triple C was one that almost immediately put expensive Silver OCC Phono DIN > RCA Cable back in its box very shortly after a PC Triple C Cable was compared to it. The Silver OCC has remained in storage for since it was put away. I certainly am not going to make a Statement as to what is the best wire to be used on a Tonearm, or wire that is best to be used in a Cable on a Signal Path. I like many, have had hands on experience with OFC Copper, OCC Copper, OCC Silver, being used as wire on a Vinyl LP Sources Signal Path, these wire types are no longer on my radar for use in my home system. If a friend needed cable to get them out of trouble, I would happily make them available for these reasons, but if I were to demonstrate a Cables Capability today, PC triple C is the material for this. These old wire designs when compared to PC triple C on my system and the few other systems I have heard using it, has made a really positive impression on myself, as well as the owners of the other systems, the New Design Wire in use is simply out in front of the other contenders, once experienced it is difficult to imagine the future with out it included. I will say solely, that I am not able to see myself taking a step back to older design wires, I have progressively adopted New Wire Designs over the years. The want to create a New Signal Path in my system, using the latest design wires has got my full attention and budget allocation. |
Dear @best-groove : as @holmz posted Furutech used that cooper cable as a power cable item::
Silver wire for tonearms still is the best you can get as could be the one from Audio Note UK or the expensive Kondo or the Ikeda one.
SAEC tonearms does not shows nothing new with his " new " tonearm. It comes with the same design " errors " of its vintage tonearm designs but today at very high price.
R.
|
Note: Furukawa stopped producing OCC Wire many years ago, but produced a substantial amount in advance of their departure, hence Furutech have been using this Stockpiled Wire in their Brand for numerous years. Furukawa own the Company Fine Chemicals and Materials, which carried out the R&D for the New Wire Material PC Triple C. PC Triple C wire used in A/B Comparisons to both OCC and OFC has shown it to be substantially improved over OFC and noticeably improved over OCC. To date, I have exchanged Phono Tag Wires, Phono Interconnects, Speaker and Power Cables. The entirety of the Loom is not yet fully exchanged but most devices have had the Cables attached to them and improved presentation has resulted. My offering demonstrations of these wires in other systems has been very well received by the systems owners, and there are now others I know who have took to the use of this wire and have extended the use of it beyond my own. There is as said previously a Tonearm with it in use as a Internal Signal Wire and it is also being used as the wire internally in anther groups Phonostages. I am wondering myself if it is worth the expense to have it used as the Hard Wire within my point to point wired Phon' . I have also introduced DUCC Wire as well, to learn if sharing the different methods for producing the wires can offer the system a presentation that is perceived as being beneficial and offering further improvement. I also have available the quite expensive PC Triple C/EX Wire but am yet to put this to trial. I have heard the PC Triple C used as a Power Cable which has been Cryo Treated and Nano Treated, during the A/B Trial, the Nano Treated has had the most impressive impact on the system used and the devices it was used on. The Cryo Treated Power Cable owner has acquired Nano Treated Wire as a result of the experience of the trial. The following will supply a description of PC Triple C wire. It is based on the Furukawa technical materials prepared by engineers, not by audiophiles. The purity of copper obtained in this process may not seem impressive as the FCM website claims the percentage to be 99.996% or more. However, this material has a completely different structure than even the PCOCC copper. The thus obtained copper has been called PC-triple C, from Pure Copper-Continuous Crystal Construction. In the final production stage, the conductors are subjected to an aging process, where larger crystals coalesce with each other, forming monocrystalline areas. |
@best-groove it is a OFC copper with linear grain. |
I have not had a demonstration of a SAEC WE-4700 arm, I am not in a position to pass judgement as I would in nearly all cases, reserve any comments of performance and impression made until such a time as I have had a in the room experience. Where I do form an opinion is that it quite an expensive arm, so at this purchase price, I would suggest a long list of Tonearms prior to producing a short list of Tonearms to be investigated further, if an individual is interested in parting with such monies as a purchase value. The SAEC arm, as I have made known before in other threads has used PC Tripe C wire was the internal signal wire and to my knowledge is the only commercial produced arm with this wire on offer. I have been converting to PC Triple C and DUCC Wire in my system over a period of time and have offered demonstrations to others in their home systems. The outcome being that I have been instrumental in the changes of signal wire others have succumb to adopting. One such individual has been prompted by myself to adopt the PC Triple C wire as the signal wire used on their design of Tonearm. It took some time to finally materialise, but there is now a Tonearm I have received demonstrations of with PC Triple C signal wire, with the result being it one of the most impressive experiences I have been party to on a Tonearm design I have been witnessing develop over the past few years. There are options for earlier guises of the arm to undergo small changes to the design around the mechanical interfaces, which I agree are beneficial to the overall performance. The newly adopted use of the PC Triple C wire is the one I would promote as the must have element of the available design changes. Another friend who has their own Tonearm design has now been informed that if they are not investigating the use of PC Triple C as their signal path wire, they may be selling their design short, not letting it deliver to its very best. I am now hoping that a Cartridge is produced in the not too distant future using this wire for the coil winding, I am hopeful there is a diameter produced that will suit this purpose. |
SAEC have bad edges and are not even worth spending money |
I guess it really is personal preference like anything in this hobby. The Technics turntables are an amazing value and in many ways are better than the SME 20 that I heard. The 20 sounded a bit thick and as much as I tried to like it, the 1200 G is not only less expensive, but outperforms the older design. That is to my ears. I also discussed the possibility of adding an SME V to the 1200g with a very prominent reviewer and he said, "don't bother". I must say that I agree with that assessment. The stock arm is fantastic but must be carefully matched with headshell and cartridge to get the best performance. However, the stock headshell is great as it depends on synergy with cartridge. Its an amazing freebie with this table. I am sure there are better, but many would be extremely satisfied with stock arm IMO. I have spoke with others that are regularly using 5,000.00 plus cartridges with the stock arm. |
Dear @perkri: "
no shame when insulting anyone who questions, or has an alternate viewpoint to your own. " I don't have a shame because I'm not insulting any one. Ignorant is a person where his knowledge level is really high in a specific regards, ignorant word is not an insult but is a word that we can use in the time is need it. No, it's not because some one is questioning me or have a different point of view but if those point of views are full of ignorance then that person is an ignorant and I'm not insulting. What that person must to do is learn. I'm ignorant on several audio subjects ( still now. ) an over the time I try and learned on some of them. " Absolute " knowledge just does not exist. No one has it. """ Music, live or reproduced, is not about math. It is about ART..""" that's why I attend at least once a week to listen live MUSIC and yes is an ART and that's why moves each one of us, wake up our emotions/feelings. """ in a previous post, made you myopic attitudes quite clear as you have lambasted the SAT tonearm because it doesn’t facilitate your "math". And, you have done so without having ever heard it. """ totally wrong your assumption. The main issue is that " facilitate or not " the math. The main issue was and is that the SAT 32K tonearm came/comes with a wrong choosed dedicated alignment and the only thing I did it was to disclose it. The absurd/no sense here is that you blame me for it ( to disclose the information for the very first time. ) . I'm a simple audiophile as you are and if you want to blame some people that must be to the " proffesional reviewers " because that information was and is their main responsability: inform to their readers true information. TAS/ST reviewers just did not and as a fact no one but me did it but please don't blame me about because rigth now you are better informed on the SAT. Btw, why need I to listen the SAT when I already know is wrong on that very critical alignment issue?. All thos reviewers in that specific SAT regards were ignorants and corrupted because when we don't give true information or disclose what is our responsability this fact is: corruption, it does not matters if it's by ignorance or in purpose. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
dER @sampsa55 : Your SAEC references posted means alñmost nothing. Ignorance is the all " war's mother " and " impressive " systems means first than all that the owners are whealty ones but is not a true foundation that they have a high audio/music knowledge levels. After the FR tonearms SAEC is the second worst design. SAEC tonearms are really builded with very high quality excecution and this is not under question but its true quality performance levels against for example other vintage one as the MAX 282 or vs some Technics models or even against today top designs. Did you listen in your system or other very well know system the SAEC along a very good know cartridge by your self? compared vs other tonearms in the same system. Which other tonearms and with which other cartridges? could you share your first hand experiences? Btw, whom is thuchan? R. |
Some people really like the SAEC tonearms and don't seem to mind the alignment. Here’s Miyajima Lab’s reference system where they refer to the SAEC WE308 as having the "structure of an ideal arm" (this particular headshell does not allow twisting the cartridge): http://www.miyajima-lab.com/system.html And here’s thuchan posting on his "best turntable system" including the SAEC 506/30, which he has praised elsewhere, and the cartridge looks to be sitting straight: https://audiocirc.com/2018/04/24/best-system/ |
"The WE-8000 is the only SAEC tonearm where the offset of the headshell is correct.The SAEC 506/30 was designed to be used with 10" and singles only. It’s geometry does reflect it. Out of curiosity I have calculated a different alignment for the 506/30 which does suit 12" records MUCH better" - @dertonarm I’ve been thingling about that statement made by Dertonarm. Looking at my SAEC SS-300 mat i can say that even this mat was designed for singles (7’ inch records) and LPs. http://img.ukaudiomart.com/uploads/large/1850936-rare-saec-ss300-special-alloy-mat-870g-made-in-japa... This is the ONLY mat that i know with special concave for 7’ inch records while the other mats are totally flat. I believe SAEC did a great job for professional market back then. As i said earlier if it was made for radio stations then the main format for new material on vinyl is SINGLES (7’ inch records), all promo material for the radiostation released by the labels on singles to promote the best tracks from the LP long time before the LP will be even pressed or available for sale. This is how the industry used to work back in the days. Singles with signs like "promo use only or D.J. copy" is typical for any radio archives. One song per side, about 3:50 min only, 45rpm. I believe @dertonarm is right at some point with his statement about SAEC tonearms, but i can just add that SAEC mat is also designed for singles! Think about it. |
@invictus005 I am pretty new around the forums, but been a member a long time. I also know that the Technics threads on many sites can get heated, as well as the whole BD/DD/Idler dust up. So I don't know if this is just lure dragging exercise, but I will give it a bite. I have owned many nice belt drives over the years, VPI, Townshend, Well Tempered, Sonegraphe, Teres, Galibier, and a few others. A few years ago I took the plunge into restored idlers, and owned a TD124 and a 401, which were both nice tables. Now in the past I have tried to like DD tables, and owned a SP25, SP15, and fostered a 1200. I hated every single one of them, and found them to be dark, losing inner detail, and dynamically compressed. On a lark I bought a SP 10 MK II, thinking there is no way I like this thing, but got to give it a shot. It took me a couple of years to get it into a plinth, but once I started playing it I found it was the equal of the best tables I have heard. I ended up buying a Denon DP 75, then another SP 10 MK II. What I found is the drive units sound so similar, and get out of the way of the music. Cartridges and tone arms make far more difference than the drive units do. I have put some good cartridges on them, with a few being in the $4 to $6K range. And I even have love for a $175 Denon DL 304 I picked up and use as a casual vinyl cartridge on the second SP 10 MK II. People like what they like, and there is more than one way to audio nirvana. If you like a BD thats great, same with idler, heck us vinyl people should be celebrating that our little niche in the hobby is so strong these days. But I do know that a Technics SP 10 MK II is a mighty fine table, and they don't cost an arm and a leg, and you can get some remarkable sound quality from them if you invest a bit of time, effort, and money into them. Regards Neonknight |
| Post removed |
@invictus005 Don’t forget that audiogon members experienced that Technics reference sound for 20-30 years or even longer. The SP-10 mkIII was one of the ultimate Direct Drive ever made for decades. The best plinth makers offered an amazing plinth for SP-10mkII and mkIII over the years. Some users are fine with the origina Obsidian plinth too. The EPA-100 mkII Boron-Titanium is still one of the best tonearms ever made. Second hand Technics EPA-100 and SP-10mkII has the best value today and they are still great, no matter what you personally think about it. There is no comparison between SP-10mkIII and SP-10R made yet, only at the Technics factory. But there is already a lot of speculations about it. Until 2017 there was no SL1200G, GR, GAE ... and until summer 2018 there is no SP10R, SP1000R on the market! I agree that SP-10R is what we should think about, but not the SL1200G, you will see them for sale used on audiogon when the SP-10R will be released! Technics reference series does not looks like an old SL1200 with new motor and new plinth, the reference is SP-10R and SP-10 mkIII is next to it. There are many vintage DD on the market with a proper plinth, one of them is Luxman PD-444 in aluminum plinth with armboards for almost any tonearms. Victor TT-101 is another coreless DD. Why should the owner of the great classic DDs should care about SL1200G which is not even reference Technics? We will see when the hype is over. SP-10R is the target for serious audiophiles, but it’s 14 000 UK Pounds, while the SP-10mkIII is much cheaper. |
Who cares about any version of SP10 and all those ridiculous plinths? There are many better current turntables on the market, with proper plinths. If anyone wants to experience that Technics sound, there's a 1200G available all day any day. And it doesn't require some lumberyard plinth. It comes with its own heavy aluminum dampened plinth! All of these SP10s should be put out of their misery. |
@chakster : """
Several years ago you'be been fighting with a'gon members regarding your idea that "naked fashion" (no plinth at all) SP-10mkII is better than any plinth. Do you remember? ...................................................... Now you're talking about "a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations", could you explain? .............................................................................. In many cases on this forum you're controversial to yourself, your own statements (from 5 year ago for example) regarding cartridges, tonearms, plinth etc is often completely different to your current statements. " As I said " no common sense at all ". 100% of audiophile TTs comes with a plinth a very special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations or at least put at minimum and why is this: because those resonances/vibrations degrades in severe ways our home audio system listen experiences. Our needs in that regards is a lot more critical than in radio stations where even the frequency response where it works is truly limited and surrounded of several kind of developed and induced " noises " that the radio listeners just do not cares about. Exist no controversy or a contradiction when tears ago I posted that the best plinth is no plinth and that the best performance in the SP-10s came with the TT in naked fashion and still think in that way because the SP10s plinths are a " mess " of plinth. One thing is to make reference on a specific TT model and other way different to refer to all TTs in the market. """ Which make me think that all your current statements about vintage analog equipmentn will mean nothing in the next 5 years. """ Nothing wrong with that because I'm not like you or other gentlemans that are " sticky " in many ways. When any one is day by day learning then we can confirm ( again and again. ) our audio believes/experiences or that learning day by day can makes we time to time amend our " mistakes " our way of thinking in some specific regards. We have the rigth to " learn " and not to stay witing for " dead ", we have to be and to have a very active role in our each one audio picture/movie. Stevenson: " the question was about Japanese manufacturers and you can’t speak for them, because you don’t know what to say about their theoretical point of view, .... " then why don't ask them?. I did it with no sense answers because ignorance. About pro-industry: why don't ask them? why? in this case I never did it because I did not and do not need it. Obviously you already cross " that " border so you don't need to post: " i will stop communicate with you foreve .."" because I already posted my attitude when some one cross over " that " border . R. |
Dear @invictus005: In a fast response and with some of the ones I had and have first hand experiences. Other than mine: Kuzma 4point, Triplanar, GST-801, EPA 100MK2 or MS MAX282. I never said the V is not a good arm because it's and with a quality level build excecution second to none. The issue is that on tonearms does not exist " the best " as you pointed out several times refering to the V. I owned several SME tonearms because it gained a trusty reputation on its quality levels so I'm not against SME and neither against its TTs. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
@rauliruegas Are you waiting for a post by Mr. Stevenson? That would be nice, or from anyone else on the same subject. You don’t have to repead your statement, i have already switched between Baerwald and Stevenson alignments several times with some of my arms over the years. I don't have paranoia about distortion level. My question was not exactly adressed to you personally, it was not exactly about my own gear, the question was about Japanese manufacturers and you can’t speak for them, because you don’t know what to say about their theoretical point of view, you’re talking from the practical point of view. I appreciate your advices, but your posts became very rude, next time you will say anything personal i will stop communicate with you forever. What you need to learn is a good manners on public forums, strange that at your age you didn’t learned this yet, believe me this is more important than alignments of tonearms or anything that you posted. Respect community members and they will respect you. As i pointed earlier, you’re contradicted to yourself in several post on differen subjects i audio if we will read old posts and new posts. Ok, nevermind. |
Dear rudeliruegas @rauliruegas Wow, you have apparently no shame when insulting anyone who questions, or has an alternate viewpoint to your own. It would seem that you are once again regressing to a position of "absolute" knowledge when it comes to all things tone arms. And that, once again, we, who enjoy music, are incapable of listening to a device and make our own assertions as to what we find pleasing. There is an inherent, and immeasurable complexity to the rather magical process of moving music from a vinyl platter to the listeners ears. Apparently, according to you (aside from your historical contradictions which have been outlined here @chakster - someone you seem to take pleasure in berating) you have an absolute knowledge and understanding of all things vinyl related, including mathematics. These things are the foundation upon which all of your beliefs and thoughts are built. Given the history of your posts, a more than valid case could be made to back this up. Couple of newsflashes for you. Thoughts are not facts, and beliefs are not truths. (Especially when it comes down to your "holier than though" lambasting of anyone who might suggest that something other than the Holy Grails of information translation from a vinyl record have anything to offer or contribute to the conversation at all) Here is the thing, a VERY primary thing that I fear may have passed you by in all of your dissertations. Music, live or reproduced, is not about math. It is about ART... The translation of, in its most basic form, a straight line to a curve is at all levels a mathematical problem. Calculus and Algebra at their finest. I will say it again, this is not about math, its about ART. This is not about the changing of a straight line to a curve, its about the emotional resonance of a systems ability to convey a response from the listener. This is where I paraphrase you - taking some creative license here - "I have neither the time nor interest in trying to educate someone who clearly is lacking in some very basic fundamental understanding of a medium..." I am not writing this to try to educate you, as that is obviously a lost cause. Rather, it is an attempt to cleanse myself of the disgust I feel when reading your vitriol. But I digress... As you have outlined to @invictus005 as to the validity of his beliefs surrounding the SME V, you are once again the harbinger of all knowledge - which is in your "mind" math based. You know, what works and what doesn’t. What sounds good and what doesn’t. Math is the solution to this. Wasn’t there something called... what was it again??? Oh, right, the Inquisition!!! That’s it! Where there was a dogmatic system forced onto a public. I know, based in religion, not "math", but the thing is, dogma is dogma... You have, in a previous post, made you myopic attitudes quite clear as you have lambasted the SAT tonearm because it doesn’t facilitate your "math". And, you have done so without having ever heard it. That is, as close to a definition of narrow-mindedness that I think I could ever reference. Commenting as to the function of something without ever having tried it. "I don’t like eggs" "Have you ever tried them?" "No, but I don’t like eggs because they are yucky" Dumb right? So, in closing, I shall quote British Prime Minister Benjamin Disreali responding to Sir William Gladstone. "A sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that who can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign an opponent and glorify himself" You can swap out "verbosity" (as this is something you clearly lack and I wouldn’t want to be chastised for unfairly, or inaccurately criticizing you) with "Mathematical Knowledge"... P PS - Did you read your own signature? "Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS" Do you actually know what that means? |
Dear @lewm : You know that I'm a proponent od DD TTs but this not means that I can't say that BD designs are not really bad because works fine. As a fact I still use my Acoustic Signature BDs. Now, the SME 30 is a serious BD design and I think way better that what you could think. I had experiences with both the 20 and 30, very good units. What I totally disagree with invictus is that the SME V is the best tonearm out there because certainly it's not, I owned and compare it against the best of the best. Yes, can beats the SAECs but this does not means is a " formidable " tonearm, is a good one and that's all. Now, this is what he like it more and from this fact he is rigth: is the best for him but not for other audiophiles with different experiences about. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
@chakster : Even that's useless to " talk " with you I want to comment: " My Sony PUA-7 has its own alignment and its own SONY protractor. " followed by: " And yes, i want to learn things and i have time to learn things in this hobby, i am 41. " that you w"ant to learn " does not imply that you will learn because you showed not one time but several times that you just did not. First than all we have to have the rigth mind/attitude to learn where common sense on each one of us plays the main critical role. You have not neither the rigth attitude and your common sense is far away to be a true " decent " common sense. I gave you enough evidencefacts why that Sony protractor is not for the stand alone tonearm and you insist in using it as the Stevenson A alignment because you need more evidences coming from opinions . Are you waiting for a post by Mr. Stevenson? You are not ready to learn and because you are not and even that you are 41 old I can tell you that 100 years can't be enough for a gentleman like you. As I said: you are a losted case. Nothing to do for help you. Remmeber that " stupidity border ", please stop your self and don't cross-over. You still are in time to return. R. |
Just to add that SP10s used in broadcasting were usually seated into a very massive counter-top (for want of a better word to describe a broadcast booth). They weren't just sitting on top. Raul and I had this argument long ago. I believe DDs need a massive plinth in order to counter the torque exerted during platter rotation. What the plinth needs to be made of is yet another bone of contention. Raul had one experience with a granite plinth. I don't care for granite, and apparently neither did he. We agreed to disagree on this subject (or at least I agreed to disagree), and I don't mean to stir the pot again. |
@rauliruegas Sp-10s were designed for broadcasting: they needed fast star up and fast stop too, speed stability, etc. but they did not needs a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations as we need in a home system. I wonder about your own learning curve, Raul Several years ago you'be been fighting with a'gon members regarding your idea that "naked fashion" (no plinth at all) SP-10mkII is better than any plinth. Do you remember? You goal was to add AT-616 pneumatic insulators under the Sp-10mkII, just like i did last month on this photo of SAEC mat (if anyone would like to see what i'm talking about). Now you're talking about "a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations", could you explain? The AT-616 pneumatic insulators is there to avoid vibrations and to level turntable in its "naked fashion" style. In many cases on this forum you're controversial to yourself, your own statements (from 5 year ago for example) regarding cartridges, tonearms, plinth etc is often completely different to your current statements. Which make me think that all your current statements about vintage analog equipmentn will mean nothing in the next 5 years. |
Invictus, Thank you for your civil response to my perhaps intemperate questions. Funnily enough, I would rank those Goldmund turntables as among the worst, most over-rated DD turntables I have ever heard, starting with their very badly implemented suspension systems. And their drive systems don't compete for engineering sophistication with the best Denon and Technics vintage DDs, in my opinion. I have yet to hear the 1200G, but the 1200G and the 10R both incorporate coreless motors. I have found that I tend to prefer DDs driven by a coreless motor, too. Among vintage DDs, this includes the Kenwood L07D and the Victor TT101. (There are more, Including the Yamaha 2000GT, but I haven't heard them.) Oddly enough, just based on what I know about SME turntables, I imagine that the SME design philosophy results in a turntable that has many of the qualities I like about DD turntables. If you found that you prefer the SME to the 1200G, that is a good head to head comparison, except, assuming you own one of the better SMEs, the cost is 2-3X that of the 1200G. Fremer, who wrote the paragraph you or someone else cited critiquing the servo system used in DD turntables, more recently went on to write a glowing review of the SP10R, calling it one of the best turntables he has ever heard and also showing graphically that it was the most speed stable turntable he has ever measured. Somehow, he forgot to complain about the servo mechanism in that review. (Or, without checking the review, perhaps the spiel about the servo system was built into the SP10R review.) But negative reference to the servo system in DD turntables is a common device used by those who want to sell belt-drive or who have a pre-determined bias of some kind. DD turntables CAN have a coloration, which I think is much more due to either EMI emanating from the motor or to motor cogging. (Hence perhaps the reason that coreless motors seem to impart a more "continuous" and musical sound.) I think it's important to shield the cartridge from EMI, and the shielding effect may be the major reason why a lot of people swear by copper platter mats, etc. And finally, nearly all modern belt-drive turntables are nowadays using a drive system that incorporates a feedback system to maintain speed stability. Witness the recent popularity of the Phoenix Engineering products in the US. How ironic is that? If the belt is at all compliant, this could in theory play havoc with speed stability, because if the drive system "sees" that the platter is slow (for example), it will signal a correction. The resulting torque bump from the motor will partly be used up in stretching the belt before the platter speed can respond. And etc. This back and forth is potentially worse than DD, because of belt compliance, if indeed there is any problem at all with DD in this regard. |
Depends on which tonearm @rauliruegas I have 4 tonearms, actually 3 are connected right now. No problem with LPs i can listen with Baerwald on Reed 3p "12 My record collection is 50% 45s and 50% LPs My Sony PUA-7 has its own alignment and its own SONY protractor. Maybe i will experiment with Luxman TA-1 tonearm with high compliance cartridge for 7’inch only. At the moment my new FR-64fx with FR-7f is on the "warm-up" in my system with its original alignment, i just replaced tube gear to solid state and everything changed, so i need time to get used to this sound, before i will make any changes! I know your opinion that Stevenson is "stupid" and all japanese tonearm manufacturers are "stupid" too, but i want to know WHY did they used what they used! And i think we need more information, more opinions. And yes, i want to learn things and i have time to learn things in this hobby, i am 41 |
Dear @chakster : You are a losted/lost case and explain why and why I several times told you that you have a lot to learn because in many critical audio analog and audiophile subjects you are a roockie but as you are a roockie on those subjects you only insist and till today even with facts/evidence you just did not learn. In the other side, a few weeks ago when for the 10th or 100th time we were discusiing why Stevenson A alignment is a stupid one to use it and I posted to forgot that kind of alignment that only gives way higher distortions and you were emphatic and said that you mainly listen to 7" size recordings and that’s why you need it Stevenson. Down there I proved to you that even with 7" recordings Stevenson has higher distortions than either Löfgren alignments. Because you were emphatic on what you mainly listen ( 7" size recordings. ) and as always trying to help I took my time to give the " best " alignment for it with the lower distortion levels and you posted here that " mainly listen to LPs ". ! ? ? ? ? !!!!! Obviously that I’m to stupid to try help ( that's always my attitude behind each single word in my posts to any gentleman here and elsewhere. ) to untrusty and ignorant gentlemans like you. Period. Do the best you do that's sale audio items because that's what you really are a seller and please don't push to hard because I can put a warning direct to agon for they " talk " with you about. I never answer to any stupid people in the forums. Till today I have you as an ignorant roockie and near that border. R. |
@lewm What can I say, I’m an SME fanboy. But I won’t apologize. They make incredibly competent products. Since 2000, I probably listened to, set up, had access to, or owned close to 100 turntables. Most recently I’ve owned the brand new Technics SL1200G. I don’t have anything against direct drive, but very often the belt driven turntables are better. If I had to pick my favorite direct drive, it would be either the Goldmund Studio, or Studietto. |
Invictus, Please be specific. What Technics/Denon/EMT turntables, exactly, did you "try"? What was the context? On what grounds would you say that the Michell and the SME turntables are "modern"? Neither brand has changed their product line much in probably 25 years, or more. Are you really saying that you don't like turntables that are not belt-driven? If so, say so. You are entitled to your own particular set of preferences, as are all the rest of us. What upsets me is your consistent need to denigrate that which you have not chosen to love; in your case, it's anything not made by SME. It's OK to be in love with SME. Just know that the rest of us have had our own experiences which have led us to different conclusions regarding equipment we've chosen to live with long term. People often get upset with Raul for his very frank opinions, but at least Raul always provides specific reasons to support his assertions, which often leads to lively and interesting, if heated, discussion. Furthermore, his taste is far more catholic brand-wise than yours. Your puffery leads nowhere. |
@rauliruegas Better than that please do it a favor and due that you listen mainly to 7" size recordings then take this alignment parameters for your 64FX tonearm that will give you the lower tracking error with the lower distortion levels for a 7" recordings : Thanks, maybe i'll try it. At my home listening sessions i'm 90% with LPs as you lazy guys, so i can relax and listen to the full side of LP. But when i'm playin out or abroad i'm with my vintage original 45s (from the 60s and 70s). I'm curious about those professional japanese tonearms, some of them are very expensive and very rare. In theory i'd like to know for sure why did they used special alignments. I can't believe they were "stupid", because Baerwald alignment is very old and very well known even in japan. I'm trying to understand the special needs those pro manufacturers served for the consumers (broadcast studios etc) at that time. Hope we will find the truth. |
Dear @chakster : Professional or pro industry works with " tools " according to its needs. Technics, Denon, EMT, etc figthed for that market and that's why appeared the SP10s or the DP100M with built-in phonopreamp/speaker. Before these models and along other names that market was extremely competitive due the grow up of that market all over the world not only in Japan. The pro-model manufacturers wanted to take as many costumers as they can with more atractive items for that partuicular kind of customers where they need it trusty/confident items with the capacity to works 24 hours seven day a week year after year with very low maintenance. All these means high build quality but they were not looking for the penultimate accuracy in the frequency response or cartridge tracking habilities or to be truer to the recording. No one of them used top cartridge models as : Accuphase AC-2 or Audio Note IO or Audio Technica AT1000. Tonearms as the own Technics EPA 500 or Audio craft or Micro Seiki. SAEC tonearms are very good looking tonearms that were builded with very high quality excecution but never been and never be a top tonearm design because that bearing type in the audiophile market where pro-industry does not belongs. Forgeret about but if you want to really know on the 506 then buy one and finish your " story " where you made a no-sense conclusions. Better than that please do it a favor and due that you listen mainly to 7" size recordings then take this alignment parameters for your 64FX tonearm that will give you the lower tracking error with the lower distortion levels for a 7" recordings : P2S: 238.55mm ; offset angle: 15.294° ; overhang: 8.45mm the alignment is Löfgren A ( Stevenson gives no single advantage even with this special alignment. ) dedicated for that size recording and only as an example the tmaximum racking error goes down from: 1.9°-2.1° to only 0.36° that's outstanding and then way lower tracking distortion levels. I hope your tonearm permits to mount it and mount the cartridge exactly with those parameters. Good luck, R. |
@rauliruegas you’re right, but the SAEC 506/30 is a professional tonearm, audiophiles are not a part of the pro industry, professional used to be meant for broadcast in the 80s. In the broadcast industry nobody cares about LPs, singles are made especially for radio deejays and for promotion of the upcoming LP albums. Making professional tonearms SAEC or any other respected manufacturers must take in count the media format of the PRO industry and no wonder that special geometry applied for this specific format of the records (they are smaller than LPs). I think this is what our member (dertonarm) pointed in his comment many years ago. Maybe SAEC 506/30 consumers in the 80s were not the hi-fi enthusiasts (private individuals), but the professional broadcast studios (special market) ? For example here is Technics SL1000 MKII P ("P" = Professional) There is a build-in balanced preamp Technics SH-10U professional version of the EPA-100 tonearm (EPA-100P) or even the best EPA-100mkII as an option. The cabinet is definitely not the best, but the whole concept reminds me EMT turntables, i think they are highly regarded among the audiophiles and price for them reflect it pretty well. Same about Denon broadcast decks. |
Dear @chakster : "
so what i tried to explain is why in the professional industry (radio broadcast) singles ("7 inch vinyl and "12 inch EPs) are more inportant than LPs. " whom said is more important?. It's not, for an audiophile LP are the important subject. Radio stations needs are way different than a home audio system at our places. As audiophiles we are looking always for " the best " the best quality performance levels when in a radio station they are looking to other issues: why the Denon 103 for broadcasting? it's a rugged cartridge spherical stylus tip because they do not needs more quality level they only need that can sounds at decent level and that's all. Sp-10s were designed for broadcasting: they needed fast star up and fast stop too, speed stability, etc. but they did not needs a special plinth to avoid resonances/vibrations as we need in a home system. Different needs that's all. Broadcasting is not the reference for we audiophiles as in the same manner recording engineers can't be a reference for audiophiles and only if they are true audiophiles we can take it as reference. R. |
@rauliruegas I wonder why our experienced member and collector of the tonearms posted this: The SAEC 506/30 was designed to be used with 10" and singles only. It’s geometry does reflect it. As far as i know SAEC 506/30 is a professional tonearm, so what i tried to explain is why in the professional industry (radio broadcast) singles ("7 inch vinyl and "12 inch EPs) are more inportant than LPs. |
The real downside of the SAEC tonearms is the ceramic headshell which must be the absolute worst choice of headshell material ever imagined.... Though they still command outrageous prices (if you can find one).....this work of the 'devil' will make every cartridge sound like fingernails being dragged down a classroom blackboard. If you have a wood-bodied cartridge like the Clearaudio Virtuoso.....you can just about listen without feeling discomfort. It's easy to eliminate this problem by simply selling the ceramic shell and using a good after-market headshell like the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber. It's easy to twist the cartridge in the headshell to re-set for any geometry one chooses. Those beliefs are reasonable Lewm... |
Dear @neonknight : When I said " stay away from SAECs " I'm not saying is a bad arm but against the 250 seems to me looks as an inferior performer. Knife-edge tonearm bearing is the exeption and ask you why the 99% of tonearm designers choosed a different bearing design than knife-edge. As I said the 407/506/8000 are extremely well made with a very high quality excecution, no doubt about and are second to none in this regards but this build quality does not means the tonearm is a " stellar " one because it's not. @l, I don't think SAEC made any changes because they already had evrything to build it as the original but exist the posibility that they did it. As you said we have to wait. Now, the SAEC problem is not about its choosed alignment parameters, its problem is deeper than that. As you know you can make any kind alignment you choose with any tonearm.l R. |
