The Palladian-A step beyond

"Newcomers always welcomed." Well thank you rauliruegas for your wonderful welcome and damning praise! Sir, “with all my respect to”, what an impressive ability you have to dam something that you have not heard through shear speculation based on prejudices which I take it are a dislike of the designer and the type of equipment you think this cartridge must represent. Listen to the cartridge and then I will happily read your conclusions. What you are indulging in is useless mischief.

Have you read and taken in what halcro and I have written? What you have done here is attack the product by attacking our personal listening credibility based on our systems and a review of a cd. “I can’t speak about the Palladian because I never heard it”. Bravo. Correct. But nevertheless speak you do, and all damning. Thank you for your patronization “I could think goes in the same “school” where you learned/study”. You know zero about the decades of equipment I have listened to.

For me, the best thing is when someone comes up with a suggestion to go in a direction that I would not have otherwise taken and my ears tell me that my pre-judgement was woefully incorrect. For many years I was a power amp tube guy (Audio Research, VTL Ichiban, CAT – but you already knew that rauliruegas) after a disastrous set of Roland 100 monoblocks back in 1988 (100 watt monoblocks with a badly masquerading tube sound thick as liquorice and unbelievably poor bass). The then Rowland preamp on the other hand was good. After all my relatively high powered tube amps I eventually went tube single-ended pure class A and the simpler the circuit the better, driving efficient speakers. I had the opportunity to trial at home one of only two custom monoblock pairs made by Audion around the VAIC 52B tube. No expense was spared – custom silver wired transformers etc. The circuit was very simple. So according to my thinking they should perform, and indeed they did. They delivered a reasonable amount of current so the bass was good. The midrange had great detail, lovely tonal texture (not unnaturally warm) and the treble was airy and extended. Great amps. I was going to stop there. And then the hi-fi dealer, for whom the custom Audions were made, told me I should get a Kinoshita HQS2500UPM power amplifier instead and not take his Audions. Nothing could have been further from my thoughts – a highly complicated high wattage transistor amp. I told him sure the bass would be better but not the mids and treble and so I refused. He said he had such faith in it he would order it and I could listen and decide, no obligation. I did and it took me about 2 minutes (of course with significant further verification listening) to decide. The Kinoshita blew the Audions away in every regard including the midrange and treble, and of course the bass.

I did not go to one school rauliruegas. I have been to too many and I remain open to any. I raise the above example not for the point of tubes v transistors nor to give you further ammunition to attack my listening credibility, but for us all to have open inquiring minds and to judge with our ears and not speculate against and denigrate others actual experiences because they do not fit our own prejudices. Yes I am prejudiced based on my experiences but I remain open to hear all approaches to hear whether I think they better my own and if they do I am grateful to know this to point me in a better direction.

not looking for a cartridge, so haven't read any reviews, but this AudioGon thread reminds me of a summer scene at the cottage.

I am floating on the dock drinking beer, taking it all in with friends. All is good with the world. Then out of nowhere comes... the Canadian Horse Fly. He is predictable, on schedule, and everyone knows that he will show up when it is nice and sunny and warm. But no one has bothered to put on any anti fly cream.

I have seen pictures of Nandric (Nikola's) room, and I have seen pictures of Halcro (Henry's) room. The two could not be more different, both in dimensions and materials. One is a square peg and the other is round.
Nikola likes MC and Henry MM. But it is obvious they both like Dertonarm.

Now the important part.
Nikola loves Slivovitz. So the question remaining for me. What is Henry's favorite drink?

(Two Grins)

Dear @bluewolf :   """  listening credibility based on our systems and a review of a cd...... """"

As I posted:   """  always is important the context/stage/scenario that surrounded any one opinions..... """

I think you could agree with. The context here is the audio system and each single lin in the overall system chain.


"""   but I remain open to hear all approaches to hear..... """"

good you are open about. Here I go on what I learned through " hundreds " of years in our beloved hobby, just like you learned too but in a way different path and certainly with different MUSIC/sound priorities and live experiences:

other than the LP the realanalog system link star is the cartridge it self, its quality level performance that will permit enjoy MUSIC at the very top level we can achieve inside each one " context ".

Now, in an " ideal " analog audio world and for that cartridge can really shines it needs to be surrounded for cero distortions/cero resonants system links.

That's is my main system target/approach and my personal audio quest.

With that premises the very first system link to the cartridge is the headshell followed by the headshell wires/connectors followed by the tonearm wand ( tonearm it self. That's for a removable headshell tonearm design as yours and Halcro and the other gentlemans I mentioned.) and internal wiring.

Carbon fiber is a beautiful terminated audio build material but high in resonances ( means that creates higher distortions than other materials. ) and not well damped to help the cartridge job and cartridge signal reproduction. No there is no perfect build materials, all has the " abilities " to degrade the cartridge signal but we can't avoid it. The best we can do is to learn through several tests the system links that degrade less the cartridge signal this's links with low very low distortions/resonances/noise level.

Following those kind of statements the tonearm is perhaps the more critical link ( in many ways. ) for the quality cartridge level performance. Here not only the cartridges needs a tonearm that hold the cartridge and  that permits the " free " cartridge LP grooves ridding but at the same time that be a truly well damped tonearm to not contribute to add higher resonances and damps too the ones that comes through the cartridge job and this includes the damping of the tonearm self feedback resonances/distortions. Higher distortions means less real MUSIC information.

FR tonearms, 66 and 64 ( I owned and still have the 64. ), are a non damped design and this is what the designer choosed several years ago. Been a non damped all metal (steel, very igh on resonance transmision. ) design are perhaps the worst tonearms ( even worst than the SAEC's that I owned too. ) to be a " trusty " main partner to any cartridge where any cartridge mounted there only can gives us higher distorted sound.
The subject is not if that distorted sound likes me or not the subject is that that sound comes with higher distortions than in any other tonearm.

All the gentleamns involved in this thread likes a cartridge performance through the FR tonearm. Good for all of you because that's what you like but that does not means in any single way is rigth because it's not.

The next link is the TT and in your case Micro Seiki ( is something like the carbon fiber. ) TTs has a very good look that makes us owners been proudly owners with but as a MS owner I learned in deep about the MS overall design and why is not a good partner for any cartridge:

- the MS platter is and ring as a bell. Yes, the platter is heavy and shines like gold or silver. So what? when it adds distortions at higher levels than other TTs and the additional platter you use it it's only and made it a " frankestein " device but can't " dead silence " the bell and that top platter has its own resonances too.

- the MS all metal plinth is way resonant too adding, yes you know distortions by it self.

- worst issue in the MS TTs design is that the arm boards are mounted exactly in the worst place of the non damped MS design: at each foot where every single internal and external resonances/vibrations must pass and are directly transmited to the non damped arm boards.
When I bougth mine I did not know nothing of all those on MS and I like it the MS look and that I can mount four tonearm at the same time, this was " great " for me  on those old times but I learned.


Next critical system link is the phonolinepreamp where the delicated and sensitive cartridge music information must be processed and where huge distortions can be added, there is no way to dissapears that huge signal degradation.
The Phonolinepreamp has a " titanic " and almost impossible job/target that's not only amplify thousands of times the very low level cartridge signal but that needs to do it with no additional signal degradation in any way along to equalize the cartridge signal for that signal can even in precise way to the RIAA equalization with no RIAA frequency deviation ( here in the link has to be aplied the inverse RIAA curve equalization. ) for we can listen the original signal that microphones pick up during recording process.

Well, when an audio signal is amplified we have to " play "/handle at the same time with the amplification process with: generated noise levels and several ways of generated distortions and frequency limitations with. All these on ly adds degradation to the catridge signal.

Tubes can't do it and here is not the usual: tubes vs SS. NO, here it's a fact: just can't do it because tubes has higher noise levels and not enough gain to amplify the low level cartridge signal with low noise as SS devices. So, the first circuit gain stage in a phonolinepreamp MUST be a solid state device ( bipolar transistors for LOMC cartridges and FETs for MM ones. ) that has high gain with very low noise levels.
When tube designs instead of solid state devices choose for a passive gain SUTs ,as your phono design and many others out there, the challenge is not solved but agravated because SUTs has a frequency range limitations ( tubes too. ) it self and produce noise levels and distortions that goes higher than bipolars. So, is not the " rigth " solution but only a way different path with higher signal degradations.

The other critical issue is that inverse RIAA equalization process I mentioned and that through tubes or SUTs you can't beats SS well designed phonolinepreamps because that RIAA frequency deviations that create in higher ways though tubes/SUts than SS ones.

That's why I know that your system and the other gentleman's system here are making higher degradation to the cartridge signal I'm accustom to.

I like NON DISTORTED MUSIC SIGNAL against that you like it that MUSIC signal with greater distortions and that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R: