I have followed The Audio Critic from the beginning (1977) to its end. For the most part Peter Aczel's recommendations were spot on! He made a serious attempt to reconcile measurements with listening trials. Unlike the all-over-the-map conclusions of the "golden ear" reviewers at Stereophile and TAS. And was the first to stress the importance of proper tonearm/cartridge alignment for LP playback - when LPs were the most common music source!
When the Audio Critic was subjective.
I was reading through this old issue of TAC and it is quite amazing to see how subjective Peter Aczel was in his earlier days before the "all amplifiers sound the same" kick. Yes I know he didn't say exactly that, but you know what I mean.
I think I liked the magazine much better when he presented a more balanced combination of measurements and subjective listening.
http://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_V1-2.pdf
I think I liked the magazine much better when he presented a more balanced combination of measurements and subjective listening.
http://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_V1-2.pdf
- ...
- 14 posts total
Aczel was also the first to publish a comprehensive chart for determining proper alignment for a wide range of tonearm lenghts, stylus-to-pivot distance, offset angles and overhang distances. This chart was for the Baerwald alignment. And he discussed VTF and stylus rake angle, along with the importance of stylus shapes (conical, elliptical, Shibata ...) for maximizing music retrieval from those vinyl grooves! |
roberjerman I would best describe Peter Aczel as a rationalist ... He would always want to know "why" and questioned established dogma regarding music systemsActually, Aczel created his own personal brand of dogma. That was his problem. |
- 14 posts total