Brinkman Balance Comparisons


For those who have the Brinkman or compared it to others please chime in. How does it compare to the Avid, TW Raven AC and SME 30? I heard the Raven AC has been compared to the Brinkman in Germany extensively. any thoughts? Also, how critical is a good support stand to achieve it's perfromance?

Thanks for your help,

Andrew
aoliviero
Hi Andrew, I might be able to shed some light on the tables you listed. One year ago I bought the Brinkmann LaGrange after much shopping and traveling to listen to the many other tables on my list. I owned a Teres 265 at the time and the Brinkmann killed it in every way. Bass reproduction was the most dramatic improvement of all. I went with the Lagrange because it seemed to be a bit more lively than the Balance AND I could mount two arms.

A great guy here in town owns a SME30-2/SME V/Celebration in a very good system. I know its sound well and the SME sounds very quiet, very smooth but too polite for me. The music from the SME just does not deliver the excitement that I have come to expect.

The standard Avid Acutus, not the Reference, was very much the same as the 30-2 but with slightly more detail but not as quiet of a background as the big SME. More energy in the music but just not quite enough for me. It also lacked finesse' when compared to some other tables, of course, IMHO.

The Raven AC plattenspieler I have only heard in Denver at the RMAF. I did spend several hours there getting a feel for the system. I must say, I think the Raven AC sounded on par with the best I have heard, again, YMMV. Very dynamic and very quiet. As quiet as the Brinkmann but with more punch, more energy.

The TT out there that I may like even better than the Raven AC, from my limited listening sessions, is the beautiful new direct drive Teres. I did hear it with my tonearm/cart but not my speakers. The new Teres just gives the music so much PRAT, so much real world dynamics. The new Teres seems to be very quiet as well. Detail retrieval is among the best I have heard.

Both the Raven AC and new DD Teres have the speed stability to give the music that solid foundation that only comes when the bass is right. With that foundation, the rest of the music sounds so right. Attack, bloom and decay of piano and guitar notes just do not get any better unless you are live. Both these tables have the finesse' that so many tables lack. These tables have what it takes to keep me listening well past my bedtime.

Forget the relatively reasonable price of the of the Raven AC and the Teres DD tables, these may be two of the best new TT's available today. I think they belong in my top five list in any case.

Good luck Andrew, I think most of us would be proud to own any of these tables. I don't want to knock any of the tables listed, thay all have some very strong points and deserve consideration. I just gave you my view. I hope you can find a way to listen and compare for yourself.
In this league you should also consider the Shindo Garrard 301 set up (table, arm, & cart) for 20k. It uses an idler wheel, and sounds fundamentally different (and better) than any belt-driven table I've heard. That said, I have no experience with the tables you've listed.

Info at www.toneimports.com.

Good luck.
I have no experience with the tables under discussion, but I find it soooo interesting (though to me, not surprising) that Vetterone has noticed something special about a direct drive table.

Besides Teres, the new Goldmund Reference will be DD (the original was belt) and of course, Micro Seiki was going that way toward the end of their production. Today, a number of other prominent makers are considering this option.

A well designed and executed DD TT will in my opinion outperform any other design at the same price point. It's a simple and elegant solution to so many TT mechanical problems. And modern electronic parts/technology will make this approach even more attractive.

As a mechanical solution, belt drives and idler wheels are so . . . . . . . British (if you've ever owned a British car, you know what I mean ;--)
.