Grand Prix Monaco review in new Stereophile- OUCH

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.

Raul

Your comments re myself and others " 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"

I respectfully disagree. YOu don't need to agree with the final outcome of what MF says, however if you understand his listening biases and comparison reference points his a valuble and consistent help to us vinylphiles.

For me to try and listen to a Monaco TT would be VERY difficult from here in Australia, and going on MF's review and his consistency and professionalism in reviewing products over the years I will not actively chase my tail in trying to hear the Monaco.
Hopefully one day I will to see if MF's view is accurate when putting my listening biases to work.

Unfortunately no one can listen to all TT's, so you need to either be lucky enough to be able to listen or take some advise from professional reviewers.

Who else would you out of any reviewer believe more the Mikey??.
J Valin or W Garcia - Valin is a joke and both give you no frame of reference to what they are listening and how it compares to other TT's. R Gregory is OK, however he spends too much time trying to think up better and smarter metaphor's - and beside anyone that has an entire loom of Valhalla must have some high frequencies missing.

Mikey Fremer - keep up the good work. ps, when are you going to review the Walker TT or does J Valin have to return his permanent loaner first :-)

So, as we all know, the only way to truly have an independent credible opinion on a piece of gear would have been for a shootout type comparison, where Mr Fremer would be one of several experts giving his opinion. And you know all of the detailed setup. Until that happens there's NO knowing what something really sounds like, and the review is a reflection of his personal ears, system and interests. Unbelievable how so many audiophiles are so naive...

So the truth is somewhere inbetween Robinson and Fremer's opinion. I'm glad I have a system that brings out what Mr Robinson hears. I feel sorry for Mr Fremer, as the second time this year he's reviewed something extraordinarily good vs his personal reference but is unable - or unwilling - to say so wholehartedly. So much for his personal choices, I'm gladly not relying on Mr Fremers ears to buy my system components.

I do find one thing disturbing. That when taking a step back on his whole GPM review and ensuing discussion here, it seems to me that Mr Fremer does not like Mr Lloyd and his endeavors, shaking up audiphile establishement with forward thinking ideas and technologically advanced solutions. You know what eventually happens to those who cling onto established paradigms...they are left behind.

We need more of the Lloyds in our audiophile world and less Fremers. And to those that are put off by Fremers review I would suggest to buy the Caliburn, I heard its a great table, maybe if you ask you can get the same price as Mr Fremer...now wouldn't that be nice!

I subscribe to Stereophile, but generally find it useless in making buying or even auditioning decisions. Most issues go to the recycle bin the same day that they are received; however, without fail, the first thing that actually and always gets read is MF's Vinyl Corner, followed by any reviews that he writes. You might ask why. The answer is probably not what you might think.

I do not think that MF always gets it right, nor do I always agree with his assessment of a particular product; however, I do believe that he loves analog with a true passion and that he gets exposed to more analog equipment and records than I will ever get the chance to hear, much less have in my home.

Based on owning and then trading a Goldmund Reference for a Rockport Sirius after hearing the Sirius in my home, I know how important it is to compare equipment side by side in the same environment and how hard it can be to admit that your preconceptions may be flawed until someone demonstrates something better. For whatever flaws MF may have, he is entertaining and does open a window for the rest of us into the big buck analog arena. Like any other reviewer, he has his own set of prejudices/musical priorities which color his judgments, but I belive that he tells it the way he hears it. Perhaps I am naive (lawyers like me generally are not), but I believe that for MF the Continuum represents the pinnacle of analog reproduction and maybe in his system it does. I have only heard it at shows, so reserve any final judgement.

A distant acquaintance who owns a company that makes a very expensive phonostage took one to MF's house to compare against the Boulder. Said phonostage is in the same price range as the Boulder and for many of us represents a more truthful choice. The acquaintance after a night of comparing the two admitted that in MF's system with his equipment, the Boulder was audibly better. He was at a loss to understand why as he had previously run the same comparison at a dealer's store. Again, this supports the notion that MF is a straight shooter and tells it the way he sees it.

Whenever a ground-breaking product comes along, we sometimes have to revaluate our frame of reference, and see if what we are listening to is indeed better, or just different.

I'm like many of you, I read Mikey's column and do believe he's telling it as it is, in the context of his system. For that I do appreciate his consistency and minimum standards which Stereophile maintains.

In this particular instances, you have one TT which is DD and the other a belt drive. The comparison was done with the same equipment, same arm/carts and the conclusion was that the Monaco was thin sounding in comparison with the Caliburn.

Certainly the one key thing about the Monaco is its touted speed accuracy. I'm a little perturbed that no mention was made of this parameter in comparison to the Caliburn, since this is one of the Monaco's key selling points. So is it indeed more accurate than the Caliburn or not? I disagree with the assertion that speed accuracy and consistency is not an important criteria for a TT, let alone one that costs over $20k or 4x that amount.

Certainly if one is more accurate, it would extract more detail and/or possess the more correct presentation of the music. This is fundamental to good analog playback.

If you agree that the more accurate TT is presenting the music correctly, then the next obvious thing is to build up the rest of the system around its strengths - base, arm and cart/phono which are complimentary/sympathetic to the TT. Unless you evaluate the piece of equipment with the best matching anciliaries, how would you know what is its performance envelope? Here I agree with Raul, that perhaps the tables (pun intended) were stacked in the Caliburn's favour, the outcome was therefore obvious.

Where then does this leave the potential customer who's looking for a state of the art analog playback system? If you accept Mikey's conclusion and write off the Monaco, I think you missed the point completely. Go listen to both tables and gain an appreciation of what each has to offer, listen for its "sound", and choose the one which ultimately matches your system and musical preferences. Its all about getting the right "mix". At this level and price point, the balance can easily tilt either way.

Mikey, thanks for bringing these new technologies to our attention and giving us your honest opinions on their sound, and more importantly, the context of your review!