Grand Prix Monaco review in new Stereophile- OUCH

Raul,you are getting a bit carried away with some of your assertions!Not that you are wrong,but to be honest if someone is interested in a product,they usually assert their own perception and tastes first,"then" weigh the benefits of a good,or bad review!
I really don't believe you have to get so technical,with your arguement.Sometimes it is beyond technicality!!!Either something interests us enough to "discover" the benefits of ownership,or not!
To pick apart every single parameter could take a lifetime,if we became so obsessed.Everything has it's positive and negative side!Intuition can play a big part,in a purchase,if we have a general grasp of the product,and what we want from it.
I think Mikey,did a commendable job,with this table(I don't always agree with him,as it should be).Why do I absolutely know this??Because I would NEVER want to do his job!!!!It is a NO win situation,with the attitudes of the hyper-audiophile legions,waiting to find something to pick on.
The reviewer job is to give us a roadmap,to "see" if this particular product is something we find interesting,and are capable of acquiring.Just to point us in a direction.We make the choice to take it further.He cannot cover every possible consideration,or he would surely go nuts!
You cannot cover ALL the different parameters with a product like an analog playback rig!There are too many variables.You "surley" know this!
Fremer did a damn good(enough) job,and if I was interested in the product,I would want to check it out,regardless of how the review shaped up.
When I bought my Avalon Ascent speakers,Michael Gindi(a reviewer at the time,and a person with good intention)was pretty adamant about my buying them.He was a friend of a friend,but was nice enough to invite me to his home(before the speakers came out)and then followed up with numerous compelling phone calls(to me)trying to convince me to acquire the speakers.He was a good salesman,btw!
I went to Mike Hobson's place(he was a dealer at the time)to check them out,and the performance was far from stellar!
Though I was disapointed,I still felt I had gotten enough good feedback,and heard enough in the speaker to "kind of like",that I put down a deposit on them,knowing that these products "had" to be better than the demo performance.I went with my own intuition,and perceptions of what I would ultimately get(which I got in spades,btw).
Personally,I think anyone wanting to acquire something like a MONACO,will not be dissuaded by a so-so review!
Sometimes you have to go with your own instincts!"THAT" cannot be tested for!
Best regards.

That you are stooping now to question my motives, my intentions, my personal feelings toward Mr. Lloyd, who I barely know, is indicative of the bizarre way in which this review has been received.

Don't forget: I've critically reviewed hundreds of products and have experienced hundreds of reactions, but none like this one. Not even close.

If you were in my position, you'd see this as a "Village of the Damned" scenario.

I mean do you want to read pure advertising copy?":

"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."

Mr. Lloyd is doing nothing all that different from what other competent individuals are doing in audio. What is he "shaking up?" Andy Payor built a dd turntables years ago. I reviewed it. Carbon fiber? Is that something "advanced" to you? Is Black Diamond Racing a name you're familiar with?

Just to be clear: I don't mean to disparage Alvin Lloyd's accomplishments here, nor did I in the review. Quite the opposite in fact.

However, I do mean to disparage the poster who wrote what's above because it's silly. Mr. Lloyd is hardly the only one designing "technologically advanced" audio products. I review such products all the time. Why would I, or any reviewer hold that against him?

A few months ago I reviewed the Kuzma Reference 'table and Airline tonearm. I wrote a review that was no more positive or negative than the one I wrote about the Monaco. I described what I heard, using adjectives, not superlatives. Much of what I found was sonically attractive, however I found the overall balance of the combo BRIGHT and said I wouldn't recommend using a Lyra Titan i or any other cartridge on the analytical side of the sonic fence on it.

GUESS WHAT? That review did not generate the hysteria the Monaco review has created. It's positively bizarre. Some of you are behaving as if I have desecrated a flag.

Snap out of it. The Monaco is just other audio product. It is nothing sacrosanct. Stop treating it as such. I wrote my opinion of what it sounds like. It's that simple, so get over it.

Period!!!!!!!

Raul.

The three things that stand out in my mind here are the stand issue, which has been fully discussed, the assumption that the sonics can be traced primarily to DD vs. BD, and the fact that aside from the Monaco's many obvious strengths, one way its problems showed up was in a lack of dimensioality, in other words, a lack of resolution. This is not an issue of altering the flavor through tweeking; it is a lack of information. IMHO, VTA, loading, etc. should not change this once optimized in a truly reference system. The only issue that makes sense to me aside from that of the stand is perhaps the way an arm and table handle resonances and how they interact around that.

I throw my vote in with those that think Michael has done an unusually good and honest job of ferreting out the deal here. We can only aspire in such situations though. This is planet earth after all and there are many logistics that will forever remove us from situational perfection.

Dear Piedpiper: +++++ " VTA, loading, etc. should not change this once optimized in a truly reference system. " +++++

I agree but that never happen..

Regards and enjoy the music.
raul.