2. analog
  3. 1205104320

Raven v Walker. Colored v Accurate?

This post has been generated following Jonathan Valin’s recent review of the Raven AC-3/Phantom combination in TAS. What intrigues me is not that JV has been lucky enough to review and buy or have on permanent loan yet another world’s best product. A truly astounding strike rate for any reviewer it must be said. Rather, it is what JV readily describes as the colored sound of the Raven/Phantom combination and the apparent appeal of this sound compared with what JV described as the more accurate sound of the Walker that piques my curiosity. This is not, I hasten to add about the relative merits of either table or their arms. The intention is not to have a slug-fest between Walker and Raven owners.

What really interests me is how it is that a product that in the reviewer’s opinion more accurately conveys what is on the source material is perceived as somehow less emotionally satisfying than one which presumably exaggerates, enhances or even obscures some aspect of the recorded information, if one can accept that this is what colored sound or the product’s character is. It appears counter intuitive and the deliberation of the phenomenon is making me question my own goals in audio reproduction. These have been pretty much on the side of more accurate is better and more emotionally compelling with due consideration to financial constraints in my choice of equipment in achieving this goal.

On face value and if you can accept the hyperbole it appears that the colored is better route is a little like going to a concert and putting on a device that allows you to alter the sound you hear. You twiddle a couple of knobs, sit back with a smile on your face and say “Ah! That’s better, that’s what I want it to sound like” You like it but it’s not necessarily what the musicians intended you to hear.

It seems logical that the closer one can get to accurately reproducing every piece of information recorded onto the medium then the closer you should be able to get to the actual performance, together with all the acoustic cues existing at that performance. I am making an assumption here that the recording medium is actually capable of capturing these things in the first instance.

We have our 12 inch pieces of vinyl on the platters of two systems under evaluation. We are not in the recording booth. The musicians are not on hand to play the piece over and over so that we can compare the live sound to the master tape and even if we did every performance is unique so we can never compare a second or third live performance with the one we just recorded. How then can the accuracy of a turntable/arm/cartridge combination and its ability to convey the emotion of the recorded event truly be evaluated? Ideally we should at least have the master tapes at hand to play on the same system in which we are evaluating the TT’s. The comparison will of necessity still be subjective but the determination would seem to be more believable than if the master tape were not part of the evaluation. If the master tape gave the listener no emotional connection with the musicians then I would contend that there would be something fundamentally flawed in another part of the playback system.

So in evaluating the two combinations would the more accurate combination be the more emotionally appealing? I cannot see how it would be otherwise unless we just don’t like what has been recorded or the way it has been recorded, the musicians have not made an emotional connection with us and the slightly flawed copy is preferred to the original. Is this why God made tone controls?

I have used the words seems, appears and presume quite deliberately, not to have a bet each way but because I am cognizant of the fact that we are, in audio reproduction dealing with the creation of an illusion and creating that illusion with people who have varying levels of perception, different experiences and tastes, different playback media and different physical replay environments so the task at hand for audio designers, humble reviewers and even we poor consumers could not be more complex.
phaser
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
13,108 posts
 
Dear Halcro: First than all I don't think that I'm changing the designer products ( as a fact I accept it. Who am I for not do it?. No I have a lot of respect to any audio designer. ) because adding a platter mat IMHO is a simple add-on that if I don't like it well I take out: the same for a clamp or TT footers, etc.

You are right I don't change any mods on cartridges, as a fact when I send any of my cartridges to repair I always " work/ask hard " for that repair leave the cartridge in original state.

No, I don't make any mods to tonearms I accept it. But many people makes: internal rewiring, IC cable, etc, etc and if we take electronics everyone change the power cord ( at least ) and put its amps over dedicated platforms, etc, etc.. IMHO I don't think that all this people are not accepting the product as it is.

The subject with TTs is that permit/allow to any one to make some very simple tweaks that does not change in anyway its main design with the hope that those mods/tweaks could improve the quality performance.

+++++ " What I'm never willing to blindly accept, is that those ' differences' ........are in fact IMPROVEMENTS. " +++++

I totally agree with you, I always support that when we make a change ( any one ) in the audio system chain the differences that makes that change are ( in some cases ) that: only a different performance but not always an improvement. Usually I only report/share audio experiences mods when IMHO appear an improvement not only a difference.

I think that we have a little different s point of view but at the end we agree on the main subjects that it is where it counts.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
sirspeedy
738 posts
 
Halcro,with respect.....you are taking things a little too seriously.Is it OK to try NOS tubes in a mfgr product having standard ones?Or adding a platter mat(as J.Valin did)to your table?Or adding a good A/C cord to product?Or in my case finding that a superb umbillical cord improves my table's power supply(and I improved the damping on my clamp).I had my pre/phonostage totally rebuilt,to amazing effect by Great Norther Sound(mod specialists extroadinaire)I am even thinking about adding teflon capacitors in the future,because these were not available some years ago,and I don't simply sell great stuff to get something new,if I know there are ways to improve it....etc,etc.
These are the types of "tweaks" that have greatly improved some folks' set-ups.
My friend Sid has ultra modded Infinity speakers,because he know SO many qualified folks that they persuaded him to do so.Result...Huge improvement!
What's your beef?Just be happy you have a nice stereo,and go from there.
BTW,years ago,I hated to touch my stuff,and virtually NEVER swayed from my dealer's set-up.I now hear my music a bit more clearly.
Lighten up,it's not your fault Patrick Rafter retired(my favorite tennis player of all time,btw)and Leyton hewitt is not going to win another "Major" title.Either is Roddick,but I'm still a happy guy-:)
Meant in the best of spirits..
phaser OP
71 posts
 
Halcro, as a SS rather than tube guy I used to find it rather strange that someone would pay a substantial sum for say a tubed phono stage and immediately replace some or all the tubes and then claim that they were in sonic nirvana. I mean, why didn't the designer see the error of their ways and use those tubes in the first place? I think there are at least five possible explanations. I'm sure someone will add more

1. The customer is correct and the designer got it wrong
2. The designer is correct and the customer got it wrong
3. The new tubes are in fact better but only in the customers system
4. The customer is hearing changes that the designer would not see as improvements
5. The customer is correct and the designer knows they are correct but for cost/availability considerations the tubes are not included in the standard product

I think the last point leads us on to a very important consideration when we talk about modification rather than just tweaking things like power cords. Very very few products are produced as cost no object designs. The Continuum Caliburn or Basis Work of Art are two which comes to mind which do in fact appear to be "cost no object" designs. With almost every product there is a cost/sales volume consideration which must be observed if the designer/manufacturer is to stay in business. Therefore almost every design is inherently compromised and as such may be able to be improved via the judicious use of higher performance/higher cost parts. The designer may in fact want to incorporate these parts in their design but cannot due to cost constraints.

Also, as Sirspeedy has mentioned as time goes by new components with higher levels of performance become available and can be incorporated into an older design with great effect on sound quality. Even the Caliburn and Work of Art are produced with materials, components and procedures of today but who is to say that major improvements will not be available in a few years time that make these statement products seem crude in comparison?

While I don't think I am every likely to look at upgrading the MOSFETS in my power amp, I did modify my Marantz SA11 S1 CD/SACD player. The (at the time, since improved of course) full RAM mod improved the performance of this player by a significant margin across every parameter. Could Marnantz have made the unit sound as good as the RAM mod? Probably better but the cost would have been so high by the time it reached retail that they would not have sold very many. The designer may have been happy but the accountants would not have been and we all know who generally has the final say. Because they do, we get to modify.
sirspeedy
738 posts
 
Actually,to add to Phaser's thought...here is what I do,on the rare occassion when I am bummed out by an equipment failure(God forbid)...In order to come out of the return,and sometimes lengthly wait for repair,I always inquire about further parts updating,or the possibility of an improvement somewhere,even if the mfgr does not normally offer this option.I have been extremely well rewarded by this.Read Arthur Salvatore's thoughts here,as they are my Bible of audio attitude,as of late!
Two years ago,my Power supply to my two chassis Rowland 8t amp developed a minor problem,but Jeff Rowland had a motorcycle mishap,that caused a lengthly wait.He is such a fine person,and I was SO into "what's out there that can be far superior" in my approach,that he got me a "one off" P/S design,that is absolutely extroadinary!I know this because my friend has the original(superb) design.Not close!!
Hence,I ALWAYS am looking for little tid bits to help my sickness.-:)
Best to all.
halcro's avatar
halcro
2,664 posts
 
Phaser,
Once again I am in total agreement.
I am not against tweeks and power cord and cable experimentation.
This is where you have all misunderstood me.
I am against changing the basic principle of a component which you have already accepted and bought from a manufacturer.
If a designer decides to produce a non-suspended turntable, is it valid for a consumer to turn it into a suspended one?....it CAN be done!
If a designer decides to produce a valve driven amplifier, is it valid for a customer to change it to SS?....again, those with the technical abilities can do it!
If a designer spends years perfecting his turntable to play without a vacuum hold-down, is it valid to change his vision simply because it is able to be done?

A lot of you will say......sure it's valid. We may do whatever we wish to get the 'absolute sound'.
But if you really wanted a vacuum hold-down table?.....why not simply buy one in the first place?
If you wanted a suspended deck?....why not buy one in the first place?
I don't consider these changes to be 'tweeks'.........they are fundamental revisions to the designer's philosophy and I, being a designer (of buildings), do not take kindly to those who take it upon themselves to change my vision.

And Sirspeedy......if you really MUST depress me about current Aussie tennis players?.....the least you can do is talk about the Golden Days of Laver, Hoad, Newcombe and Roche!!?
More to discover