Dear Axel, dear Halcro, - we do not need to get on terms in this discussion. If your point of view do differ from mine - fine with me.
And sorry again - the examples are off topic.
We aren't talking nano-mechanics here nor micro-optics or complex cable structures and - BTW - concrete was invented by the Romans too. They were really gifted engineers in their prime period.
My basic point is, that the design of a great (in terms of sound) TT or tonearm is - well... - simple.
Do do neither need computer nor digital equipment to design or put together either one.
These two are really fairly easy mechanical devices - where is the problem? I can not see the need for high-tech equipment nor for big sientific computers here.
Its brain we need - something apparently becoming increasingly less available in our days.
Do I need to constantly defend the FR-60 tonearms simply because Raul doesn't like their sound in his 10+ years memory ?
While other audiophiles like Thuchan, Syntax, Heradot with equally sophisticated set-up and all modern Skool tonerarms at hand do prefer their FR-tonearms and for good reason?
Ever given taht a thought - why should they prefer the FR over their other tonearms? Just to anoy other audiophiles? Get serious.
The proof?
There is onyl one possible and non-virtual proof:
Visit me - bring along the SME V, DaVinci or any Continuum together with your favourite cartridge.
Bring further with you some time.
I will set-up your prefered tonearm / cartridge combination and fine tune real fast and most likely you will hear your toy on all time new highs in terms of its sonic performance.
I won't stop till you agree that this is the best you've heard so far.
Then we will switch to the FR-66/Fr-7fx combo and you will loose all faith in modern day audio forever.
I know it - I have watched it happen several times and all with top-flight competitors.
See you here (now I am off for a weekend holiday with my family) some day !
Cheers,
D.
And sorry again - the examples are off topic.
We aren't talking nano-mechanics here nor micro-optics or complex cable structures and - BTW - concrete was invented by the Romans too. They were really gifted engineers in their prime period.
My basic point is, that the design of a great (in terms of sound) TT or tonearm is - well... - simple.
Do do neither need computer nor digital equipment to design or put together either one.
These two are really fairly easy mechanical devices - where is the problem? I can not see the need for high-tech equipment nor for big sientific computers here.
Its brain we need - something apparently becoming increasingly less available in our days.
Do I need to constantly defend the FR-60 tonearms simply because Raul doesn't like their sound in his 10+ years memory ?
While other audiophiles like Thuchan, Syntax, Heradot with equally sophisticated set-up and all modern Skool tonerarms at hand do prefer their FR-tonearms and for good reason?
Ever given taht a thought - why should they prefer the FR over their other tonearms? Just to anoy other audiophiles? Get serious.
The proof?
There is onyl one possible and non-virtual proof:
Visit me - bring along the SME V, DaVinci or any Continuum together with your favourite cartridge.
Bring further with you some time.
I will set-up your prefered tonearm / cartridge combination and fine tune real fast and most likely you will hear your toy on all time new highs in terms of its sonic performance.
I won't stop till you agree that this is the best you've heard so far.
Then we will switch to the FR-66/Fr-7fx combo and you will loose all faith in modern day audio forever.
I know it - I have watched it happen several times and all with top-flight competitors.
See you here (now I am off for a weekend holiday with my family) some day !
Cheers,
D.