Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

that test IMHO was invalid because there were at least 2-3 different parameters that had influence in the quality performance that preclude a precise answers: different tonearm, different arm board and different tonearm wire.

Be that as is may, the differences in pace and tracking as well as noise are more attributable to plinth and turntable motor than to the above mentioned. The Walker is sold as a (very expensive) complete package and is therefore destined to go up against other packages as is; so no excuses there. The Walker is a great performer and no doubt many others prefer it to anything else. It was a great shock to find that the humble Technics was preferred by us, especially after a long romantic relationship with the Proscenium.

john

Dear Jlsemrad: +++++ " Be that as is may, the differences in pace and tracking as well as noise are more attributable to plinth and turntable motor than to the above mentioned. " ++++

who/whom told you this? how can you validate this? peace, tracking and noise: and you think that the tonearm/cartridge/wire relationship were less important?

I don't know who you are but for what you posted in this thread IMHO your overall understanding/knowledge on the subject is poor for say the least, you ignore many things on the subject or you know something that I did not.

I can understand that a person likes more a orange than an apple: because IMHO this is what you do on that Walker/Technics tests, but " trounced the Walker "? this is very/totally different issue.

If you have on hand facts behind your statement then I'm willing to learn and if not IMHO is futile that I continue argueing against your ignorance.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

In our case, the power of the direct drive motor made a big difference in keeping up with dynamic passages on certain records. The superiority in that regard was very evident. The background was blacker with the Technics even though most consider belt-drives to be quieter. The Walker got the benefit of the doubt being provided with the better cable of the two. The bass was more solid and better defined with the Technics as well. In what area did we feel that the Walker was superior to the Technics? None - hence the word trounce. Please note that we are talking about preference, just as we prefer the Allnic phono stage to the J&R solid state phono stage.

You may hold differences in preferences but that is no reason to resort to ad hominem attacks.

John

Dear John: Attacks?, for me some one that is unaware of " something " it is an ignorant on that subject.
How do you name your ignorance, that kind of " unaware/ignorance?

Allnic?: just pathetic.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

The Walker/Technics test seems like it was one front end versus another front end and the group preferred one over the other. How is that invalid? They were not comparing arm vs. arm, or cart vs. cart, or table vs, table which would have been very difficult or impossible. I haven't read anything about the cables or phono amps used. The only conclusion I can draw from that test is that during those sessions, that group of experienced music lovers preferred one front end over the other. I don't even think it would be correct to deduce that the drive systems (DD vs belt) made the most difference in the test.

It would be interesting to hear from more people who have tried their DD tables with a solid plinth and then without one.