Albert Porters after market panzerholz plinths

A question about comparisons, based on the Walker-Technics comments posted here.

Many experienced hobbyists agree about the importance of component matching - speaker with room, amp with speaker, arm with cartridge. Raul was pretty specific when he suggested the importance of arm, headshell, and even platter mat for cartridge performance.

Why then would anyone argue that the only fair comparison of the Walker versus Albert's Technics should be made using the same or identical arms and cartridges? Who is to say the optimum arm for Albert's Technics would be the same as that used on the Walker? And even if the same (or identical) cartridge(s) was/were used in the comparison, what is the assurance it/they offer optimal performance when different arms are used.

This may not seem scientific but I believe music is an emotional experience. Therefore applying science-based tests may not always be most appropriate. For me a better test would be to optimize the Walker and it's arm with the best matching cartridge (obviously choices will vary but since the evaluation will be made on an individual basis I consider this OK). Then do the same with Albert's Technics, this time matching arm and cartridge. Then make the sonic comparison with EACH table optimized.

Your choices in optimizing each table may be different than mine and our respective conclusions may or may not agree. But each of us would have based our ratings on the best we felt each table could perform.

I trust this in not beating an old subject to death but in all my years in this hobby I've simply observed too many varying opinions about what is good and what is not so good to believe that rigorous "scientific" testing procedures (eliminate the variables) present any truth.

Pryso,

my guess, knowing the likelyhood that Albert tried quite a few of the pretender/contender cartridges while he owned the Walker, is that Albert had a pretty good idea of what cartridges worked the best on the Walker. and in any case; the Walker does not allow for an alternate arm, so you are stuck with comparing the Walker with it's fine linear tracking arm.

so Albert would have been in as good a position as anyone to make the comparison with the cartridges he knew at that time. he had way more experience with cartridges on the Walker than the Technics.

i have a Rockport Sirius III and sitting next to it is a Dobbins Technics SP-10 Mk3 with a Reed and Talea arm. i have multiple cartridges which have been switched back and forth. i have my opinions about this and that which is as close to 'a truth' as you are likely to have.

i respect Albert's perspective.

Mike, I may not have made my point clearly. I too respect Albert's experience and perspective. So based on that I can accept that he believes his custom Technics to be more satisfying (better?) than his (at the time) Walker.

My intended point was to challenge those who discredited his conclusion because of component variations - the arms in that case. Comparing different turntables by utilizing the same platform, arm, wire, and cartridge may not necessarily be a level playing field in my opinion.

Dear Pryso: What Albert decided and why he decided on the subject is only his privilege and no one else.
In the other side that I disagree with him as I stated/posted is my privilege and IMHO at least I put my " mouth " on what I believe, other prefer stay in silence: that's their privilege.

I totally disagree for many things ( between others ) that you take ( hipothetically )two different sources ( phono cartridges ) with two different tonearms with two diferent tonearm wire to make a two TT comparison: how can we do it? when both sources has its own " signature " that between other things can put in your " brain/mind " some kind of bias/preference, how can you be " neutral "/non-biased to one source or the other only by its " signature " sounds?.

Two different sources that not only has its own " signature sounds " , these " signature sounds " means IMHO: that handle different the audible frequency range because has different frequency response, different crosstalk/channel separation, different distortions, different frequency range at both frequency extremes, different tracking " hability ", different, different and different...., there are no two cartridges alike that I know even in same cartridge model could be tiny performance differences.

How could you compare two TT where the TT's are " surrounded for different: source/cartridge/, tonearm, wire/cable and the like? Please let me know how can you do it? Pryso think for a moment: when you test a Dynavector XV-1s ( or any cartridge. ) in two different tonearms ( everything the same. ) you always will have two " different " performances. Now imagine when you have all different ( not only the tonearms. ) as you propose.

I have to say that I can't imagine that comparison but if you explain to me I will try to understand it and maybe is time to change my overall point of view on the subject.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Addressing a couple of points:

I totally disagree for many things ( between others ) that you take ( hipothetically )two different sources ( phono cartridges ) with two different tonearms with two diferent tonearm wire to make a two TT comparison: how can we do it? when both sources has its own " signature "

I've stated this at Audiogon many times but want to post a response again since it keeps coming up. The two turntables were fitted with identical cartridges, one was obtained from Lloyd Walker himself for the comparison.

Tone arm wire was the same or in favor of the Walker (better quality on Walker for part of the test). Phono stage, power cables, cartridges and all electronics were identical. Perhaps even more important, the test was not an A-B comparison, but rather long term listening with multiple visitors over a period of many, many months on a wide variety of software with every conceivable adjustment to tweaking the variables.

Albert had a pretty good idea of what cartridges worked the best on the Walker. and in any case; the Walker does not allow for an alternate arm, so you are stuck with comparing the Walker with it's fine linear tracking arm.

Mike Lavigne is stating what I posted earlier in this thread. The Walker is manufactured with it's own arm and it's not removable.

Test was done the only way it could be. Every variable that could be equalized was done and the impossible was left as is.