A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Dear Raul,

+++++ " I certainly am perfectly fine, if the discussion returns to and concentrates on the ultimate audiophile fallback position: "I and a few others prefer that sound". " ++++

agree, you can't argue with only words against people that tested both approaches and that have facts and not only words like you. So permit me add to your last statement:

I and a few others that " tested " prefer that sound!

Sorry, but ... my remark was meant utterly sarcastic....;-) ...

And finally - it is always words vs words (as "personal experience" vs "personal experience"). The personal preference - that thing you named "fact" ... - of one person is worth as much or as little as one other's.
There are no empirical tests available here.
There are no "facts" here drawn from personal "tests".
Sorry.
Wished there were.
So everyone's "tests" are bitterly limited, since drawn from listening with different and most likely not perfect periphery and based on a bag full of individual circumstances and likes/dislikes.
So totally worthless for the next person - unless he/she is a blind "follower" of the former.
"Falling back" on plain and simple or complex physical models might not be tempting to some, but it is at least an universal objective attempt.

Picking up on Halcro's initial words:
For thousands of years people believed that the sun is moving around the earth. They had "proof" every day and it was an undisputed "fact" drawn from "personal test and experience".
After all they all saw the sun wandering through the horizon, setting and rising again the next morning.
Galileo (and long before him less well known arabic, greek and egyptian men of thought and clear view looked behind the plain "obvious" view and found a different approach and physical fact.
An approach free from individual experience......
Now just exchange "geocentric conception of the world" with "personal tests and facts in audio" and you see the point.
We ( well, .... most of us ...) have moved on to the heliocentric conception of the world ( and right now are on our way to another even more universal conception ... .... at least some of us ...;-) ....) and we ( ... some ...) will move on in audio too.

And as such it is the more scientific and Copernican point of view and attempt ( Halcro .... ;-) ...).

Cheers,
D.

Dear Halcro, I in "IMHO" think that "the best" or "fact" in correlation with high-end audio is in most cases a classic self-deception. This however is no problem at all, if it is a personal preference and taste. But since in audio we all ( in the sense of "we, the people" ... ;-) ... ) do strive for absolutes ( "best" and "facts" are absolutes ), it is a problematic issue to draw absolutes from highly subjective experiences and limited and ever-changing periphery.
Yes, JV, HP and all the other reviewers and likewise the customers (we, the people..) do have their personal preferences regarding "best".
But trying to break out of this and going for objective and neutral positions (physic, geometry, mechanics) isn't all that much fun ( to most - which I do understand ).
So we will continue with our "manoeuver in the dark" which at least gives each and everyone the opportunity to find his/her own portion of light and insight.
IMHO physic gives us pretty clear paths for the conception of a turntable.
If one leaves aspects as market-acceptance, Pareto-principle, MiniMax, WAF, production-costs and size/weight (all utterly unimportant ...;-) ...) aside, then the path is - well - straight.
But that TT would be very expensive and labor-intensive to produce and would find no buyer but a few east-asian thyccons.
The wide range of different designs in tts is a direct result of a wide range of taste, money to spend, approach and visions by their designers and customers alike.
We have highly individual rooms, set-ups and components - and consequently tts.
The next upgrade is the next fix for the "audiophile junkie" - needed to carry on, even if one is aware that it won't last for long.
Cheers,
D.

Dertonarm, I have to admit in this respect you are completely right. We have different tastes and also different capabilites in perceiving the world as well as the audio sound. This is why we ended up in different religions and different churches - in audio too. Why not?

The problem arises when everyone claimes for himself objectivity and tells his followers you will become as good as me if you follow my roots. This is a problem we had and have with some leaders and we should be sensitive to what the leaders or the churches are aiming at.

It is fine when I discover a certain way of audio listening with some special gear to be the best matching approach. It is even better if I can share my opinions on music and gear with some others and also do receive some critical remarks on what I do and what I use. I always have to respect that there are other people living in a "completely different world", enjoying maybe in the same way or even better...music

At this point, I think this thread needs to sink slowly down the list of threads in the Analog section, like the sun slowly setting in the West.

Dear Thuchan, I agree with you. There is absolutely no objection from my side against personal taste or preferences.
I have mine too ...;-) ...
That is as long as they stay what they are - personal tastes and preferences.
But if "leaders" or "gurus" do take (and sometimes postulate) their personal preferences as "facts" or "proof", then this is a different story.
None of us is or even can be objective - far from that.
Our tastes and consequently our way to listen to music is highly individual and thus subjective a priori et ad decretum.
A simple reason why I prefer abstract, scientific, non-individual ( colored ...) ways to encircle electrical and mechanical aspects in audio components.
It's kind of "Kritik der Vernunft". No worries, I won't go for another excursus in philosophy.
Science and abstraction is always in conflict with "wishful thinking", "personal experience" and "faith". Even I sometimes wished it weren't.
Not only in audio.
Cheers,
D.