Stereophile Class A tables


Quickly looked in recommended components and saw 2 Brinkmann tables listed in class A the Balanced and Bardo. Is the Balanced worth over 3 times the cost vs. the Bardo given the fact they are both class A?
rsf507
Where's the conflict? If price is no indicator of performance, then two tt's with a 3X differential in cost might both be worthy of a class A rating, not that I would recommend for a second that anyone should go by the S'phile listings.
The other thing is that there is tons of amazing equipment out there that never receives a SP rating, so using the list is highly restrictive. The list might be better titled Stereophile class GEBHAB "Good Equipment Backed by High Advertising Budgets".
Forums can be funny insofar as they always:
a. have people saying something costing £100 sounds better than something costing £4000 - yet the reviewer never does a proper shootout against the said hypothetical component;
b. magazine opinions are always seen as very biased. To some extent I agree with this - but most people on forums review things that they have bought.
Of the Class A components, I have heard the Brinkmanns and the DPS. Oddly enough I made the mistake of not buying a DPS when they first came out as it had no magazine reviewer approval. Instead of going by the class rating, see which reviewers like what you like, and use them ass a guide to 'voicing' ass opposed to class rating. For instance Roy Gregory likes a kind of high resolution neutrality, whereas Art Dudley has a preference of PRAT
Performance ratings are just that, performance, not price. there are different ways of getting to a Class A performance, some very expensive, some not so much. If a small manufacturer tried to replicate the electronics of a high end japanese direct drive from the late seventies, the cost would be exorbitant, just because of the miniscule scale of sales these days. that cost would be spread over few units. But a manufacturer using a simple belt drive with an excellent bearing, heavy dampened platter and plinth might get equal performance results for much less cost. Both would have Class A performance, they just achieve that result in different ways. the cost relates to the method used, not the performance achieved.
In the end it is all about 'taste', so the comparison is a vanilla vs chocolate thing. I am sure my liking vanilla is much 'better' then your liking chocolate.