Why haven't we heard more about HR-X???

I wonder why anyone would care what pseudo-intellectual gas bags in Stereophile or other magazines would recommend. Aside from being unemployed DJs, I'm not aware of any credentials that they have in terms of turntable or electronic design. Just my personal opinion. Audiophiles should listen for themselves and not depend upon fickle, "professional" reviewers. I would trust the opinion of one of the Audiogon regulars over a magazine reviewer almost every time.

There were two HR-X turntables at HE2003 in SF last year, and both sounded divine. As Jond said, HiFi+ loved the unit and that magazine has a lot street cred. Still, I am surprised that TAS hasn't had a look at one. Stereophile? - the other posters have summed up the situation very well.

Regards,

didn't hp comment something about it I remember reading it in tas it was a positive comment?

So much said here!! Boy I'm starting to wonder what response I would get if the question was asked...."comparing three tables...the VPI HR-X ..... the Basis 2500 (with or without vacuum) ..the SME 20.....which one is best?"

I assume all are very good. However, which one is the a better match/mate for the arm? For instance, the VPI makes the table and the arm, so does SME, and so does the Basis (however the Graham arm is made by someone else). Is it better to go with the same company for table/arm? I have always felt that the VPI/SME/Basis are great tables.....however, I have also felt the Graham ( made by Bob Graham and NOT Bill Conti) is a better arm then the VPI and the SME (I can't explain why). Is it best to go with the better table.....then chooses the arm (no matter the manufacturer)? Or stay with the same company for table and arm?

For me, the two operative ideas are "design philosophy" and "best of breed."

I think that at the higher end of the spectrum most equipment will sound good. If I just avoid the obvious incompatible matches, I should be aurally happy with the result. Beyond that, I have always been attracted to the design philosophy behind a product. For example, the Well Tempered Turntable and Arm were tremendously exciting for me to read about. Bill Firebaugh came up with innovative, elegant engineering solutions for his table and arm that really appealed to me conceptually. (I never bought one, however.)

It is relatively hard to compare two arms. For direct comparisons, I would need the same cartridge, table, electronics, speakers, and room. It's hard enough just to find a dealer that carries both brands that I would want to compare. I have a similar issue with tables. The best view that I have been able to get is when I upgrade to a new system, and I can compare the new one's sound against my memory of the old one. Of course, it's always better.

To compare three high end turntables or arms, I wind up studying the engineering design concepts and trying to glean insights from reading reviews or talking with others who have spent time with them. At the showroom, they all sound great.

When I buy a high end arm at high end prices like the Graham, I feel like I'm buying a piece of form-follows-function engineering art. Not only do I expect it to sound good, but I need to appreciate its engineering aesthetics.

I also like to think I can pick and choose the components I like the best, for a "best of breed," at least "best" as determined by my own preferences. I happen to like the HR-X and the Graham arm -- why shouldn't I have both?

VPI and others are working to convert the separates market into a systems market, bundling arms and tables, arms and cartridges, and some even bundling all three. This has business advantages in that the same manufacturer captures a higher proportion of a playback system purchase. Perhaps more importantly, we know the set up will be compatible, and the manufacturer will make sure that potential synergies are realized.

For me, it becomes a little bit of an ego/freedom-of-choice thing, that I can pick a satisfying combo from an open field. In line with this, I have several systems but only one has a receiver (MD 208) versus separate amp and tuner. So, in the end, do I have my own opinion? or, should I just default and defer to the manufacturer's desire for higher market share and revenues?

Very philosophical.