Telarc 1812 revisited

Hi Raul,
20 years from now, maybe you and I will still be playing our copies of the 1812 Overture and maybe a couple of kids that are just being born today will have gotten the vinyl bug and will be playing it too. There is something to be said to seeing the spinning disc as music pours out of the speakers. The cost of vinyl playback equipment however, is way out of proportion to the availablity of new music on vinyl. Today, it's already down to those dedicated few who want to hear the old music how it was once heard by the masses decades ago. In the meantime, today's populace enjoys their music digitally through either headphones or high dollar hifi systems.

It is getting harder for me to find that perfect overhang point when adjusting my tonearm. I need more light and taller legs. After hearing HD Audio last year on a top end hifi system, I imagine one day going that route. To my ears that had all the advantages of vinyl with none of the noise and set-up work. It made CDs sound flat and lifeless in comparison- on the same system! When it comes down to me deciding on a HD DAC or a new cartridge- for the same amount of money- well, I'm kind of not looking forward to that day.

Raul,

I was never a defender of SUTs, still less the "official" one, whatever that means. Please don't put words in my mouth.

It's true I once used them (as have you). In using them, I learned something of their strengths and weaknesses. I posted what I'd learned when it seemed helpful.

I campaigned neither for nor against them because, as in most things audio, they have their pluses and minuses. SUTs are useful in some systems, less so in others. Those fortunate enough to own $12K+ preamps like your Essential or my Alaap probably do not need them. OTOH, those eager to explore LOMCs on a more limited budget may find that an SUT suits their needs... as I once did. I do not defend SUTs, I defend reasonableness.

As you continue to willfully misconstrue other people's statements, my participation in this thread is no longer indicated.

Dear Toniwinsc: I agree with you. There is no single doubt that digital for we audiophiles ( music lovers. ) is here to stay and with a lot of " land " to improve in the near future.

Even, exist several " old " CD's that are great to listen it and where its analog counterpart ( original or today reissues. ) can't compete with.

For example, take Foreigner 4 ( in both formats. ) or The Wall or Gladiator: in all these sampels and several other ones digital outperforms the analog LPs ( I just bought the today " audiophile " Foreigner 4 just to compare it. ).

I have a modest today/latest digital universal Denon player ( 32/192 DAVCs ) and if you paly a DVDA on it you just can't beleive you are hearing digital, you missed nothing about analog recordings and win sveral improvements on different areas.

Even old digital recorded LPs ( like the Telarc ones. ) outperform the best analog samples.
Of course that not all the Telarc LPs are first rate some are " so so " but the ones that shines are a glorious experience through LP format. Same I can say for the old digital recordings made it by Denon ( first rate. ) but there are other digital labels really bad as: Teldec, some Deutshe Gramaphone or Philips ( I own hundreds of digital recordings on LP. ).

The best analog recording that can compete against the best digital LPs are the D2D and not all these, by-passing the R2R normal tape recording is a huge improvement on the music sound reproduction ( digital permit this. ) of course that LP manufacturers always disagree with those statements and IMHO they do because they are biased through: $$$$$$ and not because really have facts.

There are several areas where digital outperform analog and one of them is in the bass frequency range where lives the music home reproduction foundation.

I think that one of my firsts posts where I said that digital outperforms analog was 4-5 years ago ( maybe more ) and as always when people don't understand the why's just laughed of those posts and I need not to listen trough a dSc digital combo ( 150 K ) but trough a simple units as my today Denon.

+++++ " After hearing HD Audio last year on a top end hifi system, I imagine one day going that route. To my ears that had all the advantages of vinyl with none of the noise and set-up work. It made CDs sound flat and lifeless in comparison- on the same system! +++++ "

I don't have experience with the HD but I know exactly what you mean and agree.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Dougdeacon: Oh that " short " memory!!!

Yes I think is the best you can do.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear friendsds: The Kleos arrived and is mounted in my system.

Yes, is better than the Skala or Helikon and even Titan but can't compete with the Akiva ( JC design for Linn. ).

The Kleos has clear and transparent highs where the Akiva is close but not at the same level and it's only in this characteristic where the Kleos is above the Akiva.

The Akiva has a tremendous natural rhythm where the Kleos is just lifeless. Everything on sound characteristics are there ( in the Kleos ) but can't transmit the MUSIC emotions, it does not has the glorious easy MUSIC flow reproduction of the Akiva, the Kleos feels as the music has no " continuity " as if it's " fighting " to reproduce the grooves information. I can't explain in other way.

About its tracking abilities the Kleos is the worst one of the " bunch " and maybe that's why I said: " fighting to reproduce grooves... ", instead to feel happy as the Akiva one.

I know ( because JC posted is not his priority. ) that the Akiva JC design is a " faulty " builded cartridge because its truly great ( today unbeatable. ) tracking abilities that was not in the " program ", welcomed " fault " that made this cartridge so good quality performer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.