Hi Doug, I haven't listened to a ZYX, but in a recent conversation Lloyd Walker was very complimentary of the ZYX "Airy" model that you have. He said he liked many things about it and that it would possibly be his second choice to the Magic Diamond cartridge that he sells and that I use. From Lloyd, that is high praise.

Sure, we're on a mission here: you're one of our main supporters for vinyl. We want you to have the best front end for vinyl that we can suck you into! ;^)
.

rushton September 27, 2004 16:58

Hi Rushton,
I don't think I knew, or perhaps I'd forgotten, that your Io Signature replaced c-j gear. I'm not sure I want to know, if you understand my meaning. Say, are you guys on a mission? We've added nearly $7K worth of goodies in the last two months. Help! <:^)

I doubt an Io is in our near future. We'd have to add a room onto the house to accomodate it, and that might cost nearly as much as the Io itself. Going directly from phono stage to power amp must be a sonic treat. I wonder if the Rhea can do that. Guess I could look that up myself...

Since we're plugging gear here, have you listened to a ZYX? As you can see by my comments above, it does all the things we both seem to like, and better than the other cartridges I've heard.

dougdeacon September 27, 2004 15:51

Doug, if you ever had the chance to hear the Aesthetix gear in your system, I don't think you'd ever turn back from it - whether Io or Saturn series. I've always liked Conrad-Johnson equipment, and I was a long term user of their PV-9A preamp (which I always found sonically superior to it's less expensive siblings: PV-8 and PV-11). As you know, the Aesthetix Io Signature replaced the C-J here, and the improvement was staggering. The nice thing about the Io is that it will drive an amplifier to full output by itself; just get the optional volume controls and single high level switched input.

rushton September 25, 2004 07:00

...discounted by 2/3 in the case of the CJ and about 1/2 in the case of what replaced it, because naturally everything was used! But you get an Io + Callisto, and I'll send you a record or two myself (also used), just to tide you over 'til lottery day :-)

zaikesman September 25, 2004 02:39

Well let's think about this for a minute...

...the PV-11 cost $1,800 in 1991

...adjusted for 13 years of inflation @ 4% = $2,997 in today's "dollars"

...multiplied by 6.5 to match your upgrade = $19,481

Hey, an Io + Callisto would save me money! I'd have enough left over to buy another record! Where's Albert?

dougdeacon September 24, 2004 14:11

At the time, the .8mv Glider was used straight into my PV-8, and based on previous experience I wouldn't have tried to go much lower, but it seemed comfortable. My conclusion was that operating under similar conditions (no step-up, both set to 47K, gain within a few dB's, compensated for at the listening position via the PV-8 linestage's volume control), the Lancelot + interconnects was a superior head amp to the PV-8's internal one. (After the switch was made official, loading was optimized downward to considerable additional benefit - love those socketed resistors!).

The PV-8 wasn't embarrassed or anything, but there was no doubt either, something that wasn't preordained going in since I had considered myself a tube kinda guy. Which led to me reconsidering tubes in the linestage as well, which ultimately led to me settling on the Levinson 380S after one false start in between. So I'm backwards relative to the majority of mix'n'match guys like yourself, running as I am SS in front of tubed power amplification. (I had grown tired of the little nigglies somewhat inherent with high-gain small-signal tubes, but realize that quieter-operating tube gear is available, and if I were shopping today the baby Aesthetix stuff would probably be on my audition list.) A part of my decision was based on shared criteria, like repeatable volume settings, a full-function remote - y'know, all the modern conveniences. But yeah, the CJ was revealed as being warmly colored and a limiting factor in other ways by comparison, if pleasantly so (it's only fair to note that I have about 5 1/2 times the amount invested now though, or 6 1/2 X including the phonostage).

zaikesman September 24, 2004 02:00

Hmmm, I just noticed that in list price terms, our analog front end represents over half the value of the system as used for vinyl playback. I guess that's taking the "source first" approach pretty seriously. :-)

We've never heard any decent phono stage except our PV-11 and Cello's Supratek Cortese. Of course it's difficult to compare phono stages across systems. We have more top end extension but I think that's due to our B&W metal tweeters vs. his Sonus Faber cloth ones. Lots of people call the c-j stuff warm. It doesn't sound warm to me, but I'll admit I have no real basis for judgement. The improvements in noise floor, focus, neutrality, tautness and clarity wrought by the TriPlanar and ZYX have been so palpable that it's clear the PV-ll was not limiting those, at least not before.

The stepups are indispensable for listening to a LOMC with a PV-11 of course. Were you running MC's directly into the PV-8? Even a fairly lusty .5mv cartridge like the Shelter sounded veiled, undynamic and soft if fed directly into the PV-11. Those tubes just don't like being pushed that hard. Without the stepups the Airy probably wouldn't be audible at all! ;-)

Load swapping with the BentAudio Mu is a breeze and it gives you a nearly infinite array of choices. For the Shelter 901 we actually found the best load with two resistors in each terminal of the Mu. That would be nearly impossible with an MC gain stage. OTOH, cartridge loading when going directly into a gain stage is far less critical. I wouldn't have to decide whether 37.5 or 38 ohms is best.

I do have a hankering to hear an Aesthetix (not the IO, the Saturn series stuff). We both want a gain control with repeatable settings. So many records need to be played within a small range of volumes to sound right. This makes the PV-11's uncalibrated gain control an annoying distraction. The little yellow sticky on each LP jacket with its optimal arm height certainly has room for an optimal gain setting too, if I had a way to measure it. A remote would also be nifty. We ain't gettin' any younger!

dougdeacon September 23, 2004 15:48

Hey, not only does that sound like you "describing ZYX vs. Koetsu", it sounds like me describing my present vdH DDT-II vs. my old B-M Glider M2... :-)

Since you have invested so much in your analog front end - and despite the CJ letting you "hold off for a while" re balanced AC - I feel duty-bound to let you know my Camelot Lancelot handily displaced the PV-8's phono section in the chain (this with the loading matched). The PV-11 phono section is largely identical save for a couple of the tube types. (As mentioned, my CJ's since been retired from linestage chores as well, but I don't think I can bring myself to sell it yet.) Not that the Lancelot is SOTA or anything - and of course I'm not using a step-up tranny in-bewteen like you - but it did make many of its improvements in the very qualities where we seem simpatico (noise floor, focus, neutrality, tautness, clarity, extension), so I'm prompted to ask what your plans are in this area?

zaikesman September 22, 2004 21:24

ZYX Airy update, a/k/a more insufferable babbling:

We're up around 50-60 hours and the change curve is definitely flattening out. I think we've reached 95% of stability, further changes will be gradual and subtle.

What happens to the Airy during breakin is that you move closer and closer to the musicians. We're now in the front row. We're hearing more detail than the Shelter 901 but it's never a case of, "Wow, did you hear that pin drop?!" You just hear the things you'd hear at a concert, naturally, and always integrated into the musical tapestry.

The noise floor of the Airy is astonishing, just like Arthur Salvatore says about his Fuji. It's lower than a Shelter, lower than a Koetsu. It takes quiet passages down to hold-your-breath levels. This is absolute magic. CD fans brag about their dynamic range. Hah! I don't think any CDP at any price can do this.

Partly because of this innate quietness, big dynamics, when called for, are SHOCKING. The poor cats hate that, and even we find ourselves jumping once in a while. As Zaikesman just said about the EP, these big dynamics are always individual-instrument based. It's the drum or the trumpet that blasts you out of your chair, not the stereo.

And vocals, OMG. Male, female, soprano, bass, solo, chorus. Just real voices from top to bottom, with no trace of congestion and every bit of real humanity.

Even mediocre recordings reveal their music well. I could babble on forever...

We checked azimuth with the Wally Analog Shop last night. My setup by eye turned out to be pretty good, just 0.5db of crosstalk. Wally says 1db is "good" and 2-3db is "okay". It hardly seemed worth bothering but just for fun I turned the headshell a tiny amount and measured again. Now it's 0.2db! That's stupendous performance for any cartridge, and it goes a long way toward explaining the Airy's amazingly broad, stable soundstage and solid, pinpoint imaging. I don't really listen for those things very often, but it is pretty cool when a big orchestra + chorus spread about before you and everyone has a place and stays there. Hmm, how about that Speakers Corner reissue of Mahler #8 tonight?

dougdeacon September 22, 2004 19:49

Zaikesman,
We obviously have similar sonic priorities. Your description of the guitar concerto with/without the EP sounds like me describing ZYX vs. Koetsu. We also prefer the detail, *provided* it remains musical, realistic and is not thrust upon us. I'd much rather hear violinists playing together than hear some entity called a violin section.

I recall the EP doing that for the lower registers during CD playback. As I mentioned, we didn't get the analog rig until after the EP captured all the power cords in sight. Doing an A/B in our system is just too much work, due to lack of accessibility. So I appreciate your insights.

Especially re: your old PV-8. If balanced power doesn't help a c-j pre much then I can hold off for awhile without getting the upgrade itch. Many thanks for that.

dougdeacon September 22, 2004 19:20

Spencer,
Sorry, we haven't heard any version of the 501. Being confirmed maniacs we jumped from ADC XLM MkII directly to Shelter 901. No point in half measures, we go 10x the price with every upgrade!

BTW, don't get the idea the 901's a bad cartridge. Far from it, it's an excellent cartridge and at $1500 it's almost a steal. (Well, in comparison.) Until we heard the $2800 Airy the 901 was our favorite. We genuinely preferred it (on one arm) to a $4000 Urushi or $5500 RSP. For "only" $1500 that's pretty lofty company.

Stay tuned to the Analog message boards BTW. We're about to post an interesting offer...

dougdeacon September 22, 2004 19:13

"At the time I bought our EP-15A I asked the dealer about the balanced power unit. He actually discouraged me from buying it by saying the EP-15A yielded 95% of the benefit in his system and the SP15 only gave another 5%."

With the advantage of being able to use my Power Wedge's independently-switched outlets to choose between balanced +60/-60 and conventional +120/0 AC for each source, I've learned that not every component is equally responsive to this parameter. Looking at your system, I recall that my old CJ PV-8 preamp, very similar to your own PV-11, was as far as I could tell impervious to this factor. Yet with the Innersound preamp that followed, it made a large difference (positively on the balanced side). My current Levinson preamp cares only slightly, and my Camelot phonostage is battery-powered and therefore excused from consideration (and the turntable doesn't register a difference). The most consistent benefit has accrued to the digital front end separates (by Theta). One thing I can say is across the board, choosing balanced AC has never, ever caused degradation of any sort (though in fairness, that's vs. remaining plugged into the same isolation transformer with its center tap lifted, as opposed to removing the transformer entirely, which I haven't tried).

"Presumably the EP's clean sine wave and steady voltage help each component maintain its neutrality."

I agree that it's hard to imagine how a device like the EP or a Power Plant, which verifiably provides a better and more stable AC waveform (something I see the evidence of on a meter every time I bias my VTL amps' output tubes - much easier now!), could ever produce less accurate sound from attached components. After extensive auditioning, I concluded if I ever hear something that sounds subjectively less pleasing with the EP in-line, it's only because I'm receiving more of the truth.

For instance, after I posted above, I went down and listened to a disk I happened to have on with and without the EP, just to reconfirm my impressions because it had been a little while since my tests. The record was of The Romeros playing Vivaldi concerti transcribed for guitar and orchestra (on a Mercury import reissue pressed by Dutch Philips, with typically quiet surface and slightly dry, hard acoustic). With the EP out, the violins had a pleasantly congealed massed quality to them, very smooth, large, and agreeable. With the EP in, they sounded brighter and took on a touch of steeliness, with less apparent reverb, but were now much better individuated - they no longer sounded like a single mass but rather several slightly separated instruments playing in close unison, although not as expansive in sum. I probably enjoyed the violin sound without the EP a bit more.

But the when the guitars entered, it was no contest. Compared to with the EP in, taking it out left the strings rubbery and the fingering vague. Doubled runs got somewhat congested, and everything sounded slower and more boring, yet the piece seemed over too quickly. Put the EP in, and all the specifics and exitement returned - strings snapped instead of going 'bbboing', fingernails returned, positions on necks were made clear, and fast runs in unison or counterpoint made for twice the dynamics instead of half. Everything was infused with passion again, and the performance seemed to build and extend for longer as I listened, undoubtedly because my attention was more securely grabbed.

So I figure the touch of steel on the violins is what's on the recording, for better or worse, and the EP is simply letting that come through along with the individual action of the separate players. Maybe when I listen to this disk next time I'll take out the Telefunkens and put in the Mullards in the VTL's inputs, but the EP stays because it prevents the Romeros' guitars from being robbed of some of their vibrant life.

zaikesman September 22, 2004 10:30

Hey Doug,
Glad to hear you are so pleased with the new cartridge. Your comments in comparison to the 901 are particularly interesting as I dream about upgrading from my 501II sometime down the road. The 901 and the ZYX are at the tope of my list.
Curious to know if you've heard the 501II, and think it shares the 901's tendencies you mention above. Particularly, with regard to surface noise...thanks,
Spencer

sbank September 21, 2004 20:52

Zaikesman, thanks for the extensive report on your EP. Hopefully Steve will see this, or you can point him to it.

At the time I bought our EP-15A I asked the dealer about the balanced power unit. He actually discouraged me from buying it by saying the EP-15A yielded 95% of the benefit in his system and the SP15 only gave another 5%. You gotta love a dealer who'll turn aside a willing buyer if he doesn't think they'll get good value from a purchase. He earned our cable and interconnect business with that honesty. (Aberdeen Components, big plug to Anthony).

Our vinyl front end has improved a lot since then, so it's possible we'd appreciate that 5% more now than we would have. Great, another toy to buy! :-(

"Those who value 'bloom' over focus or 'relaxingness' over detail might not entirely like the view the EP provides. "

Perhaps this is why we liked it. Since we first got the EP we've climbed pretty high up the ladder on the vinyl side. In that process, we've learned that seekers after "PRaT" and lovers of certain analog components considered "warmly musical" are actually valuing bloom or coloration. They're listening to the equipment, not the music. We hear the seductiveness, but to us it just isn't worth the cost. Give me neutrality or give me death! Ahem. Sorry. Presumably the EP's clean sine wave and steady voltage help each component maintain its neutrality.

Your description of the EP's effects on treble and (especially) bass ring true. There's no doubt bass response is tighter and stronger, and like you we detected no significant effects on overall tonality or harmonics. Just a clearer view of what's on the source.

dougdeacon September 21, 2004 20:23

Hi Doug, congrats on your new TP arm. Just thought I'd add my commentary on the Exact Power unit in response to DTM. 10 miles up the road from him here in MD, we do have the occassional brown-out, but I can't actually recall one impinging upon a listening session since they're fairly infrequent. Nevertheless, even if they occurred twice as often, this still wouldn't have been a reason in my estimation to spend the money on the EP.

I've had mine for a couple of months now, and use it in conjunction with my trusty API Power Wedge Ultra, which follows the EP. Since all my components are plugged into the PW, I can't comment on the EP's ability to isolate among various components plugged into *it* - the iso trannies in the PW making this a non-issue in my system if it ever was one.

Following the EP with the PW and its balanced power transformers means all the source components can get balanced AC, which from what I've been able to discover experimentally is often equivalent in importance to powerline filtering and voltage/waveform correction. EP does offer a separate BPT to use in conjunction with their AC correction unit, but it doesn't have the individually isolated outlet architecture of the PW, or of course the PW's ability to switch on-the-fly between balanced and regular AC for each source independently.

I haven't yet auditioned my EP without my PW in place, so I can't talk about how it handles PLC chores alone, but I did do quite a bit of comparitive auditioning of my normal setup with and without the EP in-line, and ultimately decided it was worth keeping in the system purely on sonic merit. Like many PLC treatments it seems, the EP's effects can appear frustratingly subtle at first, but only, I believe, because they are spread out over the whole of the presentation. Put another way, its action is comprehensive rather than concentrated in any one area, and therefore can seem hard to pin down at first blush, until you get more acclimated to experiencing its overall impact on the sound quality.

In my system, the EP contributes improvements in what I call specificity - the ability of the system to maintain resolution and individuated spatial relationships among competing sonic images within the soundstage, without losing its grip on the various dynamic envelopes and unique tonalities in play. Take the EP out of the chain, and the soundstage becomes broader but flatter, with images more amorphous, vague, and subject to change under dynamic musical conditions. Put it back in, and it's like fine-tuning an aural focus control of sorts - more physical clarity and definition, increased tonal color intensity, heightened expression of fine dynamic shadings, and more 3D depth perspective - in other words, more realistic life and action. But I don't mean to imply that there's little benefit when listening to solo or quieter performances; even one singer accompanying themselves on acoustic guitar can ably demonstrate the EP's advantages of increased see-around 'thereness' and more complete excavation of fine 'touch' detail.

Another thing I notice with the EP is increased purity. The soundstage atmosphere is more crystal-clear, textures are more finely resolved, transients are defined with more pinpoint precision. Bass is also tightened-up a bit, and sounds less like it's associated with the speakers themselves - an unexpected change you could almost swear must be caused only if the speakers were to suddenly become endowed with less resonant cabinets or something, but obviously is attributable to improved operation of the electronics, most likely that of the power amps. The treble also sounds more effortlessly extended, with cymbals taking on truer tonal character and displaying less white-noise hashiness. The EP doesn't seem to have much impact on the overall tonal balance or harmonic structure as such, but rather on the systems's capacity to fully eludicate what's already there. The entire presentation displays more transparency and less veiling, smearing, or compression; you could call it more explicit, more embodied.

Again though, the changes aren't of the knock-you-over-the-head variety (especially at lower volumes, where the EP's benefits become increasinly submerged in the ambient noise floor of the listening environment), and my system still sounds good without the EP in use. In fact, it took me a while to determine that I considered the EP's action always a positive, and I can even imagine some folks not preferring its sort of effect in all circumstances. Those who value 'bloom' over focus or 'relaxingness' over detail might not entirely like the view the EP provides. And I'm sure there will be some listeners who just feel its effect is too subtle or tough to discern in their systems - or with their preferred music - for the unit to be worth the not-inconsiderable money spent. (Though I can imagine some listeners not pairing the EP with a preexisting PLC unit as I have may well find it even more efficacious than I.) But I'm convinced that it increases the overall fidelity of my system, its accuracy and ability to retrieve and transmit more of what is encoded in the source material fed it.

P.S. - Steve, I made you a CD-R we discussed a while ago but put it aside and forgot to ever label and send it, and am reminded of it now (I've been pretty scarce around a here for a while, at least compared to the way I used to hang out - not that that's an excuse for general lameness - sorry!). If you're still curious about the EP, we could even meet up so you could borrow mine for a while and determine its prospects in your system for yourself...

zaikesman September 21, 2004 19:30

System edited: Sold OL Silver with HIFI mod and VTF-on-the-fly tweak. :-( Went to a good home though. Enjoy!

dougdeacon September 21, 2004 17:22

System edited: Added the ZYX, a significant upgrade from the Shelter 901. It's just breaking in, but even fresh OOTB it is refined, neutral, self-effacing and breathtakingly quiet. Like the Tri-Planar or a Schroeder Reference, the Airy seems to be one of those rare, magical components that just steps out of the way. It seems to impose little or nothing of itself on the music. The Shelter 901 puts you right up there on the conductor's podium. You WILL hear every little noise, including surface noise. If the trombonist in the fourth row sniffs between bars, you'll hear it and the cartridge will force you to notice. It is detailed, dynamic and impressively energetic. The ZYX Airy puts you a few rows back in the hall, where what you hear is well integrated music. Imagine moving from a listening position 3 feet in front of a speaker back to the sweet spot. The Airy is, umm, hardly there at all. Lovely. It's worth noting the changes that have occured so far (10-15 hours in): - perspective has moved from back-of-the-hall to row 20, I expect this will continue to some degree as the suspension loosens up, but I doubt the Airy will ever stand us up on the podium like the Shelter does, it's just not that sort of cartridge - low-mid frequency dynamics have gone from distinctly soft to almost realistic, they were rather vague during the first 4-5 sides but then things started to wake up, this occured somewhere before hour #5, the change was quite noticeable and it's continuing to improve - HF detail is extending steadily, I have no idea where it will finish but again, I doubt it will ever be as ruthlessly revealing as the Shelter - it is NOT getting more pleasant or less edgy because it was NEVER unpleasant or edgy to begin with, the ZYX gives you a musically enjoyable breakin period, many other cartridges including a Shelter 901 are insufferable when brand new, unless you enjoy fingernails on blackboards A full review may follow once it fully breaks in.

dougdeacon August 30, 2004 14:20

Thanks, Doug.
Not sure if I've got the mindset(let alone the ch-ching)for a healthy relationship w/the Tri-P or the Schroeder. However, the 2.2 could be in my future someday.
For now, the Spacedeck/Spacearm is "set it & forget it" easy. Cheers,
Spencer

sbank July 29, 2004 01:02

Forgot to say, please DO knock on the door for a listen. Friendly A'goners are always welcome.

dougdeacon July 28, 2004 17:14

Hi Spencer,

'Cello' invited me to the audition of his Teres 340-2 (two armboard 340) about 3 weeks ago. Stomping good table, and Chris Brady came in to set it up.

Cello has a 2.2 and a Vector, both brand new, with a Shelter 901 and a Koetsu RSP. I brought my 901 along for comparisons and CB brought his Schroeder Ref and Urushi. Quite a pile of toys, which I heard for five days on his (really fine) system.

The Schroeder Ref easily beat the Graham and Basis arms. No contest. It's in another league and quite possibly in a league of its own. It's the only component of any kind I've heard that just disappears.

I "think" the Tri-P beats the 2.2 but I've only heard the Tri-P in my system and the 2.2 in Cello's. The Tri-P is certainly more articulate and clear in the bass, but it's really on the neutral side of neutral. The Graham is more forgiving of setup errors and equipment problems. The Tri-P is complex, exacting and it will tell you if you screw up anything at all. The Graham is easier to set up, work with and listen to in a relaxed way. The Tri-Planar is almost ferociously intense, which takes some getting used to.

Tri-Planar vs. Schroeder? I know one person who owns both and he says the Schroeder wins. We may still buy one, but there's a 6-8 month wait for a Reference and Frank has a new model coming on which the details are still sketchy. The Tri-P was available immediately for half the price and it met our desire for a topnotch arm with easy VTA adjustment. Don't know yet whether it's a keeper.

dougdeacon July 28, 2004 17:12

Doug, interesting post. Next time near CT, I'm hoping to come knocking on your door for a listen.
Your last comment about the Schroeder makes me curious. Did you audition it with the same system?
I occasionaly wonder about potentially upgrading my Spacedeck/Spacearm, and usually conclude that I'll need to go to a setup such as yours to get a meaningful improvement. That will be too costly for me anytime soon, but we can always dream...
So overall are you thinking the Tri-P beats the 2.2 or the Schroeder on a Teres? Cheers, Spencer

sbank July 27, 2004 18:30

Hi Ken,
You should know by now not to get me started, but you asked... :-)

We're on a major learning curve with the Tri-P. Half the adjustments on it I'd never even imagined. Then Tri Mai told me about some others that aren't even in the (generally excellent) manual. Many of these adjustments interact. For example, changing the cueing mechanism height affects the point across the record where antiskate first kicks in. Oy! Aligning a cantilever is a snooze by comparison.

We thought about a Vector and listened to one briefly. It and the cartridge on it were too new to draw meaningful conclusions, but the lack of VTA on the fly was a no-go for us anyway. The Teres VTA adapter works well, but it's below the armboard and that's just too awkward in our setup. The VTA tower on the Tri-P is robust, fine threaded and right up on top. It lacks the coarse scale that makes repeatability so easy on the Graham, but otherwise it's actually better. Smooth as silk, no tools required and large enough for Mr. Magoo.

I envy the ease of setup/use of the Graham 2.2, but this arm is faster, more dynamic, more articulate and more revealing. Nothing hides. By comparison the Graham is a bit softer, slightly warmer, a touch veiled . If the Graham is a Koetsu, the Tri-Planar is a ZYX or Shelter. If anything's wrong, you'll hear it. If everything's right, wow!

The N803's start rolling off at 32-33Hz, but we only just learned they have meaningful response down to... 16Hz. How do I know? Because we just heard the 16Hz test tone on the HFNRR resonance tracks, clear as can be! Un-friggin-believable. Our HIFI-modded OL Silver is every bit as dynamic as the Tri-P, but no way does it go this low or articulate bass so clearly. Maybe I'll play Reiner's 'Zarathustra' tonight. :-)

OTOH, the Tri-P doesn't quite take the cartridge and just disappear behind the music like the Schroeder Reference can. Then again, no other arm that I've ever heard, or even heard of, can perform that bit of magic. With the Tri-P you listen and think, "That's an amazing tonearm!" With the Schroeder you listen and think, "That's amazing music."

dougdeacon July 27, 2004 17:28

Doug- Great arm! Id love to find one for myself at some point! Either that or the Basis Vector. My good buddy brought home a pair of N803's and has them about broken in. Nice speaker!..Keep us posted on the Triplaner...Ken :-)

kehut July 23, 2004 01:58

System edited: Added the Triplanar VII. The OL Silver with Twl's mod is a fabulous performer for a sub-$1K arm. In dynamics and bass control it actually beats several world class arms. But like all Rega's it's a pain to adjust VTA, which we now do on nearly every record. The Silver also has resonance and tracing problems at mid-hi freq's, especially on inner grooves. The three top arms we've heard do these things much better. I hope to mount the Triplanar this weekend. It's quite an amazing device to look at and work with. The more you study it the more you appreciate how much thought and care went into it. Adjustments are easy to understand and everything - I mean everything - is adjustable. How many arms have you used where: a) antiskate force varies progressively across the record, to match increasing skating forces, b) you can adjust not only how much antiskate force is applied, but at what point on the record it starts to kick in and, c) you can adjust not just cueing height but also cueing speed. I don't know how it sounds yet, but it's certainly one impressive piece of kit.

dougdeacon July 22, 2004 17:58

System edited: Added the Loricraft.

dougdeacon April 30, 2004 01:30