New SME Flagship Model 60

[bonzo75]

… and kaguras besides sfz as far as I can see from the picture.

With Amperex, United, and WE 242c. When I was there he was using Amperex. Next time.WE.

Also G1000 and G10

 

[mtemur]

I would not be at all surprise that the SME30 and AF3P are more different than alike. My comments are about the Air Force 1 that I directly compared to the American Sound AS2000. I have never heard, and did not comment on, the AF3P. It appears to be a very different design from the AF1.

I saw no evidence that AF1 and AF3 premium models are too different. they’re basically the same. AF1 has air suspension feet that’s all. motor is claimed to be different but I suspect. AF2P and AF3P are quite the same for example. AF2P has air suspension feet also.

 

[ddk]

I saw no evidence that AF1 and AF3 premium models are too different. they’re basically the same. AF1 has air suspension feet that’s all. motor is claimed to be different but I suspect. AF2P and AF3P are quite the same for example. AF2P has air suspension feet also.

AF1 & AF3 premium are very different turntables in design and sound quality aside from the same floating system they have nothing in common.

david

 

[ddk]

I heard 4 EMT 927s and only liked Tang's. Pleasing is often a term used for color tinted valves here so that way it is not pleasing. What Tang's EMT did was it had the best PRAT I heard. Just awesome timing. It made you break into an Elvis, really had the groove, extremely lively. It is big sounding but so is Garrard, and just being big sounding is not the thing, it's rhythm and timing is great. It's main drawback was lack of nuance for classical, in inner note inflections as well as in separation of instruments. Tang later tried many experiments including using vdh to increase nuance but by reports don't think he succeeded. For certain music it was awesome and if I had an expensive TT harem, it will be first choice for a second table, i.e. one that is dedicated as first choice to play certain music, but cannot play all music so can't be a choice if one owns only one TT.

In vintage idlers the Silbatone WE room in Munich, where Schick and Schroeder themselves man the analog, have also played modded Commnwealth and dual platter lencos which have been the best analog in Munich (without benefit of isolation, though they have a tape deck and till 2018 a dCS there to compare to). In fact if I had the dough I would have offered them the money in 2019 for the dual platter lenco with vdh strad to take back after the show. Picture is at the bottom of the linked page http://zero-distortion.org/munich-2019/

Don’t know in what context you heard multiple 927s in or what was their condition but when properly setup it’s unbeatable. Many owners use EMT’s built-in phono stage which is mediocre at best maybe that’s what you heard in other places and poor setup. Tang’s EMT suffered from the AS tonearm which lacks resolution and bass, not a good match for the EMT who’s only shortcoming is very deep bass.

david

 

[ALF]

I’m also a big fan of the EMT 927, which I first had experienced at David’s home. The built-in phonostage is fun, but as David mentioned, an alternate solution can be preferable.

I have played with the fully reconditioned 927st from the folks in Germany for over a year now. A little mental, I recently received a fully reconditioned 927f from the kind fellow in The Netherlands.

To concur with Ked, I completely understand his Elvis impression .

vbw,
-a

 

[Tango]

Don’t know in what context you heard multiple 927s in or what was their condition but when properly setup it’s unbeatable. Many owners use EMT’s built-in phono stage which is mediocre at best maybe that’s what you heard in other places and poor setup. Tang’s EMT suffered from the AS tonearm which lacks resolution and bass, not a good match for the EMT who’s only shortcoming is very deep bass.

david

It does lack resolution comparing to the American Sound and also has different kind of bass. The EMT banana arm and Ortofon 297 that came with it lack resolution even more.

 

[ALF]

It does lack resolution comparing to the American Sound and also has different kind of bass. The EMT banana arm and Ortofon 297 that came with it lack resolution even more.

Resolution or Elvis…in Tang’s case, he has both

vbw,
-a

 

[mtemur]

AF1 & AF3 premium are very different turntables in design and sound quality aside from the same floating system they have nothing in common.

david

no they’re not. add a good isolation platform under AF3P and you’re good to go.

 

[ddk]

no they’re not. add a good isolation platform under AF3P and you’re good to go.

Aside from floating platters and vacuum which other completely different tts also have please point out a single commonality between the two models, physically or sonically. I deal with both tts regularly and even kept one of them, they are very different products.
david

 

[bonzo75]

I’m also a big fan of the EMT 927, which I first had experienced at David’s home. The built-in phonostage is fun, but as David mentioned, an alternate solution can be preferable.

I have played with the fully reconditioned 927st from the folks in Germany for over a year now. A little mental, I recently received a fully reconditioned 927f from the kind fellow in The Netherlands.

To concur with Ked, I completely understand his Elvis impression .

vbw,
-a

So the f from NL is better than the ST from DE?

 

[mtemur]

Aside from floating platters and vacuum which other completely different tts also have please point out a single commonality between the two models

you should explain first how different they are cause as you can see below you commented before me that they're totally different.

AF1 & AF3 premium are very different turntables in design and sound quality aside from the same floating system they have nothing in common.

and you should explain their being extremely different cause we were discussing if SME 30/12 and AF1 have a similar dampened sound signature or not. so the case is not about slight differences, it's about day and night differences between AF3P and AF1. so big that we should be convinced even a totally different approach like SME 30/12 can sound like AF1 while AF3P can't. I should make a note of that I deal with techdas turntables too. and I'm also very familiar with SME turntables and tonearms.

 

[bonzo75]

This is why my friend who had multiple SME tables didn't pair them with SME arms, but usually Graham Phantom or Triplanar. I didn't like these combos much.

I despise the TD124, but the Garrards are fun. Just not as a primary table.

Pleasing is fine. Pleasant on the other hand is a kiss of death. The TD124 is pleasant.

It will be good if your friends using Graham and Triplanar on SME tables can produce the level of resolution of this EMT 30st with Heifetz Sibelius. Speaker's corner reissue so easy access

 

[Ron Resnick]

What do you think is meant by the phrase “reproducing the recorded information of the background noise“? I find the phrase very confusing.

+1

As a matter of linguistic interpretation I think the clause in quotes is confusing.

"recorded information": The author is obviously referring to some information which is being recorded.

"background noise": Does this mean the ambient noise in a venue (for example, coughing, glasses clinking, air conditioning) before musicians start playing? Or does this mean the "self-noise" generated acoustically or magnetically or by EMI/RFI from the recording equipment itself or from the inherent noise level of the recording machine and the recording electronics? (I think at least some self-noise of components can be recorded and become part of the recording.) Or does this mean both of these sources of noise?

I agree with Peter that it is impossible to understand with any reasonable level of certainty what this clause means.

 

[Argonaut]

Does this mean the ambient noise in a venue (for example, coughing, glasses clinking, air conditioning) before musicians start playing?

I read the comment as meaning this Ron.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I read the comment as meaning this Ron.

Thank you. But there is no way to know the meaning intended by the author.

We can build competing arguments based upon the clause just for fun, but there is no principled support for the opinions underlying those arguments -- unless one stipulates in advance the interpretation of the clause that one is adopting and upon which one's following argument is based.

 

[Argonaut]

I merely employed Mr Holms consideration Ron :

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? “

For my part the only thing that made sense.

 

[PeterA]

Thank you. But there is no way to know the meaning intended by the author.

We can build competing arguments based upon the clause just for fun, but there is no principled support for the opinions underlying those arguments -- unless one stipulates in advance the interpretation of the clause that one is adopting and upon which one's following argument is based.

Ron, I’m glad I’m not the only one confused by this phrase. I have been heavily criticized for expressing the opinion that “black background” is a negative thing. People tell me it refers to a very low noise floor. And a jet black background is an exceedingly low noise floor. Often this is accompanied by a lack of ambient information being presented by the system as though it is been sucked away or covered over. This to me results in a lack of life to the music. I prefer the expression “low noise floor “.

Now we have the word noise. Noise is usually considered a negative in his hobby. The less noise the better for reproducing the information that is embedded on the recording. However in this quote about the TechDAS turntable, noise is suddenly a good thing and details like glasses clinking people breathing and clapping. If that is what is meant by “background noise“, then why not just refer to that as sounds from a live performance distinct from the music, or low level information?

One of the big problems discussing this stuff on an audio forum is the language we use to describe what we hear. It is a very difficult task. I I think the stated design goal of the designer of the Air Force one turntable could have been expressed more clearly. He could have just said he wants to achieve a digital like silence in both a low noise floor to reveal more ambient information embedded on the recording, and also a digital like silence between music tracks devoid of vinyl surface noise, clicks and pops. The fact that he did not express this clearly leaves it open to interpretation and confusion. It remains clear however, that the turntable was designed during the digital era and that something about digital silence captured his interest.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I merely employed Mr Holms consideration Ron :

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? “

For my part the only thing that made sense.

Fair enough. There's nothing to quibble about here. I don't consider the other interpretation at all "impossible."

In my view there is no textual basis for knowing which interpretation the writer of that clause intended for the meaning of "background noise."

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . . he wants to achieve a digital like silence in both a low noise floor to reveal more ambient information embedded on the recording, and also a digital like silence between music tracks devoid of vinyl surface noise, clicks and pops. The fact that he did not express this clearly leaves it open to interpretation and confusion. It remains clear however, that the turntable was designed during the digital era and that something about digital silence captured his interest.

I think your reformulation (emphasis added) of what the author probably intended is excellent.

 

[ddk]

you should explain first how different they are cause as you can see below you commented before me that they're totally different.


and you should explain their being extremely different cause we were discussing if SME 30/12 and AF1 have a similar dampened sound signature or not. so the case is not about slight differences, it's about day and night differences between AF3P and AF1. so big that we should be convinced even a totally different approach like SME 30/12 can sound like AF1 while AF3P can't. I should make a note of that I deal with techdas turntables too. and I'm also very familiar with SME turntables and tonearms.

It was this post of yours that I replied to nothing to do with anything SME.

I saw no evidence that AF1 and AF3 premium models are too different. they’re basically the same. AF1 has air suspension feet that’s all. motor is claimed to be different but I suspect. AF2P and AF3P are quite the same for example. AF2P has air suspension feet also.

and since you deal with techdas, would be nice to know in what capacity as well, it should be very easy for you to answer the question and back up your claim and don't try to change the subject please "Aside from floating platters and vacuum which other completely different tts also have please point out a single commonality between the two models, physically or sonically."

david