Ron in my humble opinion we should all learn to accept that each and every one of us has different preferences and our ideas about our goal sound is different.
Collectively we (myself included) often look to others to validate our opinions before deciding to move forward with a decision. Indeed we can often go as far as to purchase something that deep down we have reservations on yet a small collective online may/may not support.
To quote Tim Gurney on my other thread, I think we are better to embrace the concept of my sound <> your sound and be comfortable in that decision and accept that our vision of the goal will be different from person to person.
The interesting thing is the Sparrow is often bereft of fullness / meat on the wrong arm. On the SMEV, it is much faster and dynamic with very high levels of insight vs what you heard - you would not recognise it. The DaVa is much more on the lush side even on the V.
I am getting a 2nd tonearm on my Sati. I have ordered the very last The Peak arm from Stefano Bertoncello, which should be ideal with DaVa due to very high effective mass. A big, simple, high mass, 12” arm.
Question is whether you will still want to stick with the leaner presentation you have or change your cart in due course to something a little fuller.
Bill, well it's quite a chameleon is the Straingauge. It is indeed very full when the recording calls for it. Can just be jarring when LPs that were more palpable in the past now sound a bit leaner. A few reasons for this, including previous homogeneity now stripped out w my recent system changes, and my analog being much more revealing of what's best, and what's indeed quite moderate.
And I still have some way to go on finding optimal level of damping/isolating my new motor.
I have heard the Opus 1 several times, three of those times on the Bergmann Galder + Odin. I have never disliked the sound of a system fronted by an Opus 1.
No, never alone. But it is an interesting triangulating data point. It can be useful as a part of a process of elimination.
If I don't care for the sound of a system with a recording I know well and like, then some component, to my ears, is doing something wrong, at least in that particular system.
Taking these photos I am standing at the front wall looking towards the back of the room. You see the opening to the equipment room on the left, and then two large fixed glass windows (covered in orange paper), and then the glass breakfast nook (the exterior wall of which is covered in yellow paper) which extends five feet behind the windows on the left, and then the glass wall panels to the kitchen on the right.
I have been planning to put a drop down shade in the opening between the listening room and the equipment room; shades over the two large glass panels; a movable curtain to block the glass breakfast nook and a movable curtain covering most of the glass wall panels to the kitchen.
After speaking with David I think I am going to drop the idea of a shade in the opening between the listening room in the equipment room, and the idea of a movable curtain covering most of the glass wall of the kitchen. The glass wall of the kitchen will be retracted and open when I'm listening to music.
I think it makes sense to start out simpler. David recommends natural wood shutters or blinds. He believes that most fabrics have uneven frequency absorption characteristics. I would prefer vertical slats for decor reasons.
I think I am going to leave the top window uncovered; specify vertical wood slats in a color similar to natural walnut in the large lower window, and extend those slats to the right between the wall and the track of the kitchen glass wall panels.
In the first photo you can see the swing-out wall-mounted lights. Six lights are spaced every two feet and are located above where the equipment racks will be placed. Floor-standing MikeL lamps will be added later. I want that turntable lit up like an alien landing pad.
This overstates the point and the analogy is awkward, but if one regularly looks at a antique coin with a magnifying loupe, every once in a while one might want to put the coin under a microscope, just to see what is really there. I feel something in this direction (but not nearly so far) with the Grand Cru. Putting it differently, I want my music listening to be an emotional exercise, but I find the Grand Cru to be an intellectual exercise.
Sure - and that's great you have that relaxing experience.
I was not trying to imply anything. And although I maybe should have written more, I figured not to take your room thread too far off topic. Now I will ;-)
I was responding to the notion of listening to music as an emotional exercise versus listening to music as an intellectual exercise per the distinction you made in #2,215. This is not to argue with your experience or try to encourage you favorably to the vdH cartridges, but simply to discuss. But I'm skeptical of introducing a bright distinction between emotional and intellectual listening that is mutually exclusive.
The dichotomy can happen on several levels. I may find a piece of music not to my taste, both boring intellectualy and emotionally uninvolving. Or intellectualy satisfying without much emotive response on my part. Some of Stravinsky's smaller works are that way for me. Yet, positive emotive response doesn't always mean relaxing as I also enjoy music that excites me, I would say stimulates me. Several of Stravinsky's larger pieces do that for me. It's a notion of music appreciation - both of a fine performance and for what the composer has written - that doesn't require a total limbic level experience to enjoy.
Perhaps as Justin Hayward wrote, it's a question of balance. I suppose we each discover our own tipping point(s).
Several of Stravinsky's larger pieces do that for me. It's a notion of music appreciation - both of a fine performance and for what the composer has written - that doesn't require a total limbic level experience to enjoy.
Perhaps as Justin Hayward wrote, it's a question of balance. I suppose we each discover our own tipping point(s).
. . .
I was responding to the notion of listening to music as an emotional exercise versus listening to music as an intellectual exercise per the distinction you made in #2,215. . . .
But I'm skeptical of introducing a bright distinction between emotional and intellectual listening that is mutually exclusive.
. . .
I, too, am skeptical of introducing a bright line distinction between emotional intellectual listening. I certainly do not think they are mutually exclusive.
With my "ears have no trouble relaxing" comment, I was referring merely to a reflexive reaction of my ears to edgy sounds (like screeching bus brakes in Manhattan), not to an emotional or intellectual reaction in my brain.
I bought a Taiko Tana/Herzan TS-140 a couple of years ago, thinking I would put the Aesthetix Io phono stage amplification unit on top of it. It turns out that the Io on top of the Tana is too tall to fit inside the box compartment -- within the inside dimension -- of my turntable stand. For a variety of reasons I don't want to place the components in a different configuration so the Io could be on the top of the stand.
So I've been trying, unsuccessfully, to sell my Tana.
Separately, I will need amp stands for the VTL Siegfried IIs. I will have all of the other components in the adjacent equipment room. But the amplifiers inevitably will be bathing in a sea of vibration. So I have been researching CMS and HRS and Adona and Symposium Acoustics amp stands.
Then I stumbled upon this idea: instead of selling the Tana because I can't use it under the Io maybe I should get a second Taiko Tana/Herzan TS-140 (for approximately the same cost as a pair of CMS or HRS reference amp stands) and use them as amp stands for the VTLs?
MikeL is very happy with his darTZeel 468 solid-state amplifiers on his Tanas. Tube amplifiers, a fortiori, should be even happier sitting on active isolation platforms.