Sublime Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
Hmmm. I think the vdH's state of the art transparency and high resolution and "de-congestion" will manifest on any proper set-up.
Ron it isn’t that the aforementioned transparency/ high res and decongesting won’t manifest per se but whether the resulting system fit is balanced or actually too bright and skeletal for the taste of the end user.
Ron, there is no reason you should have it. You seem to prefer a different type of sound.
Yes; that is what I meant in my Post #2,418.
Tang, how would you now describe the differences in sound between the master Signature an the Grand Cru? You had previously stated that you preferred the opus to the GC. Has that now changed with better set up?
Last edited:
Tim, even though I think “ un-congested“ is an interesting term or concept, I would prefer to describe the sound of the GC in terms of what it can do or positive attributes. For me the sound of the Colibri expands to fill the room more easily than it does with other cartridges I have heard in my system. Other cartridges here have sounded "congested" by comparison.
The extreme resolution or amount of information makes it easier to experience the sense of space and atmosphere in which the instruments are playing. The instruments themselves seem better defined and understood within that space. This is what I mean when I say there is a better sense of presence then there is with the opus (in my system). The music is simply more alive. The sound is cleaner, and there is more overall clarity. As important, I have the sense that the cartridge is adding or removing less than other cartridges to the sound, at least ones that I’ve heard in my system.
In terms of visualization, the presentation is more believable, so I can “see” the musicians and instruments more than with the other cartridges I’ve had here.
As David has written, all of this is why the latest vdHs are the most natural sounding cartridges I’ve heard in my system.
Last edited:
Thank you Peter. You express your ideas well and I appreciate that.
Yes - I'm glad we agree about positive description. To have a meaning 'uncongested' (what it is not) requires a relation to something that is - to a sound that is congested and, imo, both sounds/components are needed to observe that relationship. That's why I asked if I read or used 'uncongested' in a description where the reader had not heard neither cartridges or only one, would they understand what was conveyed with the word 'uncongested' - probably not.
Probably not at least partially because 'uncongested' is not (yet) part of the conventional audiophile vocabulary. Saying what something is not can be helpful and I easily related to Tang's bringing the word forward in part because I know the Master Sig sound, however for expository writing a positive description is, imo, more descriptive, more communicative. When that is done it is okay to also include the 'uncongested' word to establish the connotation, which brings the word into the audiophile descriptive language - though that needs to happen more than once to familiarize the reader with its use.
I agree here with your positive characterizations of the VDH sound for the MS and I assume the GC. Where we may disagree in a small way is that I do not take 'uncongested' as primarily about space and atmosphere, presence and vivacity.
My positive description of uncongested is "the ability to follow multiple musical lines with clarity...". Listen to complex music, particlularly large scale symphonic works and lesser cartridges too often blur or congeal interior details, often cello and bass lines because they can be overwhelmed by brass or percussion. Often lower strings are used to establish rhythmic background that higher frequency instruments play on top of to set themes or melodies and our focus is typically with those.
But later composers don't have the rhythm section(s) repeating the same line over and over again - there's actually a lot of interesting music going on 'below the surface' even though it may not be the emphasis or thematic. Then there are big climax moments as I mentioned earlier. The VDH cartridges manage to keep all of it sorted in a way that the below the surface music does not become obscure or a muddy blur. Sometimes it does that so well that the harmonic air or resonance of an instrument or section can be heard (- here trying to draw in your 'sense of presence.') I don't think we really disagree - the foundation of all this 'uncongestedness' (pardon that) is the 'more information' of which you wrote earlier - detail whose defining consequence is a clear and open sound.
Yes - I'm glad we agree about positive description. To have a meaning 'uncongested' (what it is not) requires a relation to something that is - to a sound that is congested and, imo, both sounds/components are needed to observe that relationship. That's why I asked if I read or used 'uncongested' in a description where the reader had not heard neither cartridges or only one, would they understand what was conveyed with the word 'uncongested' - probably not.
Probably not at least partially because 'uncongested' is not (yet) part of the conventional audiophile vocabulary. Saying what something is not can be helpful and I easily related to Tang's bringing the word forward in part because I know the Master Sig sound, however for expository writing a positive description is, imo, more descriptive, more communicative. When that is done it is okay to also include the 'uncongested' word to establish the connotation, which brings the word into the audiophile descriptive language - though that needs to happen more than once to familiarize the reader with its use.
I agree here with your positive characterizations of the VDH sound for the MS and I assume the GC. Where we may disagree in a small way is that I do not take 'uncongested' as primarily about space and atmosphere, presence and vivacity.
My positive description of uncongested is "the ability to follow multiple musical lines with clarity...". Listen to complex music, particlularly large scale symphonic works and lesser cartridges too often blur or congeal interior details, often cello and bass lines because they can be overwhelmed by brass or percussion. Often lower strings are used to establish rhythmic background that higher frequency instruments play on top of to set themes or melodies and our focus is typically with those.
But later composers don't have the rhythm section(s) repeating the same line over and over again - there's actually a lot of interesting music going on 'below the surface' even though it may not be the emphasis or thematic. Then there are big climax moments as I mentioned earlier. The VDH cartridges manage to keep all of it sorted in a way that the below the surface music does not become obscure or a muddy blur. Sometimes it does that so well that the harmonic air or resonance of an instrument or section can be heard (- here trying to draw in your 'sense of presence.') I don't think we really disagree - the foundation of all this 'uncongestedness' (pardon that) is the 'more information' of which you wrote earlier - detail whose defining consequence is a clear and open sound.
Up to a point Al, my comment was based on experience with a wide sampling of systems and as @Ron Resnick mentioned vdH’s qualities are audible on any low coloration system with reasonable resolution. Personal preference doesn’t change the nature of theses cartridges.
Cartridge setup is a separate matter and will always be a variable in every case. For the sake of argument assumption is the individuals in this thread are all reasonably competent at this task.
david
Last edited:
After nine years, it is time to send my SME V-12 back to England for a complete inspection, dismantling, repair, and rebuild. The internal wiring is worn and needs replacement. I am told that it will be returned in "AS NEW" condition. Turnaround time is 10-14 days once they receive it. Communication with SME is superb, and I expect the service to be the same. I consulted with the engineers about the design of my outboard armpod on which the SME 3012R is now located and sounding excellent.
I am now even more glad that I have a second tonearm so that I still have music. I had to relevel the platter as the weight of the V-12 now missing put the upper chassis out of balance.
I am now even more glad that I have a second tonearm so that I still have music. I had to relevel the platter as the weight of the V-12 now missing put the upper chassis out of balance.
Maybe time to try out the factory position for the 3012R, just for the sake of comparison ?
That would be great and if it were possible. I would’ve tried the arm in the standard mount on the table before going to the effort of designing the outboard arm pod. Unfortunately there’s not enough clearance between the vintage arm counterweight arm tube and the suspension tower. The SME turntables were not designed to accommodate the old style tonearms.
Nice,
You will be very pleased with their service. I had engaged them some years ago on one of the SME V's I had. Somehow it came back looking like new with all the correct packaging etc.
I have heard that where they can't get the arm to look the way they would expect... on occasion, they will simply replace the arm for new and just charge the re-build price.
You will be very pleased with their service. I had engaged them some years ago on one of the SME V's I had. Somehow it came back looking like new with all the correct packaging etc.
I have heard that where they can't get the arm to look the way they would expect... on occasion, they will simply replace the arm for new and just charge the re-build price.
Doesn't this call for a mounting of the SME 3012R on the table instead of the pod?
The SME 3012R is not compatible with the SME30 turntable - the arm tube will touch the back of the pillar tower when playing. I managed to try mine because I also owned one SME3009R that is overall shorter. I f we borrow the decoupled counterweight section from the SME3009R to the SME3012R we can use it in SME30's.
Last edited:
I addressed that above. There is not enough clearance space between the arm counterweight and the suspension tower.
when the model 30 turntable came out, the engineers and Alastair were convinced the new magnesium tonearm sounded better so they offered these with the turntables as an integrated package And did not see the need to design the table to accommodate the old tonearms. This was confirmed to me by a great friend of Alastair Aikman Robinson’s.
I read that further down when I caught up in this thread.
Thanks for the explanation anyways, Micro
This is a real pity
I would have loved to know how they compare with all things being equal
Similar threads
