VAC 452 iQ review in Stereophile

[bonzo75]

My abiding memory of Fremer was his championing of the little Whest phono, a small, inexpensive (sub-£500) British boutique product. He gave it a 5* review, saying it gave the big $25k Boulder phono (2000 era pricing) a reasonable run for it's money.

The next issue came the retraction from him...he wanted to make quite clear that the Whest couldn't really match up to the Boulder, and he'd been imprecise w his words.

I must say, I was so impressed w that whole episode.

A simple googling tells me he said differently to your interpretation. Following is his article from 2005 in the below link

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/whest-phonostage20-phono-preamplifier
"But at only a tenth the cost, it comes closer to the Boulder 2008's performance than it has any right to. That it's good enough to be mentioned in the same paragraph should tell you something about how good I think it is"

"what was there immediately reminded me in many ways of both the Boulder 2008 and the fabled Mares 2.0. I'm not saying the Whest is as good as either of those, but it belongs at the same table." (emphasis mine)

"It carved 3D images as well as any phono preamp save the Boulder and Mares"

And then his follow up article is quoted there

"Fearing I'd gone overboard in my praise of the Whest PhonoStage.20 phono preamp ($2595) in my March column, I took a second listen—once the full-range, very revealing Wilson Audio MAXX2 loudspeakers had been installed in my system. While I stand by my praise of the Whest, it's not in the same league as the Boulder 2008 ($29,000)—or the Manley Steelhead ($7300), for that matter—though some overoptimistic souls have read that into what I wrote." (emphasis mine). Also in my earlier post in this thread I mentioned that to understand reviewers, you need to read their follow up articles. This is another example.

He still praises it in the follow up.

Btw, I have heard a Whest, not sure what model but one of the cheaper ones - at Barry2013 and it is really impressive

 

[spiritofmusic]

I've never seen Fremer feel he needs to overcompensate for his adoring fans. Indeed, he doesn't suffer fools gladly.

What is a fact is that Boulder were so perturbed by what he'd written about the Whest, they felt they had to contact him. And thus the follow up.

Maybe Fremer instead of telling readers not to read too much into his review should have directed that comment at Boulder.

 

[morricab]

A simple googling tells me he said differently to your interpretation. Following is his article from 2005 in the below link

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/whest-phonostage20-phono-preamplifier
"But at only a tenth the cost, it comes closer to the Boulder 2008's performance than it has any right to. That it's good enough to be mentioned in the same paragraph should tell you something about how good I think it is"

"what was there immediately reminded me in many ways of both the Boulder 2008 and the fabled Mares 2.0. I'm not saying the Whest is as good as either of those, but it belongs at the same table." (emphasis mine)

"It carved 3D images as well as any phono preamp save the Boulder and Mares"

And then his follow up article is quoted there

"Fearing I'd gone overboard in my praise of the Whest PhonoStage.20 phono preamp ($2595) in my March column, I took a second listen—once the full-range, very revealing Wilson Audio MAXX2 loudspeakers had been installed in my system. While I stand by my praise of the Whest, it's not in the same league as the Boulder 2008 ($29,000)—or the Manley Steelhead ($7300), for that matter—though some overoptimistic souls have read that into what I wrote." (emphasis mine). Also in my earlier post in this thread I mentioned that to understand reviewers, you need to read their follow up articles. This is another example.

He still praises it in the follow up.

Btw, I have heard a Whest, not sure what model but one of the cheaper ones - at Barry2013 and it is really impressive

Why don’t you guys just argue how many angels will fit on the head of a needle...

 

[spiritofmusic]

Depends how you define "fits". Can they stand on each other's shoulders, circus fashion?

 

[morricab]

Depends how you define "fits". Can they stand on each other's shoulders, circus fashion?

Let's see...oh never mind...

 

[bonzo75]

Yes, due to his writing skills he has influenced a generation of audiophiles...but to what end? HP was the big influencer of a generation before but seemed genuinely interested in the actual pursuit but I think JV is interested in his influence and what goodies he can collect. I got really turned off by JV when the cable selling scandal broke and also his endless cheerleading brands that, to my ears, were not sure what he claimed.
Prior to that, I too was impressed with the clarity and style of his writing. But I stopped reading him once I felt he was not putting honest opinions out.

What was the cable selling scandal of JV?

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . .

Fremer . . . I don't really think he has a great handle on how the real thing should sound. . . .

What is the basis of this opinion?

How are you in a position to opine upon the extent to which Michael Fremer doesn't know what live music sounds like?

Are you implying that Michael has not actually attended live musical performances which he claims to have attended?

Have you attended a live music concert with him and during the concert he mis-identified certain musical instruments?

 

[tima]

What is the basis of this opinion?

How are you in a position to opine upon the extent to which Michael Fremer doesn't know what live music sounds like?

Are you implying that Michael has not actually attended live musical performances which he claims to have attended?

Have you attended a live music concert with him and during the concert he mis-identified certain musical instruments?

I don't think those are fair comments. I think morricab was stating his opinion - he's allowed to have one. If you carefully read what he wrote, he did not imply anything. Fremer writes what he writes and readers are entitled to think what they think. With all due respect, Ron, It sounds like you disagree with that - which is your opinion.

I think at least [Fremer] has some intellectual honesty even if I don't really think he has a great handle on how the real thing should sound.

I don't believe morriecab was saying that Fremer does not know what live music sounds like. First off, that would be stupid and Brad isn't that, and second off, he did not say that.

"How the real thing should sound" - is not about a given live performance or live performances generally - it's not saying: "gosh that quartett should have played that music differently and Fremer does not know that."

Read the above quote from Brad and imagine the following words are at the end of Brad's sentence: "when reproduced." Does that cause his words to make better sense?

"I don't really think he has a great handle on how the real thing should sound when reproduced." It's an opinion. I'm guessing you disagree, which is okay. But why not offer reasons or defence why Fremer's opinion about how such-and-such component does reflect how it truly sounds like "the real thing"? To me, that could be more interesting and contributory than attacking someone's opinion or thought process, albeit socratically.

 

[bonzo75]

First off, that would be stupid and Brad isn't that

He ran big panels in small rooms under driven by SETs

 

[bonzo75]

I think morricab was stating his opinion - he's allowed to have one.

Everyone is allowed to have an opinion here. In the last two or three days, we have had the following

1. Coibiri stradivarius has lesser sibilance than MS stradivarius, no data point
2. Andromeda stated he is free to comment on Lampi without hearing it because of his experience with other tubed output stages
3. Marc gave an opinion on what he thought Fremer wrote, which was not what he actually wrote
4. Ron gave opinions on digital
5. XVX was opined to be good because the new owner said his friend who visited had positive things to say to the owner
6. Folsom's medical advise before that

Freedom for all, is free for all

 

[tima]

Everyone is allowed to have an opinion here. In the last two or three days, we have had the following

1. Coibiri stradivarius has lesser sibilance than MS stradivarius, no data point
2. Andromeda stated he is free to comment on Lampi without hearing it because of his experience with other tubed output stages
3. Marc gave an opinion on what he thought Fremer wrote, which was not what he actually wrote
4. Ron gave opinions on digital
5. XVX was opined to be good because the new owner said his friend who visited had positive things to say to the owner
6. Folsom's medical advise before that

Freedom for all, is free for all

That's rather Orwellian but not unexpected.
Thank goodness you're here to sort us all out.

 

[morricab]

He ran big panels in small rooms under driven by SETs

What does that have to do with being stupid? It was an experiment (something you obviously wouldn't know about) that went very right in fact as many who heard it gave strong positive testimony to that fact. It seems you have no original ideas of your own, which explains your world tours to "collect" ideas. You are a tourist, a voyeur, and a copycat...not a guru. Given how you have flipped and flopped around what systems you think are now "best" tells me you have a similar issue correlating what you hear live to what you hear from reproduced.

 

[morricab]

Everyone is allowed to have an opinion here. In the last two or three days, we have had the following

1. Coibiri stradivarius has lesser sibilance than MS stradivarius, no data point
2. Andromeda stated he is free to comment on Lampi without hearing it because of his experience with other tubed output stages
3. Marc gave an opinion on what he thought Fremer wrote, which was not what he actually wrote
4. Ron gave opinions on digital
5. XVX was opined to be good because the new owner said his friend who visited had positive things to say to the owner
6. Folsom's medical advise before that

Freedom for all, is free for all

I guess you decided it was too long to list all of your opinions...we would probably all die of boredom trying to read that list anyway...

 

[bonzo75]

What does that have to do with being stupid? It was an experiment (something you obviously wouldn't know about) that went very right in fact as many who heard it gave strong positive testimony to that fact. It seems you have no original ideas of your own, which explains your world tours to "collect" ideas. You are a tourist, a voyeur, and a copycat...not a guru. Given how you have flipped and flopped around what systems you think are now "best" tells me you have a similar issue correlating what you hear live to what you hear from reproduced.

Experiment is very different from mentioning each time it worked.

I never claimed to be a guru. copycat is great, I always give credit where its due, and always better to learn from the experience of people. You should try it. Had no idea you were trying to be a guru instead, but that explains

What you call flip-flop, i call learning from new exposure

 

[morricab]

What is the basis of this opinion?

How are you in a position to opine upon the extent to which Michael Fremer doesn't know what live music sounds like?

Are you implying that Michael has not actually attended live musical performances which he claims to have attended?

Have you attended a live music concert with him and during the concert he mis-identified certain musical instruments?

I am basing it on the fact that everytime MF reviews tube electronics he keeps bringing out old chestnuts regarding the differences between SS and tubes that tell me he hears the difference but not which one is closer to what he hears live. That doesn't seem to be in his vocabulary.

Why would what I said imply that he hasn't been to the concerts he claims? I said that he doesn't seem to be able to translate the experience.

Obviously i haven't attended a concert with him and even if he mis-identified an instrument...so what? This is a very crude analysis and only the most basic level of listening. Being able to tell when a system is reproducing the timbre, detail and dynamics (micro and macro) close to what one hears live is subtle and not many audiophiles I know even understand what I am talking about. I think Michael is still stuck in the compare and contrast without a real anchor...maybe I am wrong but this is how it comes across in his reviews.

He is very good at describing WHAT he hears but not nearly as good as he should be with how is that relevant to what we hear with the real thing. That is my analysis of his reviews...not anything to do with sitting with him or talking directly with him etc. If you disagree with my analysis please state why. I can go deeper with specific examples from his reviews but suffice to say that would be a much longer post.

 

[bonzo75]

I am basing it on the fact that everytime MF reviews tube electronics he keeps bringing out old chestnuts regarding the differences between SS and tubes that tell me he hears the difference but not which one is closer to what he hears live. That doesn't seem to be in his vocabulary.

He has always preferred his Ypsilon phono to other phonos. He complimented Lyra's new Lambda cartridge saying it was like a tube has been inserted into the Atlas. Do you guys actually read what he writes or read what you think how he listens?

He was also quite effusive in praise about the 90k Ypsilon hybrids. He prefers Dartzeel more.

 

[morricab]

Experiment is very different from mentioning each time it worked.

I never claimed to be a guru. copycat is great, I always give credit where its due, and always better to learn from the experience of people. You should try it. Had no idea you were trying to be a guru instead, but that explains

What you call flip-flop, i call learning from new exposure

Your denigration of others systems is a defacto attempt to be a guru whether you state it or not.

I have my influences...like everyone else... suffice to say they come from the more esoteric corners of high end...

A guru?? That is not for me to say...suffice to say I share my systems and experience and quite a few have seemed to really benefit from it.

 

[bonzo75]

Your denigration of others systems is a defacto attempt to be a guru whether you state it or not.

I have my influences...like everyone else... suffice to say they come from the more esoteric corners of high end...

A guru?? That is not for me to say...suffice to say I share my systems and experience and quite a few have seemed to really benefit from it.

you denigrate systems you haven't heard, like Mike's and you denigrate based on Munich demos.

 

[morricab]

He has always preferred his Ypsilon phono to other phonos. He complimented Lyra's new Lambda cartridge saying it was like a tube has been inserted into the Atlas. Do you guys actually read what he writes or read what you think how he listens?

He was also quite effusive in praise about the 90k Ypsilon hybrids. He prefers Dartzeel more.

I am pretty sure I have been reading Fremer longer than you have (as in from his very first days). I read most of his reviews and have found much there that was interesting. That doesn't change my analysis.

 

[morricab]

you denigrate systems you haven't heard, like Mike's and you denigrate based on Munich demos.

I have not denigrated Mike's system...I am skeptical that it can sound as good as you (and some others) claim but that is not the same as denigration...