A tough arrangement given the difficulties in setting up a blind listening situation. Most of us simply cannot arrange it. So, at the very least, listening BEFORE you know the measurements prevents being influenced by them.
Who is the best reviewer?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
A tough arrangement given the difficulties in setting up a blind listening situation. Most of us simply cannot arrange it. So, at the very least, listening BEFORE you know the measurements prevents being influenced by them.
Only if he has an interest in the company like Fourier. Now there's an icon of unbiased reviewing.
I thought about this last night and my answer may or may not suprise people. I am going to give the nod for the best reviewer to David Wilson. Some of you may remember when DAW used to write reviews for TAS back in their golden days. I always thought DAW was a great reviewer, possessed with a great set of ears and the ability to convey to you what he was hearing. Anyone remember the cartridge reviews by DAW where he would draws pictures, charts, and diagrams to explain what he was hearing? I also thought he had high ethical standards. Something that reviewers like Steven Stone who was thrown off of TAS once for blatant violation of ethics struggled with. I didn't like Stone before they threw him out the door and I haven't liked him sense.
Mark:
I don't think your suggestion strange at all. I totally agree with everything you said about Dave. He was meticulous. The other thing was Dave would use his own tape recordings to assess the gear being reviewed. Remember the ARC vs. Rowland preamp shootout back in the early '20s I think of TAS? Dave's conclusion was that the ARC sounded better but the Rowland sounded closer to the actual tape. He also was very technically knowledgable.
Myles-I do remember that DAW had a super cool R2R with John Curl modified electronics. Before DAW became a speaker manufacturer, he was recording music and making LPs. I believe that was where the WATTs were born during Dave's recording days so he had high quality monitors to listen to his recordings on location.
As for Art Dudley, sometimes I like his writing, sometimes I don't. He loves the sound of trafos for moving coils and I don't share that love. He also seems to love anything that is really old which I don't mean to infer there is anything wrong with that. There seems to be some traction now with people believing that old Garrard tables (think 301 and 401) that are built into 500 lb plinths are the balls. Ditto with old Thorens TD-124 tables. You need to use 12" arms with SPU heads mounted on them according to Art. What I find even more interesting is that people are going back to the future with DD tables that many discarded years ago such as the Technics SP-10 (gotta be the MKII baby) table. I think Art is getting ready to tell us next that 78 RPM records are the bomb. And if you buy a Garrard 301, make sure you get the one with the grease fitting for the motor because that is the holy grail of 301s.
Art Dudley is a skilled writer and injects an appropriate level of levity. He also can't help but inject his political leanings as well. Not cool.
mep,
Jeff Dorgay owns Tone audio which is a PDF based download from the internet.
As for Art Dudley, I have no opinion of his ability either way but will defend his position if he supports older turntable drive system technology.
The reason for my statement?
Turntables went through a revolution when the AR belt drive was introduced for $59.00 or $69.00 back in the mid 1960s. I ran a high end store and sold a lot of them. Just like music lovers today, many people could not afford the Thorens and were searching for an affordable high performance alternative. The AR was silent and reasonably speed accurate and even though the tonearm was mostly plastic, it worked pretty well, especially with the most popular MM cartridges of that day.
The popularity of the AR caused other manufacturers to adopt belt drive, which has many cost and performance advantages. What's amazing is to listen to them all and discover the drive system is one of several important factors that influence sound. I think it's a significant factor and has much to do with speed. I won't enter into all the subjective analysis of why and how each drive sounds except to each drive design (system) has it's own dynamic + speed accuracy sound.
Albert, thanks for the info. I have never heard an old Garrard 301, 401, or Thorens TD-124 so I have no opinion of them and it would be silly if I did. I would like to hear one properly set up and see/hear what the fuss is about. I had the original AR table and I also had the newer version of the AR table with an MMT arm. I always thought belt tables sounded much more dynamic and therefore more life like than DD tables I compared them to. But now some people are going down the DD path again and I really don't know about that road either. I have an old VPI TNT which has had the bearing worked over by a machinist so it is better than new. I own the SDS controller and check my speed regurarly so I don't think speed stability is an issue for me. I am happy with what I have.
I'm not sure if Jeff wrote for Soundstage at one time or not. He has his own online mag published every month called Tone Audio.
I do want to give Jeff some credit. He has, hands down, the best looking and laid out online audio magazine. What he does now with his layout was impossible but ten years ago with the internet. I know, I wanted to do it back then. And he does try and cover a wide range of equipment in Tone Audio.
Jeff usually hangs out at Steve Hoffman's or the ML owners forums.
I always thought that John Curl was a brilliant engineer and any company that uses his services is lucky. His thumbprints are all over the high end. Didn't he design much of Mark Levinson's early gear like the JC-2 phono preamp?
Hi
I also remember DAW from the early, glorious days of TAS, I also liked PHD ..
now I have a problem with this conclusion...
... Would that mean closer to the recording? If that was the case how could the ARC sound "better"
? That he preferred the ARC. Fine but if the other is closer to what he remembers from the performance, wouldn't that mean that the component acquitted itself of its duties better? that is to reproduce as well as it could ? ... I must say I liked the Rowland Coherence One, that was one hell of a preamp ...
By the way right now enjoying through Headphones Dvorak Cello Concerto, Bruch Kol Nidei with Antal Dorati and the LSO, next Hanson Symphonies on Mercury still ...
Similar threads
