Zero Distortion: Brinkmann Balance

[bonzo75]

The Balance is covered here and in the other TT shootout thread posted

http://zero-distortion.org/brinkmann-balance-2/

I first heard the Brinkmann Balance (BB) with Jan Allaerts Boron mk2 and the FM Acoustics electronics with the big Zellaton and the Stenheim Alumine 5, as reported here. I then decided I would break down the elements of the analog set up, given it was one of the top analog set ups I had heard. I bought the Allaerts, and then compared the Allaerts Boron mk2 to the Allaerts Finish MC Gold, Top Wing Red Sparrow, and a bespoke cart (report still to be published). I also heard the FM 123 with Art 1000 and the 122 with the Miyajima Madake at Vertere’s.

I then decided to go overboard on the balance. I heard:

1. Brinkmann Balance with Decca London Reference, FR 66s with Arche headshell, Allnic H300v and all Allnic gear with Avalon Compass at Howard’s. Also rotated SPU synergy, Koetsu Jade with Diamond Cantilever, FR 7Fz, and Zu Denon 103. I will also take my Lampi to compare here in the future.
2. Brinkmann Balance at Denis’ (dcc on WBF and Audionirvana) with Transfiguration Proteus, Allnic H3000v (KR Audio recti), into Focus Audio Maestro D’appolito with Krell electronics, TAD CD/dac, Studer tape deck
3. A shootout between Brinkmann Balance, Lagrange, Techdas AF3, GP Monaco 1.5, and Technics sp10 mk2 as documented here

 

[bonzo75]

Denis' system

 

[morricab]

Denis' system

Brinkmanns almost always sound good. Also their DD models (Bardo and Oasis) are very musically satisfying.

 

[bonzo75]

Brinkmanns almost always sound good. Also their DD models (Bardo and Oasis) are very musically satisfying.

Never heard those two

 

[microstrip]

One of the unique characteristics of the Balance is the bearing heater - does any one have a detailed photograph of the bearing inside?

 

[stsxerses]

Interesting review. I own a Brinkmann Le Grange with Ront power supply and was considering moving to a GPA Monaco 2.0. I heard the Monaco 2.0 in two rooms at Munich and really liked what I heard...image stablity, dynamics were in a different league IMO. I understand there are significant differences between the Monaco 1.5 and 2.0 and wonder whether the 2.0 would have fared better in Bonzo’s review

 

[bonzo75]

Interesting review. I own a Brinkmann Le Grange with Ront power supply and was considering moving to a GPA Monaco 2.0. I heard the Monaco 2.0 in two rooms at Munich and really liked what I heard...image stablity, dynamics were in a different league IMO. I understand there are significant differences between the Monaco 1.5 and 2.0 and wonder whether the 2.0 would have fared better in Bonzo’s review

You could also hear it with different arms .

In either case hear it properly if you are contemplating buying, also listen to the balance, stabi M, and other DDs.

As mentioned in my follow up posts I have heard the Monaco 1.0 and 1.5 before.

 

[stsxerses]

You could also hear it with different arms .

In either case hear it properly if you are contemplating buying, also listen to the balance, stabi M, and other DDs.

As mentioned in my follow up posts I have heard the Monaco 1.0 and 1.5 before.

Sound advice. I certainly liked what I heard in Munich even allowing for unfamiliar system and sub optimal listening environment. I have read in some quarters that the earlier Monaco TTs have a less fleshed out sound than other TTs but the reviews I have read of the latest Monaco 2.0 do not comment on this. It may be that other TTs suffer from a bit of bloat which the Monaco does not have. All speculation on my part. The proof would be to hear the 2.0 in my own system against the Brinkmann.

 

[bonzo75]

I am quite certain the other TTs did not have bloat relative to the Monaco. I was there in Munich. I thought the one in that CH room sounded bad, but I prefer to dismiss these data points as there you cannot isolate TTs. I never heard the one in the vox room because they mostly played digital on Saturday and Sunday.

Fremer specifically mentions the bloat point in his Balance review in comparison to SME

 

[morricab]

Interesting review. I own a Brinkmann Le Grange with Ront power supply and was considering moving to a GPA Monaco 2.0. I heard the Monaco 2.0 in two rooms at Munich and really liked what I heard...image stablity, dynamics were in a different league IMO. I understand there are significant differences between the Monaco 1.5 and 2.0 and wonder whether the 2.0 would have fared better in Bonzo’s review

Yes, the Monaco 2.0 did sound good at Munich...no flatness that I could hear. I think they have improved the speed control circuitry considerably (so vital to get it right with DD).

 

[tima]

I am quite certain the other TTs did not have bloat relative to the Monaco. I was there in Munich. I thought the one in that CH room sounded bad, but I prefer to dismiss these data points as there you cannot isolate TTs. I never heard the one in the vox room because they mostly played digital on Saturday and Sunday.



Fremer specifically mentions the bloat point in his Balance review in comparison to SME

So the CH room sounded bad?
Did you hear the Living Voice room?

 

[bonzo75]

So the CH room sounded bad?
Did you hear the Living Voice room?

No they played only digital in there whenever I went there. Sunday they played mostly digital in both the vox rooms

 

[morricab]

No they played only digital in there whenever I went there. Sunday they played mostly digital in both the vox rooms

As good as digital sounded in the Vox room the analog sounded far better.

 

[tima]

Sound advice. I certainly liked what I heard in Munich even allowing for unfamiliar system and sub optimal listening environment. I have read in some quarters that the earlier Monaco TTs have a less fleshed out sound than other TTs but the reviews I have read of the latest Monaco 2.0 do not comment on this. It may be that other TTs suffer from a bit of bloat which the Monaco does not have. All speculation on my part. The proof would be to hear the 2.0 in my own system against the Brinkmann.

I would not put too much dependence/significance on reviews of the first Monaco for gauging the present day table. Particularly given the changes made for v1.5 and the wholly new drive system in v2.0 - a lot has happened in 10 years. Nonetheless, if you're interested in the first version of the 'table you might want to consider Roy Gregory's review of the Monaco 1.0 from 2008: [url]http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/the-grand-prix-audio-monaco-turntable/[/URL] , where he addresses the topic specifically, concurring wth your speculation. Here's a little bit of that:

"... The natural assumption that goes with this is that the Monaco [v1.0] will sound leaner and less substantial than other decks and to a point that’s true. But back to back comparisons (and I’ve been exhaustive in this) always end up with the competition sounding rounded, blurred and overweight, the GPA consistently delivering better pitch security, texture and harmonic resolution, not just at low frequencies but across the board. ...."

 

[stsxerses]

I would not put too much dependence/significance on reviews of the first Monaco for gauging the present day table. Particularly given the changes made for v1.5 and the wholly new drive system in v2.0 - a lot has happened in 10 years. Nonetheless, if you're interested in the first version of the 'table you might want to consider Roy Gregory's review of the Monaco 1.0 from 2008: [url]http://www.hifiplus.com/articles/the-grand-prix-audio-monaco-turntable/[/URL] , where he addresses the topic specifically, concurring wth your speculation. Here's a little bit of that:

"... The natural assumption that goes with this is that the Monaco [v1.0] will sound leaner and less substantial than other decks and to a point that’s true. But back to back comparisons (and I’ve been exhaustive in this) always end up with the competition sounding rounded, blurred and overweight, the GPA consistently delivering better pitch security, texture and harmonic resolution, not just at low frequencies but across the board. ...."

Thanks Tima. I certainly heard the GPA 2.0 do things my Brinkmann Le Grange does not do - Roy’s comment about “the competition sounding rounded, blurred and overweight” is interesting. While I wouldnt describe my Brinkmann as “overweight” it does not have the dynamics of the GPA nor the ability to lock instruments in space with such precision based on what I heard in Munich. I was seriously impressed. My reservation about the GPA2.0 is whether I would perceive it as too lean in the mid bass...I do like a fleshed out authoritive sound (listening preferences are rock and jazz) and am wondering whether the GPA would be a step back in this area v the Brinkmann? As someone who is familiar with both the 1.5 and 2.0 I would be really interested in your impressions of how the 2.0 compares with the 1.5 in terms of presenting the mid bass and overall perceived slam/weight of sound. Many thanks and regards

 

[bonzo75]

The balance has more authority and weight than the Lagrange with more linearity throughout. At least that's what I heard, and Howard, the owner of the Avalon balance system I have mentioned owned the Lagrange before and said the balance was much better. He had the option to not buy it since he gets in-house audition from his dealer before buying and has turned down stuff before.

The authority of the balance has also been commented on by Fremer, and when I first heard it at audio arts, the authority and the tone was what attracted me to the table.

Look, I am not saying is the best. But don't buy on show auditions, or using Lagrange as a measure.

There are also other tables like stabi M, micro Seiki 8000, and Vyger Atlantis to check out

Finally Lagrange and balance are similar. If you don't find the Lagrange dynamic you won't find the balance dynamic is my guess.

 

[stsxerses]

The balance has more authority and weight than the Lagrange with more linearity throughout. At least that's what I heard, and Howard, the owner of the Avalon balance system I have mentioned owned the Lagrange before and said the balance was much better. He had the option to not buy it since he gets in-house audition from his dealer before buying and has turned down stuff before.

The authority of the balance has also been commented on by Fremer, and when I first heard it at audio arts, the authority and the tone was what attracted me to the table.

Look, I am not saying is the best. But don't buy on show auditions, or using Lagrange as a measure.

There are also other tables like stabi M, micro Seiki 8000, and Vyger Atlantis to check out

Finally Lagrange and balance are similar. If you don't find the Lagrange dynamic you won't find the balance dynamic is my guess.

I upgraded my LeGrange some years ago by substituting the new sinus motor for the old papst motor and upgrading the original power supply to the ront so the performance of my TT will be closer to the balance v the stock Le Grange - how close who knows! There is no doubt the Brinkmann is a fine TT and has given me years of pleasure, however I have the itch to see if I can significantly improve on what I have without going completely OTT - the two TTs that most interest me so far are the GPA 2.0 and the new TechDas AF3 Premium (not heard the latter only the AF1 which I liked a lot but way too rich for my budget)

 

[bonzo75]

Understand.

Also Try stabi M, and at higher prices, Vyger Atlantis (though it comes with a linear tracker, so no arm spend).

For DD, also look for used kodo beat if you are in the US.

 

[KeithR]

I've been a satisfied Bardo customer for 5 years, but still having trouble understanding the tube-rectified- power supply upgrade. Jeff Dorgay just reviewed it saying its like going from a 3-series to an M3. I think I'd prefer just moving up to an Oasis with the solid plinth, which Jeff is about to review.

On the other front, I still don't understand why the Monaco v2 is 2x the price of the original.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Keith, I thought you were going new Technics SP10R?