No, im stating put. My analog rig is good enough for my listening preferences.
Id also have to hear the SP10r in my rig which is difficult. Im not certain it outperforms Brinkmann DD.
Zero Distortion: Brinkmann Balance
- Thread starter bonzo75
- Start date
No, im stating put. My analog rig is good enough for my listening preferences.
Id also have to hear the SP10r in my rig which is difficult. Im not certain it outperforms Brinkmann DD.
+1. Brinkmann seriously has his head screwed on. He refuses to do this slam bang fake dynamics with lack of tone or balance many more courier modern TTs are doing (not referring to sp10r as haven't heard it).
I can see why brinkmann can sound boring to some.
Justin, when I was with you, the TT was not playing. If you remember, I said why is this sounding like a CD? Then you went closer and had a look, and the cartridge was above the LP and not into the groove, and it was indeed the CD that was playing. I was not there when the TT was playing.
This is a very provocative comment. It seems that you could very quickly hear that the sound was not vinyl but digital. Was that because of a lack of analog noise or something else? What attribute made it sound like a CD?
It was lack of analog. But it was just a remark, an instinct, the remark was made on walking in, from further away near the door. The TT was rotating with the cart on the vinyl. Only after Justin walked closer did he realize it was not touching the groove, just hanging there.
Aha
I have a friend who likes to do that pretend ......to play a record but actually play a CD and see what people say
You wiould be amazed how many people say oh how greats this vinyl
On an aside, there is some thought that the noise of vinyl enhances certain frequencies or masks them, which is why CD seems cold as there is so little noise in comparison .
I’ll freely confess I went to a product launch demo 20 years ago at the height of my tirade against cd. Music was playing w surface noise reasonably prominent. I opined to my mate how great vinyl was despite all that pop and crackle, only to embarrassingly discover a cd was playing, one recorded w surface noise. Yowza!
I never made any assertion to Kedar whether I thought it was a record or not. I was just thinking it was digital, and Ked mentioned it, so I walked over to make sure. We had been wondering about the cartridge and asked what it was, if I remember correctly. I certainly walked out with a Fuuga leaflet.
Lack of surface noise is the sure clue as Kevin is always playing classical, so it seems, and there was no surface noise. I often wonder how classical fans can cope with vinyl as much classical material contains quiet parts for prolonged periods sometimes, and it can get swamped by noise on vinyl.
Now rock, pop, reggae etc I understand on vinyl, but classical? I couldn't cope with it on quieter pieces, especially with sub par vinyl. Louder pieces then fine I suppose, but I just don't normally listen to it, so I'm generally fine when using vinyl, which is rare these days.
Lack of surface noise is the sure clue as Kevin is always playing classical, so it seems, and there was no surface noise. I often wonder how classical fans can cope with vinyl as much classical material contains quiet parts for prolonged periods sometimes, and it can get swamped by noise on vinyl.
Now rock, pop, reggae etc I understand on vinyl, but classical? I couldn't cope with it on quieter pieces, especially with sub par vinyl. Louder pieces then fine I suppose, but I just don't normally listen to it, so I'm generally fine when using vinyl, which is rare these days.
You anti lp guys are such soft touches .
Surface noise, just get past it.
Now digital hash, that’s something to REALLY object to .
Surface noise, just get past it.
Now digital hash, that’s something to REALLY object to .
Hi stsxerses - with the Monaco 2.0, mid-bass is authoritative and tonally rich from my Alexia series 2s. Compared to the Monaco v1.5, the v2.0 exhibits less harmonic 'fuzz' on bass notes (and most notes) - that bit of blur or cottony scrim or EL34-like overhang or lack of tightness that can come across as slowness or 'uncertainty' to a note as if, say a string, is vibrating to long - in the absence of tight time control across its brief life. I'm pretty much convinced the better a speaker's cohrence the better one can appreciate what the Monaco 2 is doing.
Though likely outside your music repetoire, a great piece to hear differences is the opening of Bernstein's Mahler 2 symphony featuring the bass section of the NY Philharmonic - the attack and weight of a repeated 5-note phrase by the entire bass section is stunning with a sense of grip and controlled force. Or as noted in my write-up on the v2.0, Ray Brown's bass and Duke Ellington piano on This Ones' For Blanton were utterly natural - as close to a live performance as I've experienced. The effect is not what you'd get from different electronics, but from a better source signal, from the transducers, from a time accurate source and a time accurate speaker.
The v1.5 is an excellent 'table, but in terms of dynamics, musical vivacity, any attribute related to dimension and space, and tonal character, the v2.0 is in a different league altogether. Played back-to-back, the v2.0's effect is immediate, not subtle and where I noticed it first was in the dynamics, weight and tonal character in the lower mids and upper bass. I thought I had a handle on timing related attributes but I haven't quite parsed out the relationship with dynamics - maybe someone has a theory on this though regardless the explanation the effect is very real.
One thing I noticed about the 1.5 is that the sense of musical weight can vary somewhat depending on clamp pressure. I have no way of knowing but I'll speculate this may be one of the areas where Fremer got it wrong in his review of the 1.0. The v2.0s clamp lights a small LED when proper clamp pressure is reached which makes it something of a no-brainer for me. I'll also comment that the Monaco deserves location on a decent platform; I've been experimenting and while I have not reached a firm conclusion, its performance improves with isolation.
If my comments here don't address your questions, let me know.
Hi Tima thanks for taking the time to share your impressions of both TTs - much appreciated. Ive yet to see any negative reviews of the 2.0 whereas earlier iterations of the Monaco (1.0 and 1.5) seem to have generated quite polarised opinions - what interested me about Bonzo’s impressions were that he listened to the 1.5 (not the 1.0 reviewed by Fremer) and was comparing against the Brinkmann (a TT I am very familiar with). Its reassuring to read your comment about the weight and tonal characteristics of the 2.0 v the 1.5. I was also interested by your speculation that incorrect clamping pressure might have contributed to the negative impressions formed by Fremer. I do know from experience that playing around with the clamp to my Brinkmann (or not using it at all) can have a pretty significant impact on the sound but perhaps not enough to change the fundamental character of the TT. Regards
You are quite welcome. Fwiw, I've seen no negative or polarizing reviews of the v.1.5. If you have, i'd appreciate if you could give a pointer so I can read. My view on the clamp pressure came fom my own experiments with the v.1.5 - one can definitely alter the character of sound toward the poorer by misusing the clamp or the wrong durometer washer beneath he record.
Hi I thought I saw a comment on one of the sites a few years back about the 1.5 being lean but I recall most comments being very favourable. The Munich show this year was the first time I had the opportunity to hear a GPA TT for myself and as previously mentioned I was seriously impressed...the fact that I was able to hear it in two completely different systems and rooms reinforces my belief that the GPA Monaco 2.0 is a very special TT
Similar threads
