New King of the Mountain

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
I think the same could be said for CES/LAMM room this year too. The Neodio/Origine CD player sounded far better than the Kronos and I'm pretty sure why after living with the Universe 2 cartridge for now over a month: they didn't set the VTA/SRA correctly on the cartridge. The cartridge was too low--not to mention the cartridge was brand new (Mike do you know if the Clearaudio had been broken in at Newport?).

Sorry one edit didn't make it into the post. Mehran sent me the same cartridge that was in the LAMM room at CES for review. When I heard how the Universe 2 sounded in my system, I immediately called Mehran and inquired how many hours (as well as whether I was in the ballpark as far as loading etc. went) were on the cartridge. That's when I discovered that the cartridge was not only brand new -- but at the point in the break-in where pretty much all cartridges sound awful (To further define: Hours 1-10: most cartridges sound good but limited for the first ten hours out of the box. Hours 10-30: the cartridge really starts to break-in and the sound deteriorates accordingly. Hours 30-75: At this point the cartridge is now starting to open up and by 75 hours the final piece to the puzzle, dynamics, should be pretty much good to go (along with some further tweaking the setup).
 

defride

VIP/Donor
Mar 28, 2013
309
200
1,185
A friend has one of these, had it about a month and it sounds like he's very happy. He also took delivery of a pair of Acapella High Violin today, must make a greater effort to get across! Will post back within the next couple of weeks with an impression hopefully
 

Peter Breuninger

[Industry Expert] Member Sponsor
Jul 20, 2010
1,231
4
0
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,676
10,947
3,515
USA
I agree that it is awfully tough to judge a turntable's performance at a show, especially when it is in an unfamiliar system. I've heard the Kronos at the last two NYC shows. The system in which it was two years ago sounded better to me. The arm and cartridge were different as were the room, speakers and electronics.

Can the Kronos really be crowned the new king of the hill while being referenced to the AF1 when I don't recall that table being declared the best either? Many tables will get great reviews, but I don't think we will ever see a serious, direct comparison between any of them from any reviewers. I'm talking about being compared with the same arm/cartridge/cable in the same system, with the same music during the same review period. I think HiFi+ recently declared the AF1 the best based on memory and different equipment.

A real shoot out like the car magazines often do will not happen.

How was the speed confirmed on the Kronos? By reading the two digital displays or by the TimeLine or other strobe devices? In the absence of hearing these in one's own system, I would like to see rigorous testing and comparisons. That would go a long way toward supporting declarative pronouncements.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Peter-I have crappy little computer speakers, but the brief music you recorded sounds overloaded/distorted for some reason. I have heard some things that you have recorded at shows that come through really, really well, so I'm thinking it wasn't your mic preamp in your camera overloading.
 

defride

VIP/Donor
Mar 28, 2013
309
200
1,185


Sorry about the poor quality low light phone camera shot.

Got to hear the Kronos last night in a friends system.

The system has changed considerably since I was last there. In situ, the Kronos, Graham 12", Lyran Titan - Nagra cdp - Rowland Criterion and seperate Rowland phono - Accuphase A60 (on dem), Acapella High Violin.

Best I've heard from his room, wonderful tonality and great image density produced a lovely presence and believability. The room is relatively small and I'd suspect given more space perhaps there'd be a wider, deeper and more open soundstage. In the context of the room and setup it didn't really matter, the music flowed beautifully and the speakers disappeared. Substituting the Nagra back in after the TT was a disappointment, by comparison it was dull, grainy and you became aware of the speakers, the sound emanating from them rather than space on some cd's. Good but not great.

Obviously it's difficult to pronounce judgement on individual products in the context of an unfamiliar setup but the comparison between TT and Nagra was interesting. The previous TT was an Oracle V with Graham 9" and the Titan, it always sounded better than the Nagra, a little greater transparency, more air but not totally night and day. The Kronos was on a different page, it destroyed the cdp to the point I doubt there'll be much digital played in that room for the forseeable. It's not that the Nagra is bad, it's not and has sounded great in a number of systems - the Kronos? seems to me the real deal.
 

SAT

Industry Expert
Dec 30, 2013
14
0
298
Sweden
www.swedishat.com
Setting up a table/arm/cart at a show is a total gamble. You really don't know the system or room or power. There is no way you can pass judgement on a table at a show, in my opinion (except for how it looks and the touch points). You need a fixed system you know very well before you can adjust azimuth, VTA and VTF. I'll have the Kronos here soon. I assume it will sound very good, since most all tables sound very good.

I agree that it is awfully tough to judge a turntable's performance at a show, especially when it is in an unfamiliar system. I've heard the Kronos at the last two NYC shows. The system in which it was two years ago sounded better to me. The arm and cartridge were different as were the room, speakers and electronics.

Can the Kronos really be crowned the new king of the hill while being referenced to the AF1 when I don't recall that table being declared the best either? Many tables will get great reviews, but I don't think we will ever see a serious, direct comparison between any of them from any reviewers. I'm talking about being compared with the same arm/cartridge/cable in the same system, with the same music during the same review period. I think HiFi+ recently declared the AF1 the best based on memory and different equipment.

A real shoot out like the car magazines often do will not happen.

How was the speed confirmed on the Kronos? By reading the two digital displays or by the TimeLine or other strobe devices? In the absence of hearing these in one's own system, I would like to see rigorous testing and comparisons. That would go a long way toward supporting declarative pronouncements.

Peter & Peter, given a certain level of turntable quality and performance, what plays a much bigger role in the final performance of the system are the cartridge and the arm by a big margin. These "king of the mountain" turntables you are talking about here are all massive, with some kind of record clamping system (though the vacuum hold-down of the TechDAS is far superior to the centre weight of the Kronos), vibration isolation system and I am sure good enough speed stability. There is not much that can be done to bring big improvements which would put one ahead of the other. The same applies to the Onedof or Caliburn. The designers of these turntables are unconstrained in the size, mass and materials use… They all have reached a threshold were differences in performance are not big.

Cartridge and tonearm designers work in a very constrained environment with a difficult set of requirements which poses great difficulties to achieve remarkable products. We need to achieve very high rigidity within a very limited mass range. The same forces generated in the record-stylus interface are equally applied to the turntable and to the cartridge/arm systems, but the turntable has a huge mass and rigidity to work against these forces compared to the minuscule mass and rigidity of the cartridge and tonearm.

All this to tell you that when comparing turntables of this caliber, what we really are judging is the performance of the cartridge and the tonearm, mainly! Even at much lower turntable price points, this statement is still valid.

/Marc
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,676
10,947
3,515
USA
Peter & Peter, given a certain level of turntable quality and performance, what plays a much bigger role in the final performance of the system are the cartridge and the arm by a big margin. These "king of the mountain" turntables you are talking about here are all massive, with some kind of record clamping system (though the vacuum hold-down of the TechDAS is far superior to the centre weight of the Kronos), vibration isolation system and I am sure good enough speed stability. There is not much that can be done to bring big improvements which would put one ahead of the other. The same applies to the Onedof or Caliburn. The designers of these turntables are unconstrained in the size, mass and materials use… They all have reached a threshold were differences in performance are not big.

Cartridge and tonearm designers work in a very constrained environment with a difficult set of requirements which poses great difficulties to achieve remarkable products. We need to achieve very high rigidity within a very limited mass range. The same forces generated in the record-stylus interface are equally applied to the turntable and to the cartridge/arm systems, but the turntable has a huge mass and rigidity to work against these forces compared to the minuscule mass and rigidity of the cartridge and tonearm.

All this to tell you that when comparing turntables of this caliber, what we really are judging is the performance of the cartridge and the tonearm, mainly! Even at much lower turntable price points, this statement is still valid.

/Marc

Do you really think that music using the same cartridge, tonearm and cable would sound similar on the Kodo The Beat, the Saskia II, and the TechDas AF1? Or, at a lower price point, the Brinkmann Bardo, the TransFi Salvation, or the SME 20/3, just to name some current designs. The way these various tables handle speed accuracy and speed consistency, both averaged per revolution over time and during extremely short time intervals, varies greatly. As do their abilities to absorb or drain vibrational energy.

I think you are underestimating the importance of the platform on which the arm and cartridge must be mounted.
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,043
995
Utah
Peter & Peter, given a certain level of turntable quality and performance, what plays a much bigger role in the final performance of the system are the cartridge and the arm by a big margin. These "king of the mountain" turntables you are talking about here are all massive, with some kind of record clamping system (though the vacuum hold-down of the TechDAS is far superior to the centre weight of the Kronos), vibration isolation system and I am sure good enough speed stability. There is not much that can be done to bring big improvements which would put one ahead of the other. The same applies to the Onedof or Caliburn. The designers of these turntables are unconstrained in the size, mass and materials use… They all have reached a threshold were differences in performance are not big.

Cartridge and tonearm designers work in a very constrained environment with a difficult set of requirements which poses great difficulties to achieve remarkable products. We need to achieve very high rigidity within a very limited mass range. The same forces generated in the record-stylus interface are equally applied to the turntable and to the cartridge/arm systems, but the turntable has a huge mass and rigidity to work against these forces compared to the minuscule mass and rigidity of the cartridge and tonearm.

All this to tell you that when comparing turntables of this caliber, what we really are judging is the performance of the cartridge and the tonearm, mainly! Even at much lower turntable price points, this statement is still valid.

/Marc

Hi Marc,
i beg to differ, yes the arm, cartridge, cable combination do make a large contribution to the sound but so do the tables, just swapping the mat on a table will yield big changes. I have a number of these high end tables set up with the same arm and each one has it own distinct sonic signature. The AF1 is a good example, it's offered with three different inner platters, each offering a very different sound on the same table. In my experience turntables make a huge difference in sound quality and have a direct impact on sound before the addition of arm & cartridge.

david
 

SAT

Industry Expert
Dec 30, 2013
14
0
298
Sweden
www.swedishat.com
Do you really think that music using the same cartridge, tonearm and cable would sound similar on the Kodo The Beat, the Saskia II, and the TechDas AF1? Or, at a lower price point, the Brinkmann Bardo, the TransFi Salvation, or the SME 20/3, just to name some current designs. The way these various tables handle speed accuracy and speed consistency, both averaged per revolution over time and during extremely short time intervals, varies greatly. As do their abilities to absorb or drain vibrational energy.

I think you are underestimating the importance of the platform on which the arm and cartridge must be mounted.

Peter,

If we managed to swap the same cartridge-arm-cable system to another turntable, like the ones you name, we could detect differences for sure - the more the better the cartridge-arm-cable set is. My point is that these differences would be less evident than mounting different combinations of arms, cartridges or both components to the same turntable. Since it is very rare and complicated to compare different turntables with exactly the same cartridge-arm-cable system, the usual scenario is that turntables are compared (for example in reviews) with at least a different arm or cartridge. The judgements made in this situation can be very misleading with regards to assessing the performance of the turntable alone.

Another point to consider is that, even comparing the same setup of arm and cartridge with the same turntable and electronics but in different installations, tiny differences in the adjustment of the bearings, how the cartridge is tighten to the head-shell or the head-shell to the arm tube, can have significant effects in the final performance. Thus, making evaluation of a turntable alone a potentially inaccurate business.

Hi Marc,
i beg to differ, yes the arm, cartridge, cable combination do make a large contribution to the sound but so do the tables, just swapping the mat on a table will yield big changes. I have a number of these high end tables set up with the same arm and each one has it own distinct sonic signature. The AF1 is a good example, it's offered with three different inner platters, each offering a very different sound on the same table. In my experience turntables make a huge difference in sound quality and have a direct impact on sound before the addition of arm & cartridge.

david

Hi David,

I agree each turntable has its own sonic signature and some times it can be very different from another counterpart. You actually brought up what I consider to be probably the biggest contributor to the final sound accuracy of a turntable: the interface between record and platter. Here, the material of the platter and mostly how well the whole surface of the record is hold against the platter, are the factors that can make a turntable stand out of the rest and are the limiting factors of most turntables. It is understood we assume the platter spins with "acceptable" speed accuracy and consistency…as I wrote in my post "…given a certain level of turntable quality and performance…".

In most turntable designs the way the record is hold against the platter is left to the discretion of the user; that's why I didn't consider this parameter as part of the intrinsic performance of the turntable, though it is of the outmost importance as I stated.


My intention with my post was mainly to trigger discussion as the main role of the turntable in the analog replay system is deeply rooted. I am glad it worked :D and hope we can continue with the discussion to come up with some interesting and useful ideas.

Cheers,

/Marc
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,676
10,947
3,515
USA
My intention with my post was mainly to trigger discussion as the main role of the turntable in the analog replay system is deeply rooted. I am glad it worked :D and hope we can continue with the discussion to come up with some interesting and useful ideas.

Cheers,

/Marc

Marc, If I understand you correctly, you acknowledge the importance of the turntable to the overall analog system, but contend that what we are really hearing is the contribution of the tonearm and cartridge rather than the turntable itself. Is that correct?

It would be very interesting to see what the designer of the Kronos or Mosin, the designer of the Saskia, would have to say about the role of the turntable in the overall sound of the table/arm/cartridge system. Forum members often write about the inherent sound of a particular drive type (belt, thread, rim, idler, DD) or the sonic differences between suspended or mass loaded tables. They discuss these sonic characteristics as though they are independent of the arm/cartridge combination being used.
 

rockitman

Member Sponsor
Sep 20, 2011
7,097
414
1,210
Northern NY
Marc, If I understand you correctly, you acknowledge the importance of the turntable to the overall analog system, but contend that what we are really hearing is the contribution of the tonearm and cartridge rather than the turntable itself. Is that correct?

.

If that were correct, then additional isolation devices wouldn't matter....but they do IME. I have no doubt in that regard. Turntable's do impart their own sound character in addition to the arm/cart. The arm/cart can even perform better on said turntable when proper isolation devices are implemented.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,676
10,947
3,515
USA
If that were correct, then additional isolation devices wouldn't matter....but they do IME. I have no doubt in that regard. Turntable's do impart their own sound character in addition to the arm/cart. The arm/cart can even perform better on said turntable when proper isolation devices are implemented.

Christian, This has been my experience too. Great point.
 

BruceD

VIP/Donor
Dec 13, 2013
1,517
587
540
Very Interesting thread and comments--especially from the SAT designer--here is the late Ken Shindo's take on the role of the Plinth in his design--any doubters speak forth

BD

" It has been said that idler wheel turntables easily cause rumble, but the problem lies in the plinth rather than the motor itself. Our plinth is made of solid laminated cherry wood designed to deaden outer vibrations. Unlike conventional plinths, this plinth allows only minimum space for the motor

and arm base. The construction of the plinth virtually demolishes any vibrations caused by the motor but not by deadening the overall sound, which often happens with other plinths that are also designed to eliminate vibrations caused by the motor vibration. Once I designed a plinth that killed

vibrations without killing the life of the table, I stopped experimenting and have been making this plinth ever since.

The plinth is the key." - Shindo
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,807
4,704
2,790
Portugal
Very Interesting thread and comments--especially from the SAT designer--here is the late Ken Shindo's take on the role of the Plinth in his design--any doubters speak forth

BD

" It has been said that idler wheel turntables easily cause rumble, but the problem lies in the plinth rather than the motor itself. Our plinth is made of solid laminated cherry wood designed to deaden outer vibrations. Unlike conventional plinths, this plinth allows only minimum space for the motor

and arm base. The construction of the plinth virtually demolishes any vibrations caused by the motor but not by deadening the overall sound, which often happens with other plinths that are also designed to eliminate vibrations caused by the motor vibration. Once I designed a plinth that killed

vibrations without killing the life of the table, I stopped experimenting and have been making this plinth ever since.

The plinth is the key." - Shindo

A similar argument is written in the book by Joachim Bungabout about the Thorens TD124 - "Swiss Precision. The Story of the Thorens TD 124 and Other Classic Turntables". The TD124 was a great turntable, but its perfromance was mediocre due to the improper stock plinth. Unfortunately I do not have the book any more - I had to offer it to the friend who got my TD124. :( It is however still available (now in an improved version English ) at a cost of 59 euros + shipping from the author http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/swissprecision.html
 

Roydrage

New Member
Mar 25, 2014
19
0
0
Rocketman is correct. Exactly the point I was going to bring up. Saying the Turntable does not monumentally contribute to the sound is Completely wrong... If changing the surface that the turntable is on can make HUGE differences... And I've heard HUGE, HUGE differences, then it stands to reason that the turntable itself can be even more significant in contributing to sound quality.


It terms of the way it serves the music it is most certainly more important in a fundamental way... As in the differences between digital and analogue. The Emotional and rhythmic drive is most dependent on the Turntable.... It's the old story.. Garbage in, Garbage out...

Conventional think was always that the speakers are the most important in terms of sound quality, they transform the electrical signal back into acoustic energy... The reverse of the Microphone. We know as audiophiles that no matter how good the electronics and speakers are at the middle and end of the chain, if you put in a crap signal, all you’re going to do is accurately reproduce Crap!

Now transfer that logic to the front end...

Of the 3 items in question the Turntable, Arm, and Cartridge which are the most important... It's the SOURCE. Conventional think again would have you think that the cartridge is the most important because it transfers the sound from acoustic/Vibrational to Electronic... But again it is not true. The Tonearm comes before it in the chain, and if it does not hold the Cartridge with great precision, and address resonances correctly the Cartridge cannot do its job.

The RECORD is the most important because it IS THE SOUND, It powers the Cartridge, and THE TURNTABLE DRIVES THE RECORD!!! The Source.

If the turntable cannot propel, and drive the record and cannot get the information out of the record without destroying or altering it all is lost... it is responsible in most important ways for getting the information out of the Groove.

Period.

Tony
 

SAT

Industry Expert
Dec 30, 2013
14
0
298
Sweden
www.swedishat.com
Marc, If I understand you correctly, you acknowledge the importance of the turntable to the overall analog system, but contend that what we are really hearing is the contribution of the tonearm and cartridge rather than the turntable itself. Is that correct?

Not exactly what I meant. Let me say it in another way which should be easier to interpret as I intended:

Given a minimum level of performance of the turntable, the arm and cartridge are potentially responsible for far more DISTORTION than is the turntable. An improvement in the performance of the arm or cartridge has a bigger effect on the overall reproduction accuracy of the system

For further insight and the reasoning behind this statement, take a look at http://swedishat.com/articles.html


If that were correct, then additional isolation devices wouldn't matter....but they do IME. I have no doubt in that regard. Turntable's do impart their own sound character in addition to the arm/cart. The arm/cart can even perform better on said turntable when proper isolation devices are implemented.

To properly isolate the turntable from ground-borne disturbances is very important, as you very well say, Christian. Having said that, isolation devices do not change the intrinsic quality and performance of the turntable itself; if you want, a given turntable is equally performant by design, with or without an additional isolation device. As a system, though, the turntable can yield better performance when properly paired with the isolation device.

This doesn't change the validity of my previous statement. I have never claimed the turntable doesn't have a fundamental role, to the contrary; my claim is that at a certain level of performance, the limitations of the arm and cartridge are far bigger than those of the turntable. It is a matter of physics and engineering.



Very Interesting thread and comments--especially from the SAT designer--here is the late Ken Shindo's take on the role of the Plinth in his design--any doubters speak forth

BD

" It has been said that idler wheel turntables easily cause rumble, but the problem lies in the plinth rather than the motor itself. Our plinth is made of solid laminated cherry wood designed to deaden outer vibrations. Unlike conventional plinths, this plinth allows only minimum space for the motor

and arm base. The construction of the plinth virtually demolishes any vibrations caused by the motor but not by deadening the overall sound, which often happens with other plinths that are also designed to eliminate vibrations caused by the motor vibration. Once I designed a plinth that killed

vibrations without killing the life of the table, I stopped experimenting and have been making this plinth ever since.

The plinth is the key." - Shindo


Bruce, this observation is the complementary of my note on ground-borne disturbances, thanks! Big plinths with big exposed surfaces are subjected to higher loads from the air pressure in the room while playing music. These loads cause deformations of the plinth and accelerations of the bearing and arm attached to the plinth. This induces distortion.

Turntables with this kind of plinths are more sensitive to the sound pressure levels in the room than other designs with much more limited surface exposure and compact design, like for example the Onedof, Brinkmann Lagrange or Kondo Ginga, to give you an idea.
 
Last edited:

Bruce B

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
Apr 25, 2010
7,007
515
1,740
Snohomish, WA
www.pugetsoundstudios.com
I guess to really find out how much the TT contributes to the sound, listen with headphones and record output with no speakers playing. That's what I do. Certainly would negate the need for exotic isolation devices!
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing