$100K Tables - TechDAS AF1 vs. Walker Proscenium? Which sounds more like real music?

[DEV]

I simply wrote that the systems in which the Walkers were used sounded more like real music to me. .

Peter that statement alone implies allot, without having both in your own system to compare you really can't confirm such.

There is another interesting discussion, though I can't remember if it is in this thread or another one, where the question is which component is better, the one that adds less to the signal or the one that sounds more like music with both good and bad recordings.

Looking at it in those terms, perhaps the TechDas is more transparent and true to the source, while the Walker adds colorations that to the listener sound more like music. Or visa versa. In the end, the only person qualified to answer the original question about which turntable sounds more like music is the person who has directly compared the two tables side by side in the same system. You are pretty lucky if you have had that opportunity. Is there anyone on this forum who has done that. Of course the captive arm on the Walker adds a complication to that analysis.

I can't compare because I haven't had a WALKER in my system but have heard on numerous occasions and think it's a amazing table.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Dev, no need to be snappy. I was just stating my opinion that the q posed in this thread is almost impossible to answer 'cause so few will have heard them all, prob none side by side. And to answer your q, no I haven't.
But I guess you know when a component sounds like real music, it just touches your heart, and I'll leave comments to those better qualified to make them i.e. those who have heard these tables. My suspicion is that the pro-Walker and pro-AF1 camps prob don't meet in the middle.
Apologies to have added nothing of note.

 

[DEV]

Dev, no need to be snappy. I was just stating my opinion that the q posed in this thread is almost impossible to answer 'cause so few will have heard them all, prob none side by side. And to answer your q, no I haven't.
But I guess you know when a component sounds like real music, it just touches your heart, and I'll leave comments to those better qualified to make them i.e. those who have heard these tables. My suspicion is that the pro-Walker and pro-AF1 camps prob don't meet in the middle.
Apologies to have added nothing of note.

Sorry I wasn't trying to come across snappy, reading your postings they came across self serving - no apologies needed. I have appreciation and respect for both tables.

 

[ddk]

$100K Tables - TechDAS AF1 vs. Walker Proscenium? Which sounds more like real music?

It depends on what's important for you. My main criteria for any high end gear is musical persuasiveness and its ability to put me in touch with the original event, this is what defines resolution for me. The audiophile/hifi tech has no appeal and frankly most of it could be had at much lower cost. Based on this there's no contest between the two, AF1 is the clear winner by a very large margin. I have heard the Proscenium on multiple occasions, at our show, in our demo rooms and even at a reviewer's home who's an avid fan. At best it impressed but never managed to involve musically. As of now, the AF1 is the most natural sounding current production table I've heard.

Googling the Walker pictures, it looks like someone stepped into Henry Ford’s secret lab in 1922. You gotta check the pressure and change the oil, just like on the Model T. The AF1, on the other hand, looks like a modern machine.

The engineering and design philosophy of these two tables couldn't be any further apart and it shows in the sound quality.

Yet, when demoing their Perfect 8 speaker, arguably one of top 3 speakers in the world, they demoed with the Walker.

"…best top 3 speakers in the world"? Compared to which other speakers and based on what is the Perfect 8 such a great speaker? How did you come up with this caesar Forget about the panels for now, just the bass is disconnected, unnatural sounding and lacks texture of any kind.

Here's my idea of a great company and their design philosophy.

So, what do these tables do that a $30K table cannot do?

At best a great tt will give you a natural representation of the original event, at worst it will impress you with its abilities! Personally, this natural recreation of music is what makes AF1 and a few precious others special and valuable. You might have other priorities.

Which table will make those 1970’s records sound more like real music? Which table will make the latest remastered recordings suspend your disbelief?

IMO neither one! I find most of the 70's rock and pop recordings unlistenable, nor do I like many of the newly remastered audiophile pressings, specially those remastered digitally. I haven't a table to make them palatable.

Which table is for the guy who wants to get lost in the music and give the middle finger to those interested in the audiophile vocabulary?

Its not about giving anyone the finger, we're not all after the same things. In my case I already voted with my wallet.

david

 

[PeterA]

Peter that statement alone implies allot, without having both in your own system to compare you really can't confirm such.



I can't compare because I haven't had a WALKER in my system but have heard on numerous occasions and think it's a amazing table.

DEV, I respectfully disagree. I must not have written clearly enough. You seem to have understood that I have stated a preference for one table over the other. I have not. Nor did I state a preference for one system over another. The OP asks which table sounded more like real music. I stated which system I think sounds more like real music. I did not state which system I preferred. Either I have been unclear, or you are presuming something that I did not write.

Regarding the need to confirm something: I clearly can not confirm the sound of either table, either in my system or isolated from the components in the other systems. However, with an entire system, I do feel that I can make an assessment about how real it sounds. If I hear two unfamiliar systems, why would I not be able to simply decide that I think one sounds more like real music than the other? I don't need to compare either to my system to make such an evaluation. And I'm not commenting about any of the individual components in either system. I am simply making a judgement based on the sound of one entire system versus another entire system in two different contexts and comparing their sounds to my live reference at the BSO or some other classical music hall. I'm sorry, but I don't understand the criticism or conflict involved in this.

Furthermore, I understand that you own the TechDas and think it is an amazing table. Also, you have not heard the Walker in your own system, but you have heard the Walker on numerous occasions in other systems and think it is also an amazing table. Are you thus not saying that you think both are amazing tables? You have not said which table you think is better, and I understand why. You are not comparing them directly, but you are judging them separately against some reference and concluding that they are both "amazing" tables. Your opinion is perfectly justified.

If you have heard them enough to reach such a conclusion, can you not then also, if pressed, express an opinion about which system sounds more like real music? I'm not suggesting that you can say that about the turntables, but you should be able to have an opinion about the sounds of the systems if you have heard them. And you should also be able to evaluate, in your own mind, whether or not either or both system sounds like real music.

My comments have been restricted to the systems in which I heard the two tables. You could rightly argue that I am off topic because I am not discussing the actual tables themselves. And that would be fine, but you also admit to not hearing the Walker in your own system and still you comment that "it's an amazing table". That is a lot more than I can do. I can't even go that far because I can't separate its sound from that of the rest of the system in which I heard it.

 

[jtinn]

of the tt's i'm familiar with......I would choose either a Dobbins Garrard 301 or a Dobbins Technics SP-10 Mk2 as my favorite $5k tt's.

beautiful, sound great. they both are energetic and have that musical 'weight' that adds so much organic reality to the music.

I owned both and lived with them for an extended period. you can install any very very good tone arm on either and you will get the full value of the best arms and cartridges.

the hard part is finding someone who is selling theirs.

I certainly hope I do not hurt anyone's feelings, but while I agree with you regarding the Garrard 301 (sexy sounding yet inaccurate), whether it be one redone by Dobbins or someone else, I disagree with the Technics. I think they are incredibly overrated (SP10 MK2 & Mk3) and ridiculously priced. I would take an EMT 948 over either all day long. Put on a real world tonearm and cartridge and you have an absolute winner.

 

[jtinn]

It would be interesting to learn from jtinn which $5K tables are superior AND which "expensive" tables are inferior. But that might require private messaging.

PM for sure

 

[Bruce B]

I certainly hope I do not hurt anyone's feelings, but while I agree with you regarding the Garrard 301 (sexy sounding yet inaccurate), whether it be one redone by Dobbins or someone else, I disagree with the Technics. I think they are incredibly overrated (SP10 MK2 & Mk3) and ridiculously priced. I would take an EMT 948 over either all day long. Put on a real world tonearm and cartridge and you have an absolute winner.

Totally disagree
EMT 948 is highly overrated. I tried to make decent transfers with it and gave up and went to Mike's house.
Mike's Dobbins TT (Garrard or Technics) easily surpassed its sonics.

 

[DEV]

DEV, I respectfully disagree. I must not have written clearly enough. You seem to have understood that I have stated a preference for one table over the other. I have not. Nor did I state a preference for one system over another. The OP asks which table sounded more like real music. I stated which system I think sounds more like real music. I did not state which system I preferred. Either I have been unclear, or you are presuming something that I did not write.

Regarding the need to confirm something: I clearly can not confirm the sound of either table, either in my system or isolated from the components in the other systems. However, with an entire system, I do feel that I can make an assessment about how real it sounds. If I hear two unfamiliar systems, why would I not be able to simply decide that I think one sounds more like real music than the other? I don't need to compare either to my system to make such an evaluation. And I'm not commenting about any of the individual components in either system. I am simply making a judgement based on the sound of one entire system versus another entire system in two different contexts and comparing their sounds to my live reference at the BSO or some other classical music hall. I'm sorry, but I don't understand the criticism or conflict involved in this.

Furthermore, I understand that you own the TechDas and think it is an amazing table. Also, you have not heard the Walker in your own system, but you have heard the Walker on numerous occasions in other systems and think it is also an amazing table. Are you thus not saying that you think both are amazing tables? You have not said which table you think is better, and I understand why. You are not comparing them directly, but you are judging them separately against some reference and concluding that they are both "amazing" tables. Your opinion is perfectly justified.

If you have heard them enough to reach such a conclusion, can you not then also, if pressed, express an opinion about which system sounds more like real music? I'm not suggesting that you can say that about the turntables, but you should be able to have an opinion about the sounds of the systems if you have heard them. And you should also be able to evaluate, in your own mind, whether or not either or both system sounds like real music.

My comments have been restricted to the systems in which I heard the two tables. You could rightly argue that I am off topic because I am not discussing the actual tables themselves. And that would be fine, but you also admit to not hearing the Walker in your own system and still you comment that "it's an amazing table". That is a lot more than I can do. I can't even go that far because I can't separate its sound from that of the rest of the system in which I heard it.

Peter, how can you listen to any system that isn't your own and be able to make such bold statements about a specific pce "table only" has got me. I always LOL when I read others suggesting such - the only possible way would be if you own the same associated gear, otherwise guessing. Now if you had said you had listened to either in your system and just changed out the table it's self I could except those comments more so otherwise you are just guessing at most which is far from being accurate and providing any credible information.

I already agreed when you wrote; "If only those who have owned or properly evaluated components in their own system"

I can't personally comment on the two tables in direct comparison as I have already written, I have not had the Walker in my system. As I wrote I have respect for the Walker and have no problem saying it's amazing but saying such doesn't in anyway suggest one produced better than the other sounding more like real music - that's too

Yes I do own the TechDas and to date is my favorite table that I have had in my system, I owned at the same time four other tables which I compared and had two others on loan but have not hi-jacked this thread with that information pertaining the differences.

 

[DEV]

I certainly hope I do not hurt anyone's feelings, but while I agree with you regarding the Garrard 301 (sexy sounding yet inaccurate), whether it be one redone by Dobbins or someone else, I disagree with the Technics. I think they are incredibly overrated (SP10 MK2 & Mk3) and ridiculously priced. I would take an EMT 948 over either all day long. Put on a real world tonearm and cartridge and you have an absolute winner.

It would be great if you and Bruce start a new thread with this debate, has nothing to do with the topic - thx

 

[PeterA]

Peter, how can you listen to any system that isn't your own and be able to make such bold statements about a specific pce "table only" has got me. I always LOL when I read others suggesting such - the only possible way would be if you own the same associated gear, otherwise guessing. Now if you had said you had listened to either in your system and just changed out the table it's self I could except those comments more so otherwise you are just guessing at most which is far from being accurate and providing any credible information.

I already agreed when you wrote; "If only those who have owned or properly evaluated components in their own system"

I can't personally comment on the two tables in direct comparison as I have already written, I have not had the Walker in my system. As I wrote I have respect for the Walker and have no problem saying it's amazing but saying such doesn't in anyway suggest one produced better than the other sounding more like real music - that's too

Yes I do own the TechDas and to date is my favorite table that I have had in my system, I owned at the same time four other tables which I compared and had two others on loan but have not hi-jacked this thread with that information pertaining the differences.

Yes, I agree and thought I wrote this. I have not posted in this thread which table I prefer or which table I think sounds more like music. I only commented on the entire systems I heard. I don't think I can state it any clearer than that. You are not reading what I wrote.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Guys lets get back on topic here, this thread is being unnecessarily hi-jacked - starting a new thread would be best

Sorry guys! My intent was not to invoke a hi-jack. I appreciate the suggestions!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Totally disagree
EMT 948 is highly overrated. I tried to make decent transfers with it and gave up and went to Mike's house.
Mike's Dobbins TT (Garrard or Technics) easily surpassed its sonics.

I agree as the 948 package it's just pretty good.

my opinion is that the EMT 948 would be top top with the proper arm and cartridge. the EMT arm and vdH cart hold the NOS 948 'package' back. but it's great as a tt.

 

[microstrip]

I agree as the 948 package it's just pretty good.

my opinion is that the EMT 948 would be top top with the proper arm and cartridge. the EMT arm and vdH cart hold the NOS 948 'package' back. but it's great as a tt.

Should we replace the original mat? Contrary to the unavailable SP10 mk3, the EMT948 is easily available in Europe - there are currently three units being sold in France.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Should we replace the original mat? Contrary to the unavailable SP10 mk3, the EMT948 is easily available in Europe - there are currently three units being sold in France.

I'd be guessing about the mat. I have not listened without that mat or another mat. but a further comment would be; hard to predict noise from the DD might need dampening and that mat was engineered to be there. I'm sure EMT 'experts' would have a more informed opinion/alternative on that.

 

[Loheswaran]

Returning to the original question - given the likelihood of the deep pockets of said audiophile with the choice of turntables - they should try each one with the makers preferred arm, cartridge and phono stage (in many ways the EMT approach). I honestly think that mix and match is all good and well, but just like people that put hard Koni Shocks on BMW E30 M3's thinking they could outsmart BMW's motorsport division, as audiophiles we sometimes and often do put the proverbial 'lipstick on a pig' when comparing turntables. I get the impression that the Walker and Techdas seek to highlight or do different things in a different way. Realism can be reached in several ways - tonal colour, resolution, effortlessness, image, timing - all in different measures - remember - other people pick up on different things. I have only heard the AF2 (too briefly I might add in a rather busy room too) never heard the Walker. IMHO I'm sure they both sound brilliant for slightly different reasons - but I would buy neither - I'd get a DD for that kind of money

 

[PeterA]

Returning to the original question - given the likelihood of the deep pockets of said audiophile with the choice of turntables - they should try each one with the makers preferred arm, cartridge and phono stage (in many ways the EMT approach). I honestly think that mix and match is all good and well, but just like people that put hard Koni Shocks on BMW E30 M3's thinking they could outsmart BMW's motorsport division, as audiophiles we sometimes and often do put the proverbial 'lipstick on a pig' when comparing turntables. I get the impression that the Walker and Techdas seek to highlight or do different things in a different way. Realism can be reached in several ways - tonal colour, resolution, effortlessness, image, timing - all in different measures - remember - other people pick up on different things. I have only heard the AF2 (too briefly I might add in a rather busy room too) never heard the Walker. IMHO I'm sure they both sound brilliant for slightly different reasons - but I would buy neither - I'd get a DD for that kind of money

Loheswaran, do you think both the TechDas and the Walker have speed accuracy and/or consistency problems? I've heard both tables, and I heard no speed issues with either. I once started a thread addressing the speed issue and posted some videos showing results using a TimeLine strobe. At the time, I think owners of both turntables suggested that they would post videos. None came. Nor are there any videos of some of the better DD tables - VPI, Dobbins, Wave Kinetics, or Technics SP10 MK3.

Or is there another reason that you prefer DD?

 

[Loheswaran]

In pursuance of what Keith said and if u look at my post I was giving an opinion. Simply put belt drives have theoretically fundamental flaws insofar as: the belt is a variable and is a further moving part; the pulley is a further component; belts can slip due to corrosion and dust collection; belts pliance can change with temperature; belts tension a bearing onto one side unless multiple pulleys are used - which then lead to more components and therefore more variables and potential for play; belts are - in cheaper decks - used to isolate motor vibrations due to inherent motor problems such as rotation at 250 rpm. I will - like I said before say I have not heard either in earnest - my view is on the basis of what I believe to be fundamental flaws in belt drive decks vs direct drive - I have both - I may well be wrong, but I believe that fundamentally direct drive is a better engineering solution and if I had that kind of money I would get a dd like the one mike lavigne has - the wave kinetics

 

[DEV]

Belt drive turntables are fundamentally flawed designs, that is not to say the better designs are not accurate enough .
Keith.

What does your post have to do with the topic on hand but trolling - stay on topic. If you have nothing to offer then why post.

 

[DEV]

In pursuance of what Keith said and if u look at my post I was giving an opinion. Simply put belt drives have theoretically fundamental flaws insofar as: the belt is a variable and is a further moving part; the pulley is a further component; belts can slip due to corrosion and dust collection; belts pliance can change with temperature; belts tension a bearing onto one side unless multiple pulleys are used - which then lead to more components and therefore more variables and potential for play; belts are - in cheaper decks - used to isolate motor vibrations due to inherent motor problems such as rotation at 250 rpm. I will - like I said before say I have not heard either in earnest - my view is on the basis of what I believe to be fundamental flaws in belt drive decks vs direct drive - I have both - I may well be wrong, but I believe that fundamentally direct drive is a better engineering solution and if I had that kind of money I would get a dd like the one mike lavigne has - the wave kinetics

Your posts come across trolling big time, why do you post such nonsense with no direct experience. Obviously neither of your two posting have anything to offer in relation to the topic at hand which is against WBF rules. You haven't had either table in your own system so you absolutely have no clue - you make reference to dd tables of preference, good for you do enjoy. Wave Kinetics that's too funny! LOL