First Sounds: Grand Prix Audio Monaco 2.0

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
( ...) I ask because like Ked I'm putting serious consideration re a modded Lenco L75 idler, the PTP Solid 12 which represents a fascinating assault on high end analog at a frankly bargain basement entry point, much more affordable than the Lenco, Garrard and Technics restored by Artisan Fidelity.

Remember that probably until the day you pay for it you will change your mind everyday - there are so many excellent alternatives available and their friendly owners are really persuasive ... :eek:
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,468
11,365
4,410
Mike, yr NVS is another tt that is just non existent in the UK, along w other gems like the Sakia 2 Ref.
So, we have no idea why you decided on it, having no experience of it.
I've heard excellent mods of 301s and SP10s and totally "get" the benefits of DD and idler over belt.
Can I ask what the NVS did/does "better" that you felt compelled to move on from the Dobbins Garrards and Kodo?
I ask because like Ked I'm putting serious consideration re a modded Lenco L75 idler, the PTP Solid 12 which represents a fascinating assault on high end analog at a frankly bargain basement entry point, much more affordable than the Lenco, Garrard and Technics restored by Artisan Fidelity.

at that point 6-7 years ago, I owned 4 turntables at the same time, including the Rockport Sirius III, and a bunch or arms and was in the middle of listening to Joel Durand develop his various tone arms using my room for his testing. My agenda was to find a combo that exceeded my Rockport 'system'. I was listening to vinyl all the time.

all those other tt's were very good, and 'The Beat' was the best of them.

along came the NVS and it was just that little bit better, and the combo of the Talea II and NVS I over-all preferred to the Rockport. and that was it.

trying to break things down between the 2; the composite platter of the NVS maybe resulted in a bit more natural and spacious presentation, the noise floor was a little bit better, the arm board wings of the NVS likely were a bit more solid sounding than the rotating arm boards of 'The Beat'. both had similar slam and drive and both had authority.

the NVS also had it's own anti-resonance base, but I made the call to choose it prior to ever trying that base.

unless you had these 2 side by side not sure you would pick up on these slight differences. but I had all this gear and so I could directly compare. and the Rockport was the target.

how does today's 'The Beat' compare to that first one. can't say. it's one of the better tt's out there and has no weakness I know of.
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
Micro, as my posts on my Stacore passive isolation thread attests, I'm at a point where I'm close to being done w big ticket component upgrading.
Happy w cart, phono, cdp, amp and spkrs choices.
My last area of slight doubt is my tt/arm.
I'm actually v happy w my choices here, but was struggling to dial in my analog in my new room.
However w my phono upgraded to top spec and the Stacore awaiting tt install on top of it, we'll see if I still feel compelled to move on.
I can tell you one thing, I'm not moving back to belt drive. Once the magic of idler/rim/DD high torque strikes in the form of realistic texture, heft and speed, reverting to the possibly more delicately beautiful but also more "floaty" belt sound just does not push my buttons anymore.
Ked has always said I should put a system or component away and listen to a ton of live unamplified and come back to things. Well, I've kinda done this and my identifying w non belt drive is stronger than ever.
And the PTP Solid 12, as well as my Trans Fi Salvation rim drive, have a lot in common I believe.
And Im sure w GP 2.0, NVS, Kodo Beat etc.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
I ask because like Ked I'm putting serious consideration re a modded Lenco L75 idler, the PTP Solid 12 which represents a fascinating assault on high end analog at a frankly bargain basement entry point, much more affordable than the Lenco, Garrard and Technics restored by Artisan Fidelity.

Marc, what do you mean by "represents a fascinating assault on high end analog...?" That might get Ron's attention.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
Micro, as my posts on my Stacore passive isolation thread attests, I'm at a point where I'm close to being done w big ticket component upgrading.
Happy w cart, phono, cdp, amp and spkrs choices.
My last area of slight doubt is my tt/arm.
I'm actually v happy w my choices here, but was struggling to dial in my analog in my new room.
However w my phono upgraded to top spec and the Stacore awaiting tt install on top of it, we'll see if I still feel compelled to move on.
I can tell you one thing, I'm not moving back to belt drive. Once the magic of idler/rim/DD high torque strikes in the form of realistic texture, heft and speed, reverting to the possibly more delicately beautiful but also more "floaty" belt sound just does not push my buttons anymore.
Ked has always said I should put a system or component away and listen to a ton of live unamplified and come back to things. Well, I've kinda done this and my identifying w non belt drive is stronger than ever.
And the PTP Solid 12, as well as my Trans Fi Salvation rim drive, have a lot in common I believe.
And Im sure w GP 2.0, NVS, Kodo Beat etc.

Marc, you seem very negative about belt drive tables as a typology. Have you heard either the Kronos Pro or TechDAS AF1 in a familiar system? I ask because they are both highly regarded belt drive turntables which seem to satisfy many listeners.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,442
13,471
2,710
London
Remember that probably until the day you pay for it you will change your mind everyday - there are so many excellent alternatives available and their friendly owners are really persuasive ... :eek:

The thing is while there are excellent alternatives, the price of the PTP is extremely low, and resale is great, so risk is low. What Marc is saying is he wants high torque, drive, and PTP gives bass and dynamics and drive as high as anything, higher than many belts. Would some others give some musicality, decay, lower noise, as you pay up to Kodo and NVS and AF2, sure, but we cannot afford that. And if you put a good cart and arm on this, e.g Schroeder and Zyx will work as Schroeder and Peter are friends, can have it nicely tuned...When I get mine I will circulate it to owners of XL4 (with Kuzma and Lyra), Prometheus (with Schroeder Ref and Etna), and Schopper Thorens (with Zyx and FR64). Should be interesting. But yes one of the problems with analog is there are many alternatives and one can like many.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,442
13,471
2,710
London
at that point 6-7 years ago, I owned 4 turntables at the same time, including the Rockport Sirius III, and a bunch or arms and was in the middle of listening to Joel Durand develop his various tone arms using my room for his testing. My agenda was to find a combo that exceeded my Rockport 'system'. I was listening to vinyl all the time.

all those other tt's were very good, and 'The Beat' was the best of them.

along came the NVS and it was just that little bit better, and the combo of the Talea II and NVS I over-all preferred to the Rockport. and that was it.

trying to break things down between the 2; the composite platter of the NVS maybe resulted in a bit more natural and spacious presentation, the noise floor was a little bit better, the arm board wings of the NVS likely were a bit more solid sounding than the rotating arm boards of 'The Beat'. both had similar slam and drive and both had authority.

the NVS also had it's own anti-resonance base, but I made the call to choose it prior to ever trying that base.

unless you had these 2 side by side not sure you would pick up on these slight differences. but I had all this gear and so I could directly compare. and the Rockport was the target.

how does today's 'The Beat' compare to that first one. can't say. it's one of the better tt's out there and has no weakness I know of.

Were your preferences made in the current room and with the EA speakers? Did you compare any of those with the Tenor 75 and when you had the Lamm or the IO?
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
Peter, as usual there is a tendency to go around in circles (at 33, 45, or even 78rpm LOL) in these threads.
I have heard a range of the top belt drives, incl yours, and Kronos and AF (latter two only at shows).
I've heard the TW AC3, Brinkmann La Grange and AMG Viella V12 at length and in multiple occasions, incl one of these in direct a/b comparison v my current choice at home.
I'm also intimately familiar w the Linn LP12, Roksan Xerxes X and TMS2 and 3, again at dealers and in my home.
So, I have a reasonable idea of the similarities and differences.
If opinions can only be made by forensic side by side comparisons, at home, w the same ancillaries, in the analog field, then no conclusions are ever going to be likely.
I maintain my strong opinion, that the uber high torque of idler inherently brings thru the heft and substance of music more explicitly and convincingly than the belt drives I've heard.
In the live music I've been fortunate enough to attend recently, the visceralness of the lower mids and upper bass I most hear from idler/rim and also high torque DD.
Now, on the flip side, the solidity in idler presentation is mitigated by some less transparency thru those mids, and so ultimate trailing of notes, low level micro detail, high end shimmer is somewhat curtailed w idler.
For me, this is a compromise I'm happy to live with, that idler/rim high torque verve getting me IMHO closer to the gestalt of "the note", and closer to the musicians' intentions.
IMHO, YMMV etc (obv, as belt drive rules 95% of tt topologies).
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
Also Peter, my comment on assault on high end is that at reasonably low cost, the unique torque advantage of idlers and rims really makes these tts punch well above their weight and get performance envelope that is so broad.
So, no, not that a Kronos, AF or SME30 fan would necessarily swap, but getting a taste of the big time at moderate entry ticket.
The q to you Peter, is have you ever actively ventured to hear and compare a really well put together Garrard 301 or Technics SP10 in eg an Artisan Fidelity or Dobbins mod? And if you did, do you get why a fan if high torque like me can't do w'out it?
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,468
11,365
4,410
Were your preferences made in the current room and with the EA speakers? Did you compare any of those with the Tenor 75 and when you had the Lamm or the IO?

in my current room 2004-present.

yes; this was the EA MM3 (2006-2012) with the dart pre and phono.....and dart 108 stereo amp.

Io left in 2002, the Tenor 75 OTL's left in early 2004, the Lamm left in 2005.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,522
10,688
3,515
USA
Also Peter, my comment on assault on high end is that at reasonably low cost, the unique torque advantage of idlers and rims really makes these tts punch well above their weight and get performance envelope that is so broad.
So, no, not that a Kronos, AF or SME30 fan would necessarily swap, but getting a taste of the big time at moderate entry ticket.
The q to you Peter, is have you ever actively ventured to hear and compare a really well put together Garrard 301 or Technics SP10 in eg an Artisan Fidelity or Dobbins mod? And if you did, do you get why a fan if high torque like me can't do w'out it?

Thanks for explaining further, Marc. I once heard the Kodo BEAT at RMAF and was extremely impressed with the overall system sound. Clarity and timbre stood out to me, not so much drive and low end punch. I have directly compared a Technics SP10 MK3 in a Porter plinth with the same SME V-12 and Air Tight Supreme as mine to my SME 30/12 in my system. That plinth is very similar to early Artisan Fidelity plinths. The SP10 lacked a "rightness" or natural sound to my ear. Notes did not sound complete and resolution seemed to suffer. I also seem to remember slight issues with noise. Perhaps something was amiss. I have also heard a few other DD tables in other systems but could not really identify what they were contributing to the overall system sound: too many variables. I have no experience with the Garrard or other idler tables you mention. I remain open minded about drive typology and implementation and admittedly lack broad exposure to alternatives.
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
Peter, for me the TW AC3 I listened to extensively a few years back was lovely in every respect, and a clear step up on my tt of the time, Michell Orbe w Pederson plinth/armboard upgrades and Origin Live DC motor.
So much so I was close to signing the cheque.
Then I heard my current tt, W rim drive and air bearing arm, and it just "spoke" to me more.
In effect, a more direct sound which seemed more grounded and floated less.
I put this down to more urgent timing.
But in other respects the TW was more of a winner, in terms of extremely fine detail and some better harmonics.
I wonder if the GP range, esp this 2.0 gets both right?
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,442
13,471
2,710
London
Peter, for me the TW AC3 I listened to extensively a few years back was lovely in every respect, and a clear step up on my tt of the time, Michell Orbe w Pederson plinth/armboard upgrades and Origin Live DC motor.
So much so I was close to signing the cheque.
Then I heard my current tt, W rim drive and air bearing arm, and it just "spoke" to me more.
In effect, a more direct sound which seemed more grounded and floated less.
I put this down to more urgent timing.
But in other respects the TW was more of a winner, in terms of extremely fine detail and some better harmonics.
I wonder if the GP range, esp this 2.0 gets both right?

“You can call me Al”, but I don’t agree with the phrase urgent timing. For example, when Ron and I compared the Pluto, Reed, and Feickert Firebird, the Pluto had the drive and an urgent timing. The energy seemed too much but not enough natural pause that exists between the notes – which is what the Feickert had. Maybe correct timing should not be heard? Music should have drive, yet the intervals should not necessarily be urgent
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
Ked, I think we're arguing at cross purposes.
Yes, non belt drives can be urgent/pertinent (ie like the kineticness of real music), but truncated/pinched (not so good).
Indeed, many DDs suffer from this.
Eg Technic SL1210, original GP 1.0 in my listening experiences sounded a bit dry and overly forward.
But many of the Garrard 301 mods are right up my alley, with equal part pertinence and relaxed breathing space for notes, and it's these examples that draw me away from the belt drives I've heard that don't keep my attention quite as fully.
No doubt, idlers, rims and DDs have their work cut out to achieve both rhythmic urgency (pertinence, dynamic prowess, whatever phrase best suits) AND relaxed music making, ability to breathe.
Eg the Reed twin wheel idler I've had reliable reports on just doesn't lose the last degree of mechanicalness from its presentation.
And my rim drive, in concert w 4" air bearing linear tracking arm and quite neutral Straingauge cart, is just on the slightly truncated side of neutral.
A reason why I want to hear the PTP Solid 12 w their in-house 12" arm (I'm not touching the Schick 12" from what I've discovered) to see if I'm missing any "wetness" in my analog sound, while maintaining the "insistency" I already have, that I gather is there in spades on the PTP.
And I remain convinced the extra torque of the GP2.0 is a big reason for its superiority over the 1.5 amongst other things.
 

jfrech

VIP/Donor
Sep 3, 2012
2,152
749
1,160
Austin
Have any of you heard the Kodo beat? One TT freak told me that this with air tangent arm produced a fantastic sound

It's a good table. I have 2 friends with that table locally. Heard it many times. I like my GPA Monaco...I will say the Monaco is sensitive to the stand it's on. I use Grand Prix Audio stands and a great synergy here. I think you have to consider this as a bundled "system". I know other stands fare very well to with the Monaco...but not all..
 
Last edited:

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,442
13,471
2,710
London
It's a good table. I have 2 friends with that table locally. Heard it many times. I like my GPA Monaco...

What are their arm, carts, and phono?
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
John, I'm in deep on Stacore passive platforms.
Perform in my room well beyond active.
I have no doubts any GPA tt will excel on it.
For me, no going back to passive racks.
 

jfrech

VIP/Donor
Sep 3, 2012
2,152
749
1,160
Austin
What are their arm, carts, and phono?

One has a Kuzma 4 pt. The other a Schroeder LT and Etna SL...I've had a Schroeder LT on my GPA Monaco, with a Lyra Atlas at the time. It's great arm...that was the first time I've heard the 4 point arm...I think its great also...as is my Centroid.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,442
13,471
2,710
London
One has a Kuzma 4 pt. The other a Schroeder LT and Etna SL...I've had a Schroeder LT on my GPA Monaco, with a Lyra Atlas at the time. It's great arm...that was the first time I've heard the 4 point arm...I think its great also...as is my Centroid.

Wow and with Albert's technics Texas has all the DDs covered
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,604
5,413
1,278
E. England
John, no way to prove my point, but if the 2.0 really surpasses yr 1.5 when you hear it, I really do believe it'll be a lot down to the upstick in torque.
I mean, the speed stability/correction in the 1.5 is already class leading, so to go from a handful of corrections per lp side in the 1.5 to one or two max in the 2.0 surely cannot be the sole or even maybe primary reason for the impvt.
But uber speed stability AND torque giving both certitude in terms of speed and NOW ALSO better ability to absolutely stay there whatever groove modulation resistance throws at the motor system, is my instinct as to why the 2.0 is proving a cut above.
Speed stability and the relentless shove to keep there come what may is the synergy that makes the 2.0 outperform.
If the upstick in price is genuinely deserved, it must be because creating high torque/uber speed stability/need for a minimum number of corrections and hence cutting out as much feedback loop "hunting jitter", is a truly complex, v hard to achieve engineering trick, all the while still optimising everything else that's needed in a top tt like isolation etc.
IMHO, obv I know absolutely nothing LOL!
 
Last edited:

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