We listen to a system, yet we judge a single piece...how accurate is that??

DaveyF · May 31, 2018

Looking at the various threads on tonearms-and the 9" vs12" debate specifically, ( although this applies to other areas of the hobby as well). I question how so many of the conclusions that are floated about have actually anything to do with the piece under review. A turntable system (and that is exactly what it is- a system, IMHO) has so many variables when it comes to the SQ that one is going to hear, that I have to ask the question in the thread heading! How on earth are we supposed to truly accept that the findings of the 'golden eared' reviewer are at all accurate when we are talking about just one piece of that system..ie, the arm, the cartridge, the tonearm wiring ( which BTW, I personally believe can make more of a difference than the even the cartridge!) The set up, the loading and on and on. This is also true of all other parts of our system ( which only work together with everything else and not independently---amp, preamp, speakers, room, cabling, etc.)
On another forum, there is a poster who is wailing about how his new Linn Klimax LP12 does not sound good to his ears....he has tried everything to make it sound great, but to no avail; reason is, that he has failed to set it up correctly and doesn't have the experience necessary to do so. Yet, instead of realizing this, he blames the tool. On this forum, we have MF defending the 9" tonearms against the 12" versions. I happen to agree with him on his thinking, yet how do we really know that the arguments are valid...how is it possible to isolate the SAT tonearm on the table from other variables at work? Could it be that in his particular instance the SAT 9" works great on his Caliburn, but would work poorly on a SME 30/12 as an example ( I use this table as it was specifically designed for the longer length arms) and poorly on multiple other turntable designs that require a 12" arm to work as the manufacturer designed.. Thoughts...

PeterA · May 31, 2018

My thought is that we can not completely know what is responsible for what in a complex system, unless one has an extreme amount of experience with a particular component across a broad set of contexts. He may then be able to extrapolate and get close to reaching some conclusions. But in general, one should do careful, direct comparisons between specific components in a known system with familiar music over time to know with any degree of confidence that a particular component sounds a certain way. People make judgements about a particular component when hearing it in an unfamiliar system context all the time: shows, dealers, friends' systems. I don't understand it.

Six years ago, I made a series of direct comparisons with my analog front end components. I was comparing my reference SME Model 10A table with V tonearm and AirTight PC-1 cartridge to an SME Model 30/12A with V-12 arm and AirTight Supreme cartridge. I used the same tonearm cable and rest of the system. I first transferred the reference arm and cartridge and cable to the new turntable. This allowed me to hear only the contribution of the two turntables. Later, I replaced the 9" arm with the 12" arm on the bigger turntable. I then compared the two arms to each other on the same table with the same cartridge and cable. Finally, I installed the new cartridge so that I could directly compare the two cartridges on the same arm, table and cable. These comparisons took place over a three week period. When I had the new front end set up and running, I then tried to compare that sound to my memory of the former reference front end. That was more difficult, but the new combination was far better than the old one. I learned a lot and am confident about the differences I heard with these individual components.

DaveyF · May 31, 2018

Peter, great answer. One that I concur with. Perhaps you should emphasize ...with these individual components. That is where I suspect the crux of the matter lies.
IME, the variables in this hobby are almost endless, leading to incorrect assumptions and proclamations of fact that doesn't actually hold up in extended tests. This is the real risk in the hobby and I think it is somewhat propagated by reviewers and the reliance that so many people put on them. Not a good thing, IMHO.

Ron Resnick · May 31, 2018

I agree with you, Davey.

In my visit report to MikeL I spend a lot of time talking about this very topic.

PeterA · May 31, 2018

DaveyF said:
Peter, great answer. One that I concur with. Perhaps you should emphasize ...with these individual components. That is where I suspect the crux of the matter lies.
IME, the variables in this hobby are almost endless, leading to incorrect assumptions and proclamations of fact that doesn't actually hold up in extended tests. This is the real risk in the hobby and I think it is somewhat propagated by reviewers and the reliance that so many people put on them. Not a good thing, IMHO.

Davey, in a related topic, I wonder about music reviews, vinyl records in particular. I have posted my thoughts on adjusting arm height for different LPs and people may or may not agree with that. Al M. and I have discussed at length how in my and MadFloyd's systems, we can clearly hear the advantages of correct SRA/VTA. This makes me wonder about the reviewers who describe the quality and sonic traits of particular recordings when they do not optimize the conditions/parameters under which they are auditioning the recordings. The sound clearly changes depending on the resolution of one's system and how the vinyl source components are set up. It is a complex and often perplexing hobby.

microstrip · May 31, 2018

PeterA said:
Davey, in a related topic, I wonder about music reviews, vinyl records in particular. I have posted my thoughts on adjusting arm height for different LPs and people may or may not agree with that. Al M. and I have discussed at length how in my and MadFloyd's systems, we can clearly hear the advantages of correct SRA/VTA. This makes me wonder about the reviewers who describe the quality and sonic traits of particular recordings when they do not optimize the conditions/parameters under which they are auditioning the recordings. The sound clearly changes depending on the resolution of one's system and how the vinyl source components are set up. It is a complex and often perplexing hobby.

Peter,

IMHexperience there is not such think as correct SRA/VTA, just preferred SRA/VTA. I participated in sessions where people considered "experts" adjusted it independently and they often disagreed by a significant margin on the settings. The tonearm was a Triplanar , that had excellent reproducibility as it has a clear VTA scale. Even myself I have now found that my preferred VTA depended on system, so I have an average adjustment for all LPs. Also it seems to me that some cartridges are to be more dependent on this setting than others.

I think we must understand that this an hobby of very diverse sensitivities, and we cultivate mainly a few, becoming very dependent on them. Others have different views and different audio obsessions due to their interests and preferences - remember that Fred Thal sometime ago told us we should adjust head azimuth for playback of each tape? I must say I adjust it with a MLR calibration tape and forget about it!

Surely all IMHO, YMMV!

GaryProtein · May 31, 2018

PeterA said:
My thought is that we can not completely know what is responsible for what in a complex system, unless one has an extreme amount of experience with a particular component across a broad set of contexts. He may then be able to extrapolate and get close to reaching some conclusions. But in general, one should do careful, direct comparisons between specific components in a known system with familiar music over time to know with any degree of confidence that a particular component sounds a certain way. . . . .

I think many of our systems fall into that category and you must be familiar with the effects/sonic signatures of all the components in the signal path [and the listening room] in order to evaluate a particular component.

Some excellent components also might not sound their best when combined with some others.

A person really has to evaluate a component they are considering in their own system and room.

cyclopse · May 31, 2018

Interesting topic that you raise.

I think a lot of the audio press also run into this trap. This is with their reviews of individual components.

At the level most of you are enjoying isn’t it about system synergy where the result is greater than the contribution of each individual piece in the reproduction chain? Then there are audiophile fuses, racks, footers and grounding solutions that all play there part. When you get it right you listen with your soul and get lost in music. When it’s wrong the box swapping is relentless.

PeterA · May 31, 2018

microstrip said:
Peter,

IMHexperience there is not such think as correct SRA/VTA, just preferred SRA/VTA. I participated in sessions where people considered "experts" adjusted it independently and they often disagreed by a significant margin on the settings. The tonearm was a Triplanar , that had excellent reproducibility as it has a clear VTA scale. Even myself I have now found that my preferred VTA depended on system, so I have an average adjustment for all LPs. Also it seems to me that some cartridges are to be more dependent on this setting than others.

I think we must understand that this an hobby of very diverse sensitivities, and we cultivate mainly a few, becoming very dependent on them. Others have different views and different audio obsessions due to their interests and preferences - remember that Fred Thal sometime ago told us we should adjust head azimuth for playback of each tape? I must say I adjust it with a MLR calibration tape and forget about it!

Surely all IMHO, YMMV!

Thanks Francisco. You are right. VTA is a preference, not an absolute. So, I wonder if someone reviewing an LP knows or cares that a different setting might sound even better to him for a particular LP under review. Perhaps it doesn't matter to him. As the reader, I am left to wonder if he heard the LP in the best way possible using whatever criteria are important to him. Anyhow, Al and I have discussed this. Perhaps others don't see the point that I have failed to make.

Al M. · May 31, 2018

PeterA said:
Thanks Francisco. You are right. VTA is a preference, not an absolute. So, I wonder if someone reviewing an LP knows or cares that a different setting might sound even better to him for a particular LP under review. Perhaps it doesn't matter to him. As the reader, I am left to wonder if he heard the LP in the best way possible using whatever criteria are important to him. Anyhow, Al and I have discussed this.

Yes, and even if you are happy with a fixed arm height setting regardless of LP and its thickness, the subjectively best arm height may still vary by cartridge. Therefore, upon making comparisons between cartridges by keeping everything constant, you may shortchange the one for which the given arm height is subjectively not optimal.

In light of all this, I am wondering how reliable and informative cartridge reviews are.

DaveyF · May 31, 2018

Al M. said:
Yes, and even if you are happy with a fixed arm height setting regardless of LP and its thickness, the subjectively best arm height may still vary by cartridge. Therefore, upon making comparisons between cartridges by keeping everything constant, you may shortchange the one for which the given arm height is subjectively not optimal.

In light of all this, I am wondering how reliable and informative cartridge reviews are.

Both Peter and you have excellent points, IMO. I remember reading a review a few years ago by a Stereophile reviewer, sorry cannot remember who at the moment, who was certain that the headphone amp under review ( in this instance a Musical Fidelity) was about as great as it could possibly get. I stupidly went out and bought this piece....what a total POS!
I realized that the whole system that the reviewer used was so very different to mine and that his ‘expectations ‘ were so different to mine that he did indeed report as he saw fit. Problem was that the gear in question worked ok with his headphones and not with basically all others on the market

As to reviews on LP’s, I understood years ago that one has to take them with a major grain of salt. Numerous variables are involved, particularly when the reviewer is using a set up that most here would consider midfi at best.

DSkip · May 31, 2018

Something that really struck me once I became a dealer was just how much work goes into the business behind the scenes. What I mean is this: we have a responsibility to show our products to the best of our ability so that they shine. In fulfilling this goal, we also have to run through a gamut of gear in order to extract the potential any single component has. I find this to be the most enjoyable aspect of being a dealer because you begin to understand the limitations of each component and how to actually make it shine.

Before I was a dealer, I scoffed a bit at a dealer offering me a 'system' to work towards when I was only interested in a single component. Some of that might have to do with distrust with the actual salespeople, but now I understand much better why a dealer should not just be sales, but a true adviser to his/her clients. Usually my first question for clients when they approach me is along the lines of 'where do you want to end up' as opposed to 'what product type do you need'.

To add to what another poster has said, I've had countless times where I tried a product X that was clearly better than Y, even in my own system, but it didn't gel correctly with the synergy I created with Y. I've then had to decide whether it was worth keeping X and replacing components A, B, and C to fully realize its potential, or stick with Y and appreciate the work I had put in to creating the system I had. To me, this is when you can tell that a system is really dialed in - when better doesn't necessarily mean better.

microstrip · May 31, 2018

Al M. said:
(...) In light of all this, I am wondering how reliable and informative cartridge reviews are.

What should be the definition of a reliable review? IMHO subjective reviews are just informative and should also be enjoyable. It is the reader responsibility do determine if they are "reliable".

Again, IMHO one real problem with reviews and reviewers is mostly that most readers expect cooking recipes, something that does not exist in the high-end.

Ron Resnick · May 31, 2018

Al M. said:
Yes, and even if you are happy with a fixed arm height setting regardless of LP and its thickness, the subjectively best arm height may still vary by cartridge. Therefore, upon making comparisons between cartridges by keeping everything constant, you may shortchange the one for which the given arm height is subjectively not optimal.

In light of all this, I am wondering how reliable and informative cartridge reviews are.

An interesting point, Al. And yet, even with all of the subjectivity and the problem discussed in the opening post of this thread, we are able to arrive at general consensuses on cartridges

Whichever sonic category of cartridge one prefers I think there is a pretty decent consensus that if somebody wants a more neutral and detailed and frequency extended cartridge one might consider a Lyra, and if one wants a more midrange-centric, slightly rolled-off cartridge one might consider a Benz Micro.

So at least it is not all nihilism, all the time.

DSkip · May 31, 2018

microstrip said:
What should be the definition of a reliable review? IMHO subjective reviews are just informative and should also be enjoyable. It is the reader responsibility do determine if they are "reliable".

Again, IMHO one real problem with reviews and reviewers is mostly that most readers expect cooking recipes, something that does not exist in the high-end.

I don't know that I necessarily agree. I think reviews can be a 'recipe' so to speak, but you want to know if the author enjoys the same spices you do. If I see an ingredient that I simply do not like in a recipe, I avoid it. If I see one that keeps with half of what I already have in my pantry, I'm much more interested in trying that recipe out.

PeterA · May 31, 2018

microstrip said:
Peter,

IMHexperience there is not such think as correct SRA/VTA, just preferred SRA/VTA. I participated in sessions where people considered "experts" adjusted it independently and they often disagreed by a significant margin on the settings. The tonearm was a Triplanar , that had excellent reproducibility as it has a clear VTA scale. Even myself I have now found that my preferred VTA depended on system, so I have an average adjustment for all LPs. Also it seems to me that some cartridges are to be more dependent on this setting than others.

I think we must understand that this an hobby of very diverse sensitivities, and we cultivate mainly a few, becoming very dependent on them. Others have different views and different audio obsessions due to their interests and preferences - remember that Fred Thal sometime ago told us we should adjust head azimuth for playback of each tape? I must say I adjust it with a MLR calibration tape and forget about it!

Surely all IMHO, YMMV!

Francisco, thinking more about your statement, I'm not so sure. SRA/VTA is a preference because we adjust it until we like how a certain setting sounds. However, ideally, the best or correct SRA is the one that matches the original angle of the cutting head when the lacquer was inscribed. This should in theory, produce the lowest distortion. So, in this sense, I think there is a "correct" SRA though we can never be certain that we have found it. Ideally, the shape of the stylus should also match that of the cutting head. I think the replicant shape in the Ortofon A90 is close, or so I read. There was no standard angle, so we are approximating it by listening and adjusting arm height.

morricab · Jun 1, 2018

DaveyF said:
Looking at the various threads on tonearms-and the 9" vs12" debate specifically, ( although this applies to other areas of the hobby as well). I question how so many of the conclusions that are floated about have actually anything to do with the piece under review. A turntable system (and that is exactly what it is- a system, IMHO) has so many variables when it comes to the SQ that one is going to hear, that I have to ask the question in the thread heading! How on earth are we supposed to truly accept that the findings of the 'golden eared' reviewer are at all accurate when we are talking about just one piece of that system..ie, the arm, the cartridge, the tonearm wiring ( which BTW, I personally believe can make more of a difference than the even the cartridge!) The set up, the loading and on and on. This is also true of all other parts of our system ( which only work together with everything else and not independently---amp, preamp, speakers, room, cabling, etc.)
On another forum, there is a poster who is wailing about how his new Linn Klimax LP12 does not sound good to his ears....he has tried everything to make it sound great, but to no avail; reason is, that he has failed to set it up correctly and doesn't have the experience necessary to do so. Yet, instead of realizing this, he blames the tool. On this forum, we have MF defending the 9" tonearms against the 12" versions. I happen to agree with him on his thinking, yet how do we really know that the arguments are valid...how is it possible to isolate the SAT tonearm on the table from other variables at work? Could it be that in his particular instance the SAT 9" works great on his Caliburn, but would work poorly on a SME 30/12 as an example ( I use this table as it was specifically designed for the longer length arms) and poorly on multiple other turntable designs that require a 12" arm to work as the manufacturer designed.. Thoughts...

When I did/do show reports I tended to focus on only the way the whole system sounded for this reason...I don't know enough about the gear involoved to be able to convolute the contributions of each step in the chain. If it sounds good then it can be taken for granted that everything in that chain is working well...in that chain. If it is sounding poor, then one can only say that something in the chain or the way pieces in that chain interact is resulting in a negative outcome. However, one can, IMO, perform a kind of meta-analysis if one has heard a particular piece of gear in multiple rooms across multiple shows and years. Then I think it is possible to get an idea from a show or dealer what that piece sounds like.

As a reviewer, you need to do many back and forth experiments with a piece of gear, ideally level matched, to gain the need information on how that piece impacts a system. Of course this is only telling you the impact specifically in that system; however, this can be generally applied as well but with a lower degree of accuracy and there can always be surprises. A casual listen to a system of low familiarity will not allow you to dissect the exact cause/effect of a system. With speakers, if there are gross variations then these can sometimes be singled out if the other gear is somewhat known.

microstrip · Jun 1, 2018

PeterA said:
Francisco, thinking more about your statement, I'm not so sure. SRA/VTA is a preference because we adjust it until we like how a certain setting sounds. However, ideally, the best or correct SRA is the one that matches the original angle of the cutting head when the lacquer was inscribed. This should in theory, produce the lowest distortion. So, in this sense, I think there is a "correct" SRA though we can never be certain that we have found it. Ideally, the shape of the stylus should also match that of the cutting head. I think the replicant shape in the Ortofon A90 is close, or so I read. There was no standard angle, so we are approximating it by listening and adjusting arm height.

I remember reading that we can easily have SRA/VTA variation around +/- 2 degrees or even more in recordings, and this forgetting about the old vintage LPs that audiophiles love, that have much higher deviations. This would mean a 20 mm vertical excursion of the 12" (300 mm) toneram back if the optimum setting of playback was just the one that matches the original angle of the cutting head. I think that the problem is much more complex than this simplistic approximation.

ack · Jun 1, 2018

PeterA said:
ideally, the best or correct SRA is the one that matches the original angle of the cutting head when the lacquer was inscribed. This should in theory, produce the lowest distortion.

I am diverging a bit here, but wanted to make a point that all statements, reviews and impressions are entirely relative and should be taken in context, which would be my response to the original post. For example, in the above statement of yours, most people might agree with you that setting the exact same SRA angle as that of the cutting head's offers the lowest distortion of that kind; but the picture is also incomplete: do we also realize that the length of the cantilevers must also be exactly the same? Think about it: the stylus moves up and down effectively in an arc, albeit small, so the longer the cantilever the smaller the arc, and the shorter the cantilever the larger the arc.

audioguy · Jun 2, 2018

Semi related but slightly OT?

I remember reading a review (in TAS) about some product that the reviewer (current reviewer and well "respected") heard at a trade show. He had never heard a single piece of equipment in that room nor, obviously, had he ever been in that room, yet he is making comments about one of the pieces of equipment in that room. Not in any way humanly possible.

Now back to your regular programming.

We listen to a system, yet we judge a single piece...how accurate is that??

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor

Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Industry Expert

VIP/Donor

Site Co-Owner, Administrator

Industry Expert

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

WBF Founding Member

Similar threads