Walker Audio's New Black Diamond Mk II Record Player
For the past ten years I’ve been using Lloyd Walker’s record player—with air-bearing linear-tracking tonearm, massive air-bearing platter, and air-suspension feet—as my reference. Other excellent ’tables have come and gone; only the Walker has stayed. The reason for this is simple: The Walker is the best linear-tracking record player I’ve heard.
Comes now a brand-new Walker—the Black Diamond Mk II, with improvements in just about every regard, including tonearm wiring, the jetting of the arm-bearing housing, the functioning of pumps and hoses. The price has gone up to $57k (which includes a visit from Lloyd Walker and his partner Fred Law to set the Walker up), but the sonic results are worth the added expense, IMO. You’re not going to find a superior analog playback device—or, at least, I haven’t heard one (and I’ve heard just about all of them in my system, in other people’s systems, and at trade shows).
Although it doesn’t look dramatically different than the Black Diamond, the Mark II sounds better and tracks better, thanks, I think, to octuple venting of the arm-bearing housing, which smooths out air flow and eliminates “dead spots” in the bearing’s travel. The arm itself remains a sonic gem, fashioned from some secret ceramic/metallic material that is so stiff (20 times stiffer than carbon fiber) and hard that it takes diamond-tipped drills to saw out the tiny holes through which the tonearm wires are routed from inside the arm to the RCA plugs at the back of the ’table. The wire itself is now doubled up and braided in a way that has knocked RFI down to levels I couldn’t approach with older Walkers.
Although I’ve only had the Black Diamond Mk II for a few days, its sonic superiority to previous iterations of this classic record player is apparent—and was apparent from the first listen. Noise is lower, tracking better, resolution higher. Indeed, the thing functions so smoothly, easily, and quietly now that I no longer feel the need to damp the cartridge (although viscous damping can still be applied) to tame the rising upper midrange and treble of most moving coils. With Da Vinci’s superb Grandezza moving coil—a wonderful match with the Walker Black Diamond tonearm—the sound is utterly transparent. You will not miss a thing at this first critical step in the chain of high fidelity, and since you don’t miss a thing here, if the rest of your system is up to it, you don’t miss a thing in the listening, either.
Despite its plethora of detail and astonishing dynamic sock, the Black Diamond Mk II is not a cool or analytical sounding record player—Walkers have never been that. With anything but the worst recordings (and even then with some of these), it is always sweet and listenable and just plain realistic (or as realistic as the record allows). And it is every bit as good with mono discs as it is with stereo LPs.
I will have more to say about the Walker Black Diamond Mk II in the near future.
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Comments
Awsome Pictures! Its nice to actually see the gear from different angles that comes in the listening rooms of the reviewers. thanks JV
I feel for the poor guys who have to schlep this heavy gear up to your listening room. However, I look forward to your review of the Walker.
Mark
PS: How 'bout some more on the REF2?
Mark,
I will be reviewing the Reference 2 in Issue 199.
Jon
Pump box of the Walker Black Diamond Mk II with massive regulation and filtration.
Front view of Walker Black Diamond Mk II
Walker Black Diamond Mk II motor and adjustable motor cradle, with record clamp
Black Diamond linear-tracking, air-bearing tonearm (with Da Vinci Grandezza mc cartridge)
JV,
You have the best system in the world!
JV,
You have the best system in the world!
Wow, very few comments!
How does the Walker Audio Black Diamond II compare to the Rockport Sirius III?
I haven't directly compared the Walker to the Sirius III, although I have heard the Sirius III many times. To me the Rockport is a little on the analytical side--it sounds vaguely "direct-drive." Though the belt-drive Walker has at least as much detail (or more), it never sounds analytical. But keep in mind, the Sirius III is getting long in the tooth. It is my understanding that Andy is working on a Sirius V. When he perfects that, all bets are off.
I read somewhere that Payor will build the Sirius V when he gets enough firm orders.
With respect to your observations on the Sirius III, can you described what you mean by "a little on the analytical side" and "vaguely direct drive"?
I mean a little flat in aspect, a little lacking in bloom, a little on the dark and clinical side.
I think it would be interesting to know how the new Walker mk II compares to the DaVinci Gabriel turntable. With this question I am not asking which table is better (such a statement does not mean much to me), but what are the differences between these turntables with regard to important aspects as staging, tonality, bass foundation, transparence, dynamics? I never heard the Walker but I visited Jolanda and Peter this sommer in Sornetan (they have moved since to Bern) but I was seriously impressed by the performace the Gabriel turntable and Peter's new cartridge in his complete DaVinci set up (includiong his Virtu speaket).
audiocrack,
I too am "seriously impressed" with the AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci turntable, Da Vinci Grandezza tonearm, and Da Vinci Grandezza cartridge. (If you want to know how seriously impressed, pick up our upcoming Products of the Year issue.) I will have specific things to say about how Da Vinci's state-of-the-art magnetic-bearing 'table and 12" pivoted arm compare with Lloyd's state-of-the-art air-bearing 'table and air-bearing linear-tracking arm in my upcoming review of the mighty Walker. You might also want to stay tuned to this channel for a report from Switzerland, where I'm headed this weekend to visit Da Vinci and Soulution.
Do note that I said you can't find a "better" analog playback device than the Walker; I did not say that you can't find "as good" (albeit different).
Jon
Thanks for your reply, Jon. Jolanda and Peter are lovely people and I am sure you will enjoy their hospitality as much as we (my family and I) did last summer. The complete DaVinci set up I listened to in Sornetan was really impressive, although quite different sounding compared to my own two audio systems. I have not yet had the pleasure to visit their new set up in Bern so I am looking forward to your listening experience in Bern (Bern is by the way an absolute gorgeous city; you should try to visit the centre of it if you some spare time left). Did you already have an opportunity to listen to Peter's new cartridge? I am spoiled using a Lyra Olympos cartridge and a Koetsu Coral stone diamond catridge but Peter's latest cartridge is something very special as well. Your claim that no better turntable can be found than the Walker mk II seems to me rather bold. E.g. the big Continuum table is very special indeed (please note that I am not using a Continuum table myself). I wonder whether the Continuum table you listened to in Breda was set up right. I do know that the listening rooms of Kharma in Breda are not ideal. But of course there are very promising turntables available such as the black night turntable of TW Acustic, a new turntable by Kondo in Japan etc. Thanks and kind regards, audiocrack
Geez, what a dead thread! I thought there'd be much more interest.
Mark
Mr. Valin,
It seems like you keep most of your audio equipment between your speakers. Doesn't that induce noise/degredation in the sound? Specially the kind of massive/powerfull speakers that you listen to, I would guess that CD-Players/Turntables or even other Tube gear this close to the speakers may suffer a little. What are your thoughts?
<< It seems like you keep most of your audio equipment between your speakers. Doesn't that induce noise/degredation in the sound?>>
It doesn't bother me, but the standard wisdom is that it causes image degradation.
Jon, can you inform us about your visit to DaVinci Audio in Switserland? Thanks.
audiocrack,
As soon as I return to earth and get out of this jet-lagged fugue state I will blog in detail about my visit to Switzerland and Da Vinci. I also visited Soulution and will blog about it, as well.
Jon
very nice ...........very intersting to know how the walket make II compares to the DaVinci Gabriel turntable...
what are the differences between these turntables with regard to important aspects as staging?
<a href="http://www.buyblackdiamonds.com">buy diamonds</a>
The new Walker and Da Vinci are both superb, but different. The Walker is (and always was) a bit more robust sounding, denser in both tone color and dynamic. It is also extremely detailed. The Da Vinci is ultra-neutral and ultra-transparent and no slouch in tone color and dynamic either. Think of them as the dynamic loudspeaker (Walker) and electrostatic loudspeaker (Da Vinci) of analog playback devices.
Thanks Jon. I did not know you only recently came back to the USA. Off course take all the time you need to become a real person again without suffering from a jetlag. Although I hate flying, I experieced quite some jetlags in the past and I hate those as well.
Hello Jon,
Thank for your work.
Could you write a few words about the Grand Prix Monaco, and its relation to the new Walker, please?
phfh,
I can't directly compare the sound of the Grand Prix Monaco to that of the Walker, as I've only heard the Grand Prix at shows (where it has sounded swell, BTW). They are substantially different, however, in design. The Grand Prix Monaco is a superbly built direct-drive turntable to which you must add an arm of your choice. The Walker is a superbly built belt-drive record player with an air-bearing platter, air-suspension feet, and integral air-bearing, straight-line-tracking arm. You do not (in fact, cannot) add an arm to the Walker--it is a complete playback system. For what it's worth, I have a colleague who traded his Grand Prix for a Walker--and never looked back. OTOH, I'm sure there are folks who have done just the opposite. Turntables, tonearms, and cartridges tend to be very personal choices.
Jon
Mr. Valin,
I was wondering, on certain turntables that have seperate motors, and tonearm assemblies like the AAS Gabriel, Walker, etc, how do you know the correct position, distance, and belt tension to get the speed, and height just right? Just wondering. I also noticed that you use the MIT Oracle MA-X cable, have you noticed a "significate" improvement when adjusting the articulation? Thanks in advance. One more question, do turnables like the AAS Gabriel, and Walker units improve in sound quality after extended use, is there a "break-in" for exotic turntables like these two?
Hiendguy,
On positioning, distancing, and achieving the correct belt tension on tables with outboard motors, as long as rotational speed reads correctly vis-a-vis a strobe/test record there is no one right solution. Generally, I follow the manufacturer guidelines. For instance, Walker prefers the belt to run along the lower part of the platter, close to the bottom. This will determine the height at which you set the motor. He also likes a relatively low amount of tension on his silk belt. This will determine the distance at which you set the motor and motor carriage. Da Vinci's standard belt is considerably longer than the Walker's, so the motor will perforce be farther away from the platter than the Walker's motor (Da Vinci does make a shorter belt, however). Also Da Vinci prefers a very low amount of tension on the belt--just enough to get the platter moving. This also has a bearing on motor/motor block distance from the table.
On MIT's articulation control, yes, there is a significant difference when you adjust it. I've not decided whether this difference is an improvement--or merely a difference. I can say that MIT's Oracle MA took me entirely by surprise. It is superb--very very neutral, very very high in resoluton, very high in dynamic energy, very very high in bandwidth. It is simply not at all what I expected from a "networked cable," given long-ago experience with networked cable. Clearly Brisson has fixed many of the issues I used to have with networked wire--the way it used to "sit" on dynamics, the way it used to roll-off in the treble, the way it used to make musical images sound as if they were cut with a cookie-cutter, the way it used to make musical energy sound overcontrolled.
On whether turntables "break-in" over time, yes. I can't say that they break-in as dramatically as, oh, a loudspeaker does, but tables do change sound subtly as tonearm wires break in and bearing lubrications are more evenly spread through repeated use.
Jon
Hello John,
You experienced a complete DaVinci audio system when you visited Switzerland lately. Has this experience changed in ant way your opinion about the Gabriel turntable? And did you already have a chance to listen to Peter's latest cartridge in your own audio system or are you still playing with the DaVinci cartridge you tedted some months ago in TAS? Any idea when you will be able to post your comments on your visit to DaVinci and Soulution?
Kind regards, audiocrack