AAS Gabriel/DaVinci turntable with DaVinci Grandeeza arm
Jonathan Valin -- Sun, 03/09/2008 - 22:59
Pictured above is what may well be the best turntable and tonearm I've heard--and perhaps one of the very best a great deal of money ($57k for 'table and arm) can currently buy. I say "may well be" because I haven't yet compared it directly or at length to my reference, the Walker Black Diamond record player, or to the truly remarkable TW Acustic Raven AC-3 'table with Graham arm. I'll be doing just that over the next several months and will report on the results in TAS.
I can already say this, however, with certainty: This gorgeous, belt-driven, magnetically-suspended, Swiss 'table and this gorgeous, double-gimballed, 12" Swiss tonearm reproduce all music with exceptionally high realism, standard-setting resolution, and very, very, very low distortion. If you can picture a cross between a Walker Black Diamond and a TW Acustic Raven AC-3 then you have some idea of what this Da Vinci combo sounds like.
The DaVinci Grand Reference "Grandeeza" transcription tonearm already has a good deal of buzz going for it; the AAS Gabriel/DaVinci 'table is less well-known, at least in the States. It won't remain a secret for long. Every once in awhile (and more frequently just recently), this reviewer has had the incredible good luck to chance upon a product that represents a genuine "paradigm shift"--a clear advance in the state of the art. The Magico Mini was my last such experience. Now I have two more contenders--the Symposium Acoustics Panorama loudspeakers (for which, see the "Symposium Acoustics Panorama--World's Best?" thread in the Speaker forum) and this turntable and tonearm from DaVinci.
For more on the DaVinci 'table and arm, go to tangramaudio.com/ or da-vinci-audio.com/.
On the interesting subject of magnetic-drive (or suspension) platters vis-a-vis conventional-bearing 'tables, I have this one early observation: It seems to me that the magnetically-suspended AAS Gabriel/DaVinci Grandeeza is allowing details (and conglomerations of details) to almost literally "stand out" more clearly. The lowering of distortions here isn't heard so much as a "floor" but as a background (as I think it almost always is)--a canvas whose colors and textures get modulated into the sonic "picture." Here the sense of a "canvas" (or background) is much, much, much lower. It's kind of like the difference between a photographic print (on paper) and a photographic slide (on a viewer). The magnetic-bearing 'table seems illuminated from within, as if light (or sound) were passing freely through it rather than being reflected off its surface, heightening transparency, density of color, and dimensionality.
Hi Jon,
Good to see you testing this table.
One little nitpick........you say...'picture a cross between the Walker Proscenium Black Diamond and the Raven AC-3'.......
How many people do you think can actually DO this?
Regards
Halcro,
Uh, you've got a point!
What I meant was that the Gabriel/Da Vinci seems to combine the virtues of the two best analog sources I've heard: the neutrality and transparency of the Walker and the seductive musicality of the Raven.
Time will tell whether these initial impressions hold.
Jon
My shootout between the AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci 'table w. Da Vinci Grandeeza 12" arm, the Walker Black Diamond record playing system, and the TW Acustic Raven AC-3 w. Graham Phantom and Dynavector arms will begin next month, after Thomas Woschnik visits me this weekend to upgrade the Raven AC-3 and Lloyd Walker visits me next weekend to upgrade the Black Diamond. With all three record players tweaked to the max, it should be an interesting contest.
I can tell you in advance that my admiration for the Da Vinci has only increased with further listening. My little panel of fellow-listeners already think it is the most phenomenally neutral, highly detailed, purely lifelike source I've had in my system. It is certainly the most formidable challenger to my long-standing reference, the Walker, that has yet come along.
Uh...hold the presses!
Thomas Woschnik and Jeff Catalano just updated the TW Acustic Raven AC-3, adding a second tonearm (the Dynavector) to go with the superb Graham Phantom and, perhaps more importantly, a completely new motor controller that is said to be far more accurate than TW Acustic's incredibly accurate original motor controller and greatly improved (TW Acustic-designed) feet for the 'AC-3. (This change will probably add about a $1k to the Raven AC-3's price.) It is hard to believe that a motor controller and new feet would make a substantial difference in overall "neutrality," and yet it appears, from an early listen, that they may have done just that. If you'd like more information on the TW Acustic Raven AC-3, go to Jeff's site at http://www.highwatersound.com/.
I have little reason to doubt that Lloyd Walker will also make substantial improvements to my reference Walker Black Diamond, meaning that this
turntable/tonearm shootout is going to be very close and very interesting.
Stay tuned.
[img]://image_url[img]
Jon,
I wonder if the motor controller Thomas installed is the same as the one he just sent me after 4 months of design work?
It makes a startling difference.
Also, if you are simply listening to the Raven with the Phantom (I know Thomas likes it), you should try it with the Grandezza 12" Ref which blows the Phantom away.....and THEN you should try it with the Continuum Copperhead which is another leap forward[/img]
Regards
Halcro
Halcro,
I would think that the motor controller is the same one he sent you, as the difference it makes in overall neutrality is..."startling." (The new feet, which were designed by Thomas, may also be playing a role.)
I may try the Grandeeza with the Raven AC-3 at some point. As for the Continuum arms (and tables)...I remain skeptical about these products, although the smaller one showed better this year at CES than either did last year. Of course, I've never heard either arm or table in my home, just at trade shows, where they've typically sounded like the anti-TW Acustic--sonic vacuum cleaners with all the soul of an insurance salesman.
FYI, Harry Pearson has the smaller Continuum table at the moment.
Jon
Jon,
Thomas just confirmed that your controller is the same as mine.
I've heard the Caliburn/Cobra in a domestic situation and believe that the Raven AC-3/Copperhead is just as good if not better.
Both the Cobra and Copperhead arms are not to be ignored.
If you can even imagine the Davinci Grandezza being shaded, then that's a mighty arm!
Regards
Halcro[/img]
Cool-looking setup, Halcro!
I'll take what you said into consideration. I certainly haven't ruled the Continuum arm or table out of the picture. That wouldn't be fair. It's just that, as I said previously, aside from the decent showing of the smaller table and arm in Continuum's own room at this year's CES, I've had trouble understanding what all the fuss is about. (And I'm not the only one.)
Thanks Jon,
But certainly not nearly as impressive as yours which I see in the Speaker section!
You must be getting some seriously delicious sound with that set-up.
One thing that puzzles me............you and other reviewers never seem to try the ZYX Universe XSB cartridge.
I know that it's probably because ZYX doesn't issue review samples and I imagine you've probably heard one in someone else's system, but as with the Continuum arms, unless you actually hear it within your OWN system, it's a pretty meaningless audition.
I've had Koetsu Urishi, Clearaudio Insider Gold, Lyra Helikon, Lyra Titan i, Dynavector DV1s and I must say that the ZYX Universe is as great a revelation to me as the Raven AC-3....that's how good it is!
Your anciliary equipment leaves Fremer's for dead IMHO........if you procurred a ZYX Universe, he would have nowhere to go with his Titan i which I found to be the worst cartridge in my recent experience.
I'll look into the ZYX, Halcro, and the Continuum arm.
At the moment my two favorite cartridges are the Air Tight PC-1 (have you tried?) and the Goldfinger v2 (ditto?). I just recently heard a cartridge from Audio Tekne that was also interesting. In fact, Audio Tekne is interesting. Do you know this Japanese company? Among other things, it makes a $130k phonostage! (Yes, $130k!) Apparently the guy behind Audio Tekne, Mr. Kiyoaki Imai, is a Zen master of ultra-high-end audio design. I have his inexpensive phonostage ($12k) in my system at the moment, and it is very, very, very good.
If you want to see some photos of Audio Tekne stuff go to http://www.tangramaudio.com/content.htm and click the Audio Tekne link in the "Products" box.
Wow.....that's serious stuff.
The ultra expensive ones don't seem to have valves (a good thing IMO for LOMCs).
Do you have the one with valves?
Regards
Halcro
Halcro,
I think they all have valves (tubes), and, yes, the one that I'm using does have tubes. It also has a step-up transformer. Normally step-ups rob you of transparency, dynamics, and detail. Not this one. It's terrific.
Jon
Jon,
Can't see the valves?
The tubes are housed in small perforated metal cages between the transformers, Halcro.
Halcro,
You are being too absolute in your comments. I have learned that different arms react differently w. different cartridges. I would not say the PC-1 is better than all, but posses qualities that I want that others don't have. In that regard, I still think the Titan I is the best cartridge for Rock. Much better than the Universe. I own both. The Titan I would not do well in your DaVinci arm as the compliance would be a mismatch. The AirTight should do very well. Better than in the Phantom. But the Phantom and Titan I are a perfect match. Mind you my ZYX is abotu a 6-7 cu. Not all cartridges are the same. Based on your preference for the DaVinci I would guess yours is similar. Making the Grandeza an ideal match. The Air Tight is about a 10 cu. As s Koetsu (& can be less). Try a Van den Hull in your DaVinci & it would not do so well. But in a Breuer it would be tops.
Jon,
I would love for you to show readers what percentage of the sound is the turntable, vs. the tonearm/cartridge match. Of course there are no absolutes. I read your earlier review of the Raven/Phanom vs. Walker / Black diamond as just that. The entire setup. But while the Walker is dedicated and a linear tracking turntable / arm combination, the Raven is more of a Morph. Your review to me was more of how the Phantom w. either cartridge sounds on the Raven. With more arms it will be more fun but boy is it work figuring it all out. I run 3 tonearms and am never 100% how I want to play it. Mind you, the simplest decision is that I have a LIFT for one of my arms. So late as night I use my Ikeda so I don't have to worry if I fall asleep. Or I do SACD/CD. But if I want to listen I choose the cartridge based on the music or album. I love what your are doing w. your in depth analysis and keeping us postd as you go.
dgad,
First, thank you for the kind words.
Second, you couldn't be more right about how hard it is to figure out how much of a record player's sound is rightly attributable to the table and how much to the arm/cartridge. To even try to figure this out, you'd have to be able to mount the same arms on whichever turntables you were testing, which is impossible in some cases (such as the Walker Black Diamond), or (if you were only testing arms) various arms on the same table, which is also often tricky (for instance, the Raven AC-3 has to be modified to take multiple arms). Even at that, how do you know how much of the sound you're hearing is the arm proper and how much the arm as it is being colored by the table (or vice versa)? When I reviewed the Raven AC-3, how much of that turntable's fabulous reproduction of the duration of notes was attributable to the AC-3, how much to the Graham Phantom, and how much to the Clearaudio Goldfinger v2? In terms of percentages, I honestly don't know, although I can say with certainty that a good deal of it came from the table because I have since heard the AC-3 with the Graham fitted with a PC-1 and also with a Dynavector arm fitted with a different cartridge, and the "more complete" duration of notes was still audible (although there were substantial differences in density of tone color, detail, and dynamics).
Because this is such a very tricky proposition, I've settled for comparing table/arm/cartridge combos as complete systems. In all cases, I have used the arm (or arms) that the table manufacturer recommends most highly (and, usually, the cartridge he is most comfortable with in this table/arm system).
Jon
dgad,
I think you need to re-read my statement "......Titan i which I found to be the worst cartridge in my recent experience."
This is not an ' absolute' per se.......it is a personal statement which is irrefutable.
I did not say that the Titan i sounds poorly in every arm and on every table and in every system. It obviously suits some people and their systems.
You should also be careful about your assumptions.
I never used the Titan i in the Davinci Grandezza but in my Hadcock GH228 Unipivot built 30 years ago (you'll see quite a few similarities in the early development of the Graham unipivots).
This same Hadcock unipivot has been a happy match for all the moving coils I mentioned including the Helikon which one might assume to share some similarities to the Titan.
Nagaoka MP11, Garrot P77 and other Moving Magnets have also proved a happy match in the Hadcock.
The Titan i is the ONLY cartridge that made me miserable.
Now I accept that there are good and bad matches between various arms and cartridges, but there is a poster in another forum who has 3 turntables and 6 arms and about 20 cartridges who tells all and sundry which cartridges match the best with which arm.
The problem for me is..........none of his turntables, arms or cartridges can be described as ' new' or ' state-of- the-art' .
This is fine for him and I'm glad he's happy......but basically.....I'm not interested.
Have a look at this Topic Review with Jon proclaiming that perhaps the Davinci Gabriel table and Grandezza arm ".....represents a genuine 'paradigm shift' - a clear advance in the state of the art."
I'm interested in the question.....'Is there a BEST turntable and a BEST arm?'
I believe the answer could be....yes!
Cartridges being transducers like speakers, can never claim that mantle as system and room dependencies will preclude universal agreement. [/u]
Quote:Cartridges being transducers like speakers, can never claim that mantle as system and room dependencies will preclude universal agreement.
Halcro,
I wouldn't take dgad's post personally. I'm certain that you heard what you heard with the Titan i in your setup (and that dgad heard what he heard in his). I think his larger point about "compatibilities" (both in system-matching and in music) is well made, and it is undeniably true that it is tough to suss out precisely what percentage of the sound is rightly attributable to each part of a record playback system. Your concluding comment (quoted above) made me smile, because it is so true. In my experience, the assessment of all hi-fi gear, whether done by numbers or ear or both,"precludes universal agreement" (and very often starts arguments)!
Jon
My goodness!
Lloyd Walker and Fred Law of Walker Audio have been tuning up my reference Walker Black Diamond (tweaking the table, adding a new and more effective grounding scheme to the RCA connectors, a greatly improved filter for the air supply box, and a completely new and superior motor controller). Although the update isn't yet complete, I can say without question that this is the best I've ever heard the Walker Black Diamond (or any Walker table) sound--simply phenomenal high fidelity from top to bottom. There is a reason why the Walker has been my reference for 8 years.
What a trio of competitors!
JV & Halcro,
I think that with sufficient tweeking the sound of all 3 systems can begin to approximate each other. I have had a situation where Warm Cartridge mated w. a SS phono, was difficult to distinguish from a sligtly lean cartridge w. a tube phono. This was after VTA/VTF adjustments to make them sound alike. Running multiple arms & cartridges can lead to a convergence between the sounds of your arms. I bet the same will apply to some of these tables.
The big limit though will remain the room & isolation. I did some changes to my equipment setup where I removed items from my isolation platform. I was just trying to make my system more elegant looking. In the end reducing the weight on my isolation platform changed the resonant frequency. It took me a while to realize. My springs are rated for about 200Lbs to bring the Resonant Freq low enough. I can get fairly deep bass in my room. I find the biggest challenge for any turntable is to produce deep bass, but maintain the mids & highs. This is where the evaluation must be done w. a full range system. The turntable & isolation will be challenged by the bass vibrations. But if the room resonates, or the speakers aren't full range there is no way to know they performance limits of the turntable. I designed speaker cables based on a friends advise. He had great speakers. But they weren't full range. In the end, his cables were very weak in the bass. He would not have known as his speakers lacked much below 45 Hz.
dgad,
Please read my post in the ' turntable isolation platform' section.
Your Raven appears to be on a granite shelf on a hollow-steel-tube floor-mounted rack.
From your post above, it would seem that you have added an isolation platform between the Raven and the granite top? if you tell me the specs of the isolation device and show me photos, I may be able to provide some thoughts.
As it is, your Raven is compromised compared to a wall-mounted situation.
Are your floor tiles fixed to a concrete slab or glued to fiber-board on timber floor joists?
Not to pre-empt Jon's shoot-out?.....but I've just completed 6 months of detailed evaluations on the Raven AC-1, Raven AC-3, Davinci Grandezza 12" Ref and the Continuum Copperhead and will be posting this review in the next few days.
What I have discovered with the Continuum Copperhead tonearm, is that a new age in vinyl reproduction has just begun.
Rather than sounding similar to other arms available today, the Copperhead demonstrates that the sound of ALL previous arms is degraded.
The Copperhead demonstrates that the tonearm is at least as important as the turntable......and maybe more so!
And yes dgad.......I'm guilty of a serious ' absolute' here, but just wait till you hear this arm (or its derivatives) in your own system.
The age of Tonearms has arrived! :javascript:emoticon(':P')P
http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl64.html
The sound he is hearing is primarily that of the Copperhead arm.
Halcro,
My Raven has always been on a sand filled Sound Anchor rack, on tile floor. On the Rack are cones which support a 1.5 inch thick wood shelf, which in turn supports springs which support a 1.5 inch thick piece of granite (actually 2 pieces joined together). There are 10 very large spring. I can't wall mount as I don't have the room. Adding the isolation made a huge improvement. But this is in my room / system. People often say Granite rings, but in my system I detect no ringing. I can knock on it & it is silent. Of course I have Stillpoints under my Raven. I removed them a few times, but always found they offer a nice improvement, even when isolated.
I am sure your tonearm is fabulous. It is tempting, but until there is 1 arm that can change effective mass, I am staying put. Too much depends on the tonearm mass. I have used Blue Tak on many arms to adjust sound. It really works. Not many people test their arms resonant frequencies. That for me is critcal before anything. Hence Schroder offers different mass arm wands to match different cartridges. Of course, not many will buy multiple wands (I haven't, considering how much he charges for one). Out of curiousity, what is the effective mass of the Continuum arm? I would love to read your review.
dgad,
I'm sure you have listened carefully to your Raven with different mounting conditions.
My thoughts for what they are worth:-
The granite shelf is not a good idea. You THINK it doesn't ring but believe me if you saw the tests for sound transmission you'd be shocked. It helps that you have the Stillpoints between it and the Raven?
The springs you have under the granite shelf I believe is a serious weakness.
These springs will convert all STRUCTURE-BORNE and AIR-BORNE sound into MOVEMENT!!!!!
We do not want our Ravens to be moving!?
This movement in the springs will convert some energy back into sound via the contact with the granite shelf.........hence the 'ringing' problem in the granite I mentioned.
It is important to know whether your tiles are fixed to a solid CONCRETE floor or are glued to floorboards or some other light-weight substrate on timber joists?
Both Structure-borne AND Air-borne transmissions are quite different depending?
I agree with you that the effective mass of tone-arms (as we've known them to date) can affect the compatibility with various cartridges......but what I believe after hearing the Copperhead......is that finding the best arm is just like finding the best turntable.
THEY become the 'absolutes' and the cartridges (as even today), will be a matter of personal taste, system compatibility and....dare I say it.....tone-control.
Halcro,
My stand resonance is tuned to about 1.5Hz, when I have 200lbs on the platform. I sinse reduced the weight moving some equipment around which changed things to the worse. That will be ameliorated shortly when I reorganize my equipment. In my house, the isolation stand adds a further level of transparency and allows the turntable to play deep bass (provided no rumble) with dynamics and solidity. There are several isolation stands that use springs. Minus K & Halcyonics to name a few.
My springs have sorbothane on them to prevent vibration. I know slate to be superior but it is impossible to source locally. Even to import it is cost prohibative.
The Granite is multiple single length slabs joined together which itself removes resonance. I can jump up and down next to the turntable and there is nothing while music is playing.
I did try the turntable without stillpoints on the isolation base and found that the stillpoints do further improve things. It wasn't subtle. I have a feeling the stillpoints help remove rotational energy from the turntable but of this I am not sure. It definitely sounds better and provides isoation in the horizontal plane. I have tried stillpoints & springs under my CD player as well to a very positive effect. Dynamics and bass and improved as well in digital playback.
I have a tile floor on concrete but it still has a spring constant and as such does transmite vibration. The springs actually isolate the turntable from floor born vibrations, and from room resonance due to the subwoofer etc.
I agree a wall mount is superior but in my case just not possible.
Quote:What I have discovered with the Continuum Copperhead tonearm, is that a new age in vinyl reproduction has just begun.
Rather than sounding similar to other arms available today, the Copperhead demonstrates that the sound of ALL previous arms is degraded.
Halcro,
It seems to me that you could reasonably say that the Continuum Copperhead sounds better on the Raven turntable than the other arms you've tried on the AC-3, but until you’ve heard it in other tables and compared it to several other arms like the Graham Phantom, the Basis Vector, the Tri-Planar, the SME Series V, the Dynavector 507, the Schroeder, the VPI JMW, the Kuzma Airline, the Clearaudio Master TQ-1, the latest Rockport, the latest Goldmund, or the latest Walker Black Diamond—to name an obvious few—I'm not sure you can fairly claim more than that at this point.
Moreover, a table/arm/cartridge is an interactive system. Before pronouncing anything “the best” (a phrase, trust me, that should always be followed by the words “I’ve yet heard in my system”), you need to at least consider how much of what you’re hearing is an arm synergy with table or cartridge. I fully realize, as I’ve already said, how tough this is to do, which is why, in my case, I review table/arm combos as systems and generally try to use the cartridge that the table/arm manufacturers think is the best match for their products. I know, for example, that Robert Graham is high on the Air Tight PC-1, that Lloyd Walker is also high on that cartridge and the Clearaudio Goldfinger v2, and that Da Vinci has its own cartridge which it thinks is the ideal match for the Grandeeza.
All of this is not to say that the Copperhead isn't some sort of "breakthrough." It may well be, although I have a little trouble imagining how any pivoted arm, which, after all, is always slightly "off" when it comes to tangency (save for two spots on a record—and then only if it is properly aligned), could be superior in all respects to a truly well-engineered straight-line-tracking arm (or to a well-engineered 12" transcription arm like the Grandeeza).
Speaking of the Grandeeza, there are improvements in store for the already superb AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci turntable. Like TW Acustic and Walker Audio, Da Vinci wants to put its best foot forward for the upcoming shootout.
Jon
Jon,
I've heard the Air Tangent on the Basis Debut and I've heard the Rockport Sirius with its tangential arm, and despite the theory related to pivoted arms.....they did not bowl me over?
I suspect that minimizing tracking error to zero may not be as important to tone-arms as other parameters?
I'm eagerly awaiting this shoot-out.
Can you give some tempting initial impressions?
Quote:I suspect that minimizing tracking error to zero may not be as important to tone-arms as other parameters?
It is certainly not the only parameter, but it is important--or, at least, it has shown itself to have been in my experience. For instance, one of the differences between the Walker Black Diamond or the Da Vinci/Grandeeza table/arm and the Raven/Graham table/arm is the resolution of certain kinds of fine detail that I associate with precise, stable imaging and, also, with large-scale dynamics. If, for instance, you listen to the "Sanctus" of Stravinsky's Mass [Columbia MS 6992] through the Walker or the Da Vinci, you will hear the individual voices of the Greg Smith Singers (at both sides and at the rear of the stage) more clearly delineated than you will through the Raven/Graham (although you won't hear ambience or duration in quite the same way--a subject I will talk about when I review the three tables). Also, when the entire chorus almost literally bursts into a joyful "Hosanna in excelsis," you will be rocked (as you are certainly meant to be by Stravinsky) by the power of this quadruple-fortissimo expression of praise to God in the highest. Through the Raven/Graham, this ffff will be softened into an ff, losing some of its power and expressiveness.
What I believe is causing this slight "softening" of image focus and dynamics is--at least, in part--the greater tracking (or tangency) error of the Raven/Graham vis-a-vis the straight-line-tracking Walker Black Diamond or the 12" Grandeeza transcription arm (with its inherently lower tracking error). The Walker may have a slight edge here over the Da Vinci, as it should if my speculation about tracking error is correct, but whatever edge it has is much less marked than it is compared to the Raven/Graham. (I should note that bearing noise or the lack of it is also playing a big part in the superior resolution and dynamic scaling of the Walker and Da Vinci. Both the Walker and the Da Vinci tables are "suspended-bearing" designs. In the Walker this is accomplished via an air bearing, in the Da Vinci via a magnetic bearing. Regardless of how the suspension is done, it seems to isolate the table from noises that can and do obscure dynamic range and detail.)
Now, precise imaging and powerful dynamics are swell, but they aren't the whole ball of wax. I have heard straight-line-tracking tables and arms that excel in both of these areas (e.g., the Kuzma), but that also sound "overcontrolled"--somewhat etched and analytical--trading away the immeasurably important qualities of natural size, air, and bloom for an utlra-precise but ultimately artificial presentation. Neither the Walker nor the Da Vinci does this. In fact, with good sources both are extremely musical and lifelike in addition to being highly detailed and reproducing dynamic scale correctly at both ends of the dynamic spectrum (i.e., from pppp to ffff). However, because they are getting dynamic scaling (which is really the key factor here) closer to lifelike, they are somewhat less forgiving of sources than the begulingly softer-sounding Raven/Graham. There are two ways of looking at this: 1) by softening dynamic scale somewhat (on the forte end of the spectrum--not on the pianissimo one, where it excels), the Raven/Graham makes all recordings sound more "beautiful"; 2) the Walker and the Da Vinci make recordings sound more like themselves. I could construct arguments in support of both positions, and probably will.
Thanks Jon,
Tantalizing stuff!
Halcro,
The shootout with the Continuum--arm or table--ain't gonna happen. I did try, but Continuum's U.S. distributor claims he doesn't have enough loaners at this time to send one my way (and it is a fact that he already has one "out" with HP for review in TAS).
To be frank, I have a feeling Contiuum wouldn't want me to review one of its 'tables anyway, seeing that I haven't been a fan and have said so repeatedly in print.
Oh, well...
Jon
"To be frank, I have a feeling Contiuum wouldn't want me to review one of its 'tables anyway, seeing that I haven't been a fan and have said so repeatedly in print."
Not a great way to obtain a review sample Jon?
Can you understand that if you were Continuum, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by giving you.......a self-confessed foe.......a product to review?
With the highest accolades from your arch-rival in Hi-Fi journalism and your mentor HP soon to review the Criterion/Copperhead, why would anyone take the risk of a negative review?
Unfortunately in this case Jon, the real loser may indeed be you if the Cobra/Copperhead tone-arm designs eventuate to in fact BE the breakthrough I believe them to be?
It means that you are NOT hearing the best from your vinyl (regardless of your turntable), and to do so, you will eventually have to eat humble pie or wait for the other arms to catch up?
Quote:"To be frank, I have a feeling Contiuum wouldn't want me to review one of its 'tables anyway, seeing that I haven't been a fan and have said so repeatedly in print."
Not a great way to obtain a review sample Jon?
Are you saying I should have lied about what I heard (repeatedly and in several different rooms) at CES and RMAF, Halcro? Or soft-pedaled it? Or should "eat humble pie" now and just retract what I said? Or that the way to get review samples is to suck up to manufacturers, lie about what you heard, and pretend you think their stuff is the nuts when you don't?
Buddy, I report what I hear as honestly as I can. To my ear, with records I know by heart (many of which I brought with me), the Continuum tables and arms have not been the "breakthroughs" you claim they are, at least not as they've been shown at CES for two-and-a-half years running. Even champions of the Continuum have admitted that the tables have often shown poorly. But a show's a show, and a reference system's a reference system. Several listeners whose judgment I respect have found the Continuum to be very special, indeed, in their own reference systems. So I was, am, and will continue to be willing to audition the Continuum, without prejudice, in my system and to compare it directly to the best I've yet heard. At this point Continuum isn't willing to take that chance. But that could change. Chris Sommovigo, Continuum's U.S. importer, is a smart, fair-minded, and downright witty man. I hope to persuade him to take the risk. It seems to me that turning a critic into a convert would only help Continuum in the marketplace. And if I'm not converted, then what has been lost? I'm already in print as being skeptical. The worst I can imagine happening is that I would remain skeptical.
Quote:I've heard the Air Tangent on the Basis Debut and I've heard the Rockport Sirius with its tangential arm, and despite the theory related to pivoted arms.....they did not bowl me over?
Let me get this straight: It's OK for you to reach the broad general conclusion that the Continuum kills all other competition and that straight-tracking arms are the bunk based on listening to a couple of competitive tables and arms in someone else's system, but I'm not supposed to report on what I've heard time and again at CES?
No offense, Halcro, but have you heard the Basis/Air Tangent or Rockport Sirius in your system? (What is your system, BTW? I've told you what mine is.) Have you heard the Walker Black Diamond, the AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci, the AC-3 with a Dynavector 507? I have. In fact, outside of the Clearaudio Statement, I believe I’ve heard just about every table/arm out there, either in my system or repeatedly and at length at shows. No offense, again, but moving up from a Pro-Ject to an AC-3 doesn't exactly give you a world of analog experience. You've given the impression that the Continuum arm decisively beats out the Da Vinci (at least on the AC-3), but did you always feel that way? I have some reason to think that you didn't.
In any event, don’t feel too sorry for poor me with my handicapped analog playback setup. I will confidently bet that what I’m currently listening to is, at the very least, fully competitive with what you’re listening to. Which is not to say that there isn’t better to be had—just that I haven’t heard it in my home.
Gosh Jon,
You're getting quite agitated there?
I was simply trying to explain to you that from Continuum's point of view, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose by giving a review sample to a writer who continually bashes their products.
Now you admit that you've only heard their products at shows (which you then rightly state is really a poor way to form valid opinions), yet you continue this pre-formed stance of antipathy (you might say scepticism) in print time and time again.
I would have thought that a pre-requisite for a reviewer of any equipment is primarily an open mind?
I don't believe in this case that you are demonstrating this 'a priori' however I have faith in your trained and experienced ear and believe that you would in fact be fair in listening and judging their arms......that is why I have been suggesting it to you.
In 3 hours time, both Mark Doehmann and Murali are visiting my place to check my arm set-up and I was going to make a plea for them to offer you a Copperhead (one can't get any higher in Continuum than them)?
Jon, I've admitted many times that you've heard infinitely more (and better) equipment than I and that you've obviously heard (and had) better sound in your listening room than I probably ever will.
That is precisely the reason for this discourse.
I also understand that writers in your position are sensitive about criticism but I was trying to get you to see your stance objectively from Continuum's point of view........and I know it's hard to do?
Halcro,
Kiddo, I'm sorry for being so testy.
Please do not ask for any gear on my behalf. It's a sweet gesture, but unnecessary.
Sorry again for snapping at ya. It was inappropriate.
As for Continuum's sensitivity to criticism...this is an interesting question. There are companies--take MBL and ARC, for instance--that i've been highly critical of (I heartily disliked the MBL X at the last two shows and I wasn't at all happy with ARC's Class T amp a couple of years ago)--who don't seem to feel that an honestly expressed opinion is a bar to future reviews. Indeed, i will be reviewing MBL's completely new 101 E Mk II loudspeaker in the very near future, and ARC gave me its flagship 610Ts to review last year (and I believe I'm the only reviewer who has reviewed these amps, at least in the U.S.). My point is that reviewers aren't publicity agents, if they're any good. Some companies understand this; some don't.
It is true I've been hard on Continuum, but I call them as I hear them and, with the exception of Chris' room at this last CES, it hasn't showed all that well. Yeah, shows aren't the best spots to make a judgment call. And yet some folks consistently manage to do quite well under these trying circumstances--Magico, for instance. There are, I think, fundamental reasons for this that go beyond just "getting lucky" with room or electricity or ancillary equipment.
In any event, if Continuum wants to take the chance that I'll be fair and honest about its gear, it will give me a review sample. If it doesn't, it won't. There really isn't anything you can do to change this. Or, frankly, anything I can do.
Enough already about Continuum. This thread is about AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci.
Jon
You're right Jon,
And getting back to the Davinci Grandezza.......I re-checked my set-out geometry (which was spot-on) and then began playing with VTA and VTF.
When I tried to raise the VTA I found that the arm shaft was fully extended within its locking collar which thus had less than solid grip on the shaft.
This was obviously allowing movement!
By removing the Raven armboard and inserting the ½" stainless steel spacer which Thomas Woschnick had belatedly sent me, I was able to raise the VTA and fully clamp the arm shaft in its locking collar.
Well....the difference in sound was amazing as you can imagine and now the Copperhead/DV1s and Davinci/Universe were far more similar in performance.
I will report back after a week or so of listening.
Halcro,
This is interesting! I've been told that the arm shaft ideally needs to be gripped by the locking collar somewhere in the first two-thirds of its travel (ideally the first third, which, with the AAS Gabriel, means the 'table and arm pillar height are quite critical). Above that, you're courting disaster. I, too, didn't know this at first and tried to raise the Grandeeza higher than it ought to go. You are right about the sonic effects of this misadjustment: The arm doesn't sound as good at this height because it isn't well-secured (you can actually make the Grandeeza wobble in its locking collar if you apply enough pressure with your thumb to the top of the pivot).
I look forward to your report on the Da Vinci/TW. From my own experience I can say with confidence that properly set up, aligned, and leveled and sitting on a stand (like the superb Symposium Acoustics Isis) that isolates it from floor-borne vibration, the Grandeeza is the most neutral and dynamic pivoted arm I've heard in my system, with a sound that is quite competitive with that of my reference, the straight-line-tracking Walker Black Diamond (at least, it is when it is mounted on the magnetic-bearing AAS Gabriel/Da Vinci table).
There are, however, some "improvements" in store for the AAS Gabriel and a new Da Vinci cartridge that is said to be the ideal match for the Grandeeza. So an arm/table that is already very special is likely to get even more special in the near future.
Jon
Jon,
I'm in the process of changing internal speaker wiring and capacitors to the drive units so I did not want to disadvantage either the Copperhead or Davinci arm with a premature conclusion.
The shoot-out will continue.
How are your listening sessions with the Raven AC-3 and Davinci AAS Gabriel going?
I wonder how you have the time to even sleep with all the dialogue you're having to contend with at the moment?
Regards
Kid, I haven't done much concerted listening since I got back from Germany--I've been so snowed under with work.
Things remain where they stood. I haven't received the Da Vinci upgrades, yet. But the upgraded Walker is certainly going to be tough to best.
The new upgrades for the Da Vinci 'table are now finished and should be arriving in a week or two, at which I point I will tell you all about them.
I'm also acquiring a mono cartridge from...Koetsu! I look forward to reporting on it, too, as I listen to a lot of mono LPs. I'll start a separate thread on the mono Koetsu when it arrives.
Jon---which Koetsu mono cart will you be auditioning, or do they have just one?
(I keep hoping for a Koetsu Black mono that I can use on another Graham armtube and substitute quickly for my stereo Black without having to set everything up again)
Thanks,
Jim
Jim,
I was offered the choice between a Coralstone Mono ($15k+) or a Rosewood Signature Mono ($5995). I took the Rosewood Sig. It should be arriving in fairly short order.
jon
The Coralstone Mono probably exceeds the value of my entire mono record collection. It would be very interesting to compare the performance of the Rosewood Signature Mono with its stereo counterpart on mono recordings.
Cheers,
Jim
Jim,
The Koetsu mono arrived today! I'll have it in by this weekend and report back.
Jon
JV:
I'm drooling, you lucky bastard. When can we expect a full-blown feature in TAS?
Amandela.
Amandela77
Heh-heh!
Pretty soon, Amandela! The thing just arrived today and I've got MBL here this weekend, so I won't start listening until next week. Figure on a fall or early winter Absolute Analog piece on the Koetsu mono. Of course, I'll post some comments about it here on AVguide beforehand.
Jon, maybe you could start a separate thread on the Koetsu mono?
I don't want to miss it!
Thanks,
Jim
HI Jon
Can you tell us some more about the Audio Tekne phonostage you mentioned earlier in the thread.
Paul
Jon & Halcro: can you give a little feedback on the Grandeeza on the Raven vs. the Phantom? I'm getting the Raven One and have it narrowed down to these two... thanks.
Post new comment