RECENT AUDIO NOTES
1 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
RECENT UPDATES
REFERENCE COMPONENTS
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
THE SUPREME RECORDINGS
REVIEWING THE 'REVIEWERS'
MY AUDIO SYSTEM
MISCELLANEOUS
NEW LINKS
COMPONENTS NOW ON SALE
INTERNAL LINKS
INTRODUCTION
This new section contains ALL the newest material before it is posted to the dedicated files. It will remain
here for around six months. In this way, readers can find the latest observations, news, opinions and thoughts
in the fastest time.
Caveat 1- Readers should always keep in mind that the material which is most recently posted is also,
generally speaking, the least reliable. It is usually, though not always, my (or our) "first impressions".
Sometimes it will be an "update", which of course is usually more reliable. In any event, I may further edit,
quite liberally and without any notice or warning, anything you may read here.
Caveat 2- A good number of the posts below are by Anonymous Readers of this website. They are
separated from my own posts (*******), and should never be considered my own personal evaluation,
belief or recommendation. In many cases, I will add a "Personal Reply" to the reader's letter. If so, my
contribution will be the only editorial part of that post that I take personal responsibility for.
I have made these letters public because I feel they could be interesting and informative to some readers. I
also like an exchange of observations, evaluations and ideas, even when I disagree with some of them.
However, readers must always consider the extent of the previous experiences of the anonymous writer.
Serious thought should also be focused on the writer's actual objectivity and their sonic priorities. All of this
background and perspective is obviously relevant and critical, and can be extremely difficult to evaluate
within a short anecdotal observation. A continual scepticism in our audio world is a perspective that is
difficult to argue with.
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
2 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
REFERENCE COMPONENTS
JUNE 2008
"Commercial Announcement"
I have reluctantly decided to sell my Ars Acoustica System Max Speakers. I don't have a dedicated
room for them, and they're a waste for "Home Theater". The relevant details are below. Their outstanding
performance is discussed in several places within this website.
Playing "Full-Range"? Why I Can Not - An Explanation.
I receive a letter like this on a regular basis, so I feel it is time to make a better explanation of my (highly)
particular situation. From a reader, with slight editing:
"I'm curious if you are going to run your new Pure Reference (speakers) full-range... or are you still going to
bi-amp?"
My Explanation
Actually, I can play the Pure Reference (or any speaker) "full-range", but only on CD sources (or a tuner or
tape). However, playing records is a very different matter! The reason why I can not play any speaker (or
amplifier for that matter) "full-range" with my turntable/phono source is simple...
My (Jadis JP-80) tube phono stage does not have a cathode follower, so it attenuates the bass.
(The JP-80's cathode follower was removed, by me, in 1992, along with the entire line-stage.) I must then
use an electronic crossover, and bi-amplify, when playing records on my present system.
Now, why did I ever remove the cathode follower in the first place, creating this unusual "problem"?
It was initially only an "experiment". However, because of the serious sonic improvements I subsequently
heard in the midrange and high frequencies, I soon realized that I could never go back. As for the bass
"problems", I didn't even know about them until I later used the JP-80 in another system, that did not have a
crossover/buffer like mine. For me, having no cathode follower has never been an "inconvenience", because I
have long preferred bi-amping and using subwoofers anyway.
Finally, I don't think that an amplifier (or speaker) comparison using digital sources only is useful, so it's
unlikely that I'll make any direct comparisons using my CD player.
Addendum- I have increased the input impedance of both the Coincident Frankenstein and Dragon
amplifiers, so I will make another attempt to play them full-range on a phono source, hopefully this Summer.
(I would do it now, but I need new 300B output tubes.)
Top
**********************************************************
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
3 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers’ letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the December 2007 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective
Reference Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers
Letters". If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in
the file of the component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
Canary 906 Preamplifier
This is the follow-up letter from the same reader who had a letter about Canary preamplifiers posted in May
2008. There is some minor editing and my bold:
"The story continues with the CA906. It continues to shine in my system which consists of a Sonic Frontiers
transport and Processor 3, an Altavista NP220 premium gold power amp (sometimes I still use my VAC Phi
70/70, but recently I am more inclined to favor the NP220s more "honest" sound) and Avalon Eidolon
speakers.
Strings are the area which the CA906 shines the most. With material like Gil Shaham playing Glazunov and
Seiji Ozawa/Boston Symphony/Joseph Silverstein Vivaldi: Four Seasons, the CA906 made my system
sing like never before. This preamp has a wicked way of presenting the crescendo of violins with unbelievable
realism. It conveys the right texture of the strings regardless of pitch or loudness. Another area where it shines
is jazz saxophone. A lot of preamps tend to make saxophones growl. A well-known challenging track is All
Blues in the Reference recordings HDCD sampler. The CA906 not only was able to handle the passage
when played loud, but the texture of the instrument is there and never sounds stressed.
Another thing worth mentioning is the over-engineered volume control. You need to dial it up/down 5 clicks
to change the volume equivalent to 1 notch in a conventional volume control. This really helps me dial in the
optimal listening volume for every track.
Too bad I did not get a chance to put the CA906 head to head against my favorite preamp, a MFA Lumi,
which was rebuilt and modified under the guidance of Scott Frankland himself. I had the Lumi in my system
a few weeks before I had a chance to evaluate the CA906. As far as I remember the Lumi was more
"dramatic" and has more "bloom" where instruments "float" out from the speakers. The CA906 was a bit
more laid back. If memory serves me correctly, the CA906, while a bit darker, preserves even more
microdynamics and presents a quieter background than the Lumi. Other than that the sonic signatures are
very very close.
The CA906 did get a chance to up against the Lumi for one evening. The setup also has a Sonic Frontiers
Processor 3, but has a biamped setup with the preamp driving a pair of Tube Research Monoblocks and a
pair of Rowland 1s. The speakers were Avalon Ascent IIs. The Lumi was the resident preamp of the setup,
and the whole system sounded beautiful given the constraints of the bass extension and the top end of the
Ascents.
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
4 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
We were a bit disappointed when we plugged in the CA906. First we had to deal with a hum problem where
despite selectively floating each piece of gear with cheater plugs the hum never really went away 100%. But
the biggest letdown was that while the CA906 did not sound anywhere close to the Lumi, and did not sound
anything like it did in my setup. In that system the CA906 sounded more like my CA801SE before I did the
mods. The size of Midori's violin shrank regardless of volume level, and things began to sound marginally thin
and stressed. We believe that it might have something to do with the Lumi's capability to swing huge voltage
into the additional load due to bi-amping. The CA906 is probably designed for driving 1 set of power amps
only (preferably the Canary 300B amps perhaps?).
In my setup the CA906, was definitely better than any preamp I have owned."
The Linn Cetech Subchassis is now Available
Here's some good news from a reader, particularly for all those Linn LP-12 turntable owners who refuse to
pay Linn's exorbitant prices for their own updates. There's no editing, but my bold:
"I can confirm that the Cetech subchassis for the LP-12 is again available. Steve, the manufacturer, is
now located in New Zealand, and can be contacted at steve@derwent.co.nz
I believe he also sells on eBay.
I purchased a Cetech carbon fiber subchassis and armboard, and a Hercules II power supply, from him last
month. This was a great upgrade from my Valhalla, pre-Cirkus LP-12 - low level detail is much improved.
The total cost was US$799, plus shipping. A much better deal than the Linn alternatives."
Top
JULY 2008
Naim Electronics
I am asked about the Naim line from time to time, so this is how I feel about them.
I am quite familiar with the Naim models from the 1980's and early 1990's (and if there has been a significant
change in design philosophy since then, I haven't noticed it). I had several Naim trade-ins over the years in
my former store (which were always very easy to resell), along with some loaners. I also heard them in
customers homes and at audio shows. At the time, I considered them "better than average" in sound quality,
but never "outstanding". Naim components have some good performance qualities, but they don't do very
well in what matters the most to me (and many other audiophiles); retrieving low-level musical information.
(You will need good tube electronics for that.)
Naim was special for a while, but only until the late 1980's. They had (and have) excellent current and drive
capability, making them unusually stable and versatile. They sounded more natural and dynamic than most
solid-state amplifiers. They were also better built and more reliable. Further, Naim has a history of matching
their components better than most other companies. A lot has happened since then.
Transistor equipment has become more sophisticated in design, especially with power supplies. The circuits,
on many models, are now less complex. The result is that Naim is no longer near the transistor top in
performance. While Naim has never been known for providing real "value" (like NAD), they have never
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
5 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
charged "crazy prices" for their basic components, and they also have good resale value. If you need solid
state to drive your speakers, and the (used) price is right, you can't go really wrong with them.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that (like Linn) Naim also has a decades long "cult following". These
cultists truly believe that Naim are "the best amps in the world", and always will be. I'm obviously not very
popular with this group (or the "Linnies"), but their fanatical loyalty make Naim amplifiers an easy resale.
Thus, purchasing a Naim component "used" is usually not a serious risk.
Top
**********************************************************
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers’ letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the January 2008 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective
Reference Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers
Letters". If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in
the file of the component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
Altec 1570B, Galibier Turntables and K & K MC Step-Up
A veteran reader sent me his latest observations on a variety of interesting components. Here it is, with
some minor editing and my bold:
"I finally received in May my new Altec/Tutay 1570Bs! They are really astonishing and work very well with
the Quads 989s. I only waited 9 months...:) Interestingly, I didn't find all that much difference when swapping
the 811As for 572Bs. What made more difference was to exchange the 12AT7s provided by Tom with
Telefunkens; the Telefunkens brought more clarity, in particular in the mid-range and more transparency
overall. The synergy with the Bent Audio passive preamp is wonderful, and I have plenty of gain for all
sources. Speaking of Bent Audio, John is now preparing production of his new step-up, which will be based
on transformers made by David Slagle (that's the person who makes the autoformers for his preamp); another
couple of months, he says...
Another new item is a turntable, the Galibier Serac, with Tri-Planar Mk.VII tonearm (cartridge is still my
ZYX Airy 3, low output, with silver base). This is a vast improvement over my previous Acoustic Solid
turntable, in all areas. I heard several combinations of Thom Makris' turntables when I visited him in April,
and one thing that they seem to all have in common is a remarkable sense of layering: the various instruments
or instrumental groups are very well defined, timbrally and spacially and there's a lot of air between them.
Indeed, that characteristic was immediately apparent when I put mine in my system.
Finally, I wanted to let you know of an incredible bargain in the domain of stepups: the K & K Audio MC
phono Step-up. I've had it for a couple of months now and have spent quite a bit of time comparing it with
the ZYX CPP-1, which I was using previously. Although the K&K costs (far) less than the ZYX ($290 in kit,
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
6 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
$350 assembled); and based on Lundahl transformers (http://kandkaudio.com/phonostage.html), it's
actually better, in particular in the areas of clarity, frequency extension and inner detail. The ZYX is really
lovely tonally, specially with piano and other single acoustic instruments (violin, cello are very good). The
K&K seems a little thinner at first, but it's just a different timbral quality; not harsh, certainly, just a bit
lighter. In comparison, the ZYX sounds like it has a hump in the mid-bass which brings a bit of congestion.
Indeed, where the K&K really shines is as soon as the texture gets denser, because it allows for a clearer view
inside the instrumental combinations, with more air between instruments and registers, so that polyphonic
lines or even individual notes in harmonies are easier to differentiate. (Comparison made with a ZYX Airy 3
and the new Hagerman Trumpet at either end of the step-up. The load in my K&K is 120 Ohms (20 KOhm
resistor), and it has 20dB of gain, but it can be ordered in other configurations of load and gain.)
The Trumpet is actually quite a hard unit to beat. I have the opportunity recently to test the Artemis Lab
PH-1phono preamp, and after many attempts at optimizing it with various loading resistors, I couldn't get rid
of some harshness in the treble; it did actually sound better with the ZYX CPP-1 than the K&K step-up, but I
suspect it was because each unit's "faults" were somehow compensating each other. The K&K/Trumpet
combination has more transparency, natural tonality and detail; and it's a lot quieter, too.
Still, I'm wondering how the Trumpet would fare against the K&K phono preamp...
I think that, at this point, I'm almost where I've been trying to get for the last three years--there's still a bit of
room for improvement in the turntable area, with an aluminium base and/or heavier platter, which I heard at
Thom Makris' home in April (the Gavia model). I won't go to the Stelvio, which is really far-out, price-wise; I
know two people who have it here in Seattle, and I can't say that it sounds tremendously better than
mine--we're almost starting a Galibier club!). After that, it would require a large financial investment to
improve things a little bit here and there.
Hey, famous last words..."
(Second letter from same reader shortly thereafter...)
"Just a quick note to rectify my initial comment on swapping 811As with 572Bs on the Altec/Tutay amps. I
went back to the 811As to compare, and indeed the 572Bs add quite a bit of punch to the sound, without
taking anything away in clarity, transparency etc. I think I hadn't fully burnt-in the 572Bs when I made the
first assessment. So they're staying in."
Top
AUGUST 2008
Update-Playing my Speakers "Full-Range"
Since I made some changes with the input impedance of the Coincident Frankenstein (and Dragon)
amplifiers (by increasing it), I have finally been able to play my Pure Reference speakers full-range without
the need for bi-amping and electronic crossovers. This just happened at the end of July, so I am still
experimenting when I have the time and opportunity (no storms!). I haven't tried the Dragon yet, and I
haven't played my most demanding recordings, but that will eventually come.
From what I have heard so far, with a decent variety of records, the improvement playing with a single amp
has been close to a revelation of sorts. There's no question that the (Behringer) electronic crossover subtracts
musical information and more. This is not surprising of course, since all electronics do some harm, but I had
no other choice during these many years. Now I can't make a final evaluation and judgement until I hear more
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
7 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
challenging recordings, but I feel, at this point, that for most listeners, and in most rooms, the Frankenstein
amp can easily drive the Pure Reference by itself, with outstanding results, and without any serious
compromises.
NOW ADDED TO CLASS B (UPPER) DIGITAL SOURCES
Digital Shootout - Part II
As I promised a number of months ago, here is the addendum to the Fall 2007 Digital Shootout.
Both of the below CD players join the Class B (Upper) Reference Digital Sources. The short
"review" below was written by one of my associates, who had two other associates assist in this evaluation.
They were unanimous in their conclusions, as was also the case with the original "Shootout" from last Fall.
I've made some minor edits and additions for clarity and my bold:
Marantz SA 7S- SACD (latest version)
Audio Aero Prestige SACD
Let's cut to the chase- Both are excellent players and fit into the upper reaches of Category 3 (Category 1
being the highest and 5 the lowest). Both are beautifully constructed with the Marantz representing superb
value.
Marantz SA -7S-1- Does everything well. No obvious flaws. Similar to the Accuphase SACD/CD DP77
in quality and sonics. Very smooth and refined with no sense of edge or brightness. Well balanced from top to
bottom, with errors being those of omissions. For those looking for the last word in detail, this is not the player
to own. If overall listening ease is of highest priority, the Marantz will be sure to please. The SACD and CD
sound almost identical.
Audio Aero Prestige - Expensive, but well built and it does have the advantage of having an integral
preamp with the added convenience of remote volume. Overall performance is top notch, but a different
sonic perspective than the Marantz. It is more detailed and transparent than the Marantz, but conversely not
quite as smooth or forgiving on less than stellar recordings. Upper midrange has a predisposition to be slightly
lean. SACD and CD performance at par.
Both of these players would form the basis of a very high end audio system. They have differing strengths and
weaknesses and personal preference will determine which player is preferred. The Audio Aero is twice the
price of the Marantz, but the Prestige's high quality, built-in preamp and the added convenience of remote
volume, narrows the financial gap between the two.
MHZS CD66 DAC CHIP IDENTIFIED AS A FAKE
I received this letter about the MHZS CD66 from a reader. I had heard about this DAC chip controversy
previously, but I wasn't sure what the truth was. However, there is a much larger issue than whether or not
MHZS lied about what DAC chip they used. First the letter, with a little editing and my bold, then my
response.
"...The so-called proprietary MHZS DAC is actually a BB DAC if you lift off the head. Take a look at this
web site here:
http://www.lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/MHZS/MHZS_CD66F.html
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
8 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
I bought the MHZS CD66 player on the strength of what you thought about it - and certainly in my system is
does not disappoint - but despite this, you just cannot recommend any fakes... at the end of the day if the
Chinese are lying about this player, you must let your viewers know about this clearly.
I now have to think about getting another player despite this sounding good - I can't live with a lie!"
My Response
I believe the reader, and his source, are correct about the BB chip, which also means that MHZS lied about it.
I don't hesitate using the word "lied" in this instance, because, unlike the mainstream audio press, I don't
believe in some billion-to-one coincidence and/or that audio manufacturers are always innocent, no matter
what the evidence demonstrates. However, the important issue we have here is how to respond to this
knowledge.
This reader "can't live with a lie", despite the MHZS 66 "sounding good", so he may sell it. I also own a
MHZS CD66, but I'm not selling mine, and I advised him, in my personal reply to his letter, that he also
shouldn't sell his, at least not for that reason. Now let me explain why I am keeping mine, despite the lie about
the DAC chip being used.
First of all, I (or we) don't "recommend" any component. I have "References" on this website, not
"Recommendations". This official change in wording was made almost 6 months ago, but, in spirit, it was
always "references", from the beginning. The difference in meaning between these two words is important. A
"reference" is just that, a benchmark in performance; in a certain parameter, or for the money, or without any
qualification. A "recommendation" is different. Ideally, it is personal, and focused to an individual or a
group. You can "recommend" a general philosophy, or a strategy, but not a particular component in general.
The only exception is if that component was simultaneously "the best", affordable to all and worked in all
systems. No such component has ever existed, and maybe never will.
The MHZS CD66 is a Reference on this website. It, along with the MHZS CD88 and Doge CD6, are
the finest performing digital sources, that we know of, below $ 3,000. The fact that MHZS deliberately misled
purchasers about what chip they used doesn't change the player's actual performance, which is outstanding
for the money (or its build quality, which is also outstanding for the money). So while their "reputation" may
(and should) have changed, obviously for the worst, the actual sound has NOT. This all leads us to "The Big
Picture", and its related questions:
What are our ultimate goals as audiophiles, and how do we best achieve them?
Personally, I want the best (highest fidelity) audio system I can afford, and I'll do anything to get that system,
short of criminal and/or unethical behavior. For me, this means ignoring, when ever possible, hyperbole, false
claims, outright lies, obnoxious behavior and even raw hatred from others. While admittedly unpleasant, and
ideally absent in the world of our hopes, these negative hurdles are all irrelevant when it comes to building the
audio system of your dreams. They are just distractions. You should be interested in, and focused on, only the
(potential) performance of the components, and not who makes them and how they market them.*
You are not marrying either the manufacturers of the components, or the components themselves. There is no
"relationship" to consider. Audio components are strictly lifeless tools for you to use for your enjoyment. This
may appear cold and ruthless, but that is the best (and only) approach to take if you want to reach your goals
with the least amount of time, expense and effort. The only "relationship" you should have, as audiophiles, is
with the music and the musicians. Don't waste your emotions on things and objects.
Now, as an audiophile, I admit I love outstanding audio components, but only in the abstract. I never love the
individual components themselves. I do "love" their performance, admire the skill it took to design and build
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
9 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
them, and appreciate how they enhance my life. However, a true and serious audiophile is always fickle. He
or she must be, because "true love" is a decided hindrance in this case. When something better comes along,
and it always does, even if it takes decades, you don't want "love", or any other emotion, interfering with your
ultimate goals.
*Example- I have been contemptuous of the way Linn has marketed their LP-12 turntable for 20+ years, but
I still have it listed as a Reference on this website. Its proven performance, and reliability, trump all the
cynical "BS" associated with it, from both the manufacturer and (too) many of the owners.
Top
**********************************************************
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers' letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the February 2008 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective
Reference Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers
Letters". If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in
the file of the component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
Linn Sondek Platter (Under)Weight
Here is a letter from a reader that I find somewhat disturbing, even though I haven't (personally) owned a
Linn turntable for many years. I would appreciate receiving any other observations concerning this topic that
would add some light to it. Some editing (English is not the reader's mother tongue), and my bold:
"I'm a DIYer... Sometimes, I make a request of friends' Linn Sondek TTs. I agree with you about the rating of
this old and obsolete turntable*. However, it offers a big advantage by comparison with the other TTs on your
Reference components list. It is very easy and cheap to make and the only option to self-produce a Class C
component by few hundreds of euro. Besides, spare parts are available in big quantity, new or used, original
or not, and the worldwide Linn assistance is excellent. For all these reasons, I frequently look for and buy
parts for this TT. Buying and handling new and old Linn original spare parts, I can see how much the quality
continuously slips down while the prices increase.
Recently, I bought a new outer platter directly from the Linn shop on ebay. A few days ago, I received and
installed it onto the inner platter. I was amazed verifying that it is 200 grams underweight. Please, if you
consider it useful, warn your readers about this problem. I sent my complaint to Linn. You can read below
what them replied to me:
<<< Dear L...,
I have spoken with our engineers and they have confirmed that the platter is correct and is within our strict
tolerance specifications. Once you have fitted a new platter you require to adjust the suspension on your
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
10 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
turntable. This would account for the arm board being about 1mm higher than the plinth. The item supplied
does not differ in any way from the listing. The listing specifies the auction is for an outer platter and a felt
mat and this is what you have received.
Best Regards
Linn Products Limited >>>
To me, he is ridiculous when he speaks of: 'strict tolerance specifications'. 200 grams on 2,500 make a
difference of 8%. I believe that so much difference is outside an admissible tolerance, especially for a part
where calibration of weights is of fundamental importance. When I read on the Linn brochure: '…and our
legendary precision manufacturing, all of which ensure the pitch accurate faithful reproduction of the original
source'.
What other can I do more than to give them negative feedback on ebay?"
Personal Note- I don't believe eBay feedback will do that much, one way or the other, but letting other
audiophiles know about this issue by posting this experience in various forums will make a difference.
*The Linn Sondek LP-12 is still a Class C (Lower) Reference turntable in my evaluation. It is a particularly
good value when purchased used.
Advanced Analog MG-1 Tonearm and Soundsmith Cartridge
Rebuilding Service
A veteran reader has sent me his latest observations, which may prove helpful to all tonearm owners (see
my Personal Notes below). Only minor editing and my bold:
"1. Advanced Analog MG-1 arm with a digital VTA read-out.
I'm still in love with this arm, and am now on a second one. This is a current version with minor improvements
and a digital VTA read-out. I will say again, that IMHO, it is absolutely THE BEST BUY, AND AN
EXCELLENT ARM EVEN AT 3 to 4 times the cost. The Digital VTA read-out moves it into a totally
different territory altogether. Ada Lin is a true enthusiast, and this product is addressed to the like.
VTA is utilizing a mass-produced, but nonetheless excellent digital LCD-screened gauge, also found on digital
calipers. Powered by a single LR44 cell (which should last for a LONG time), it provides read-out both in
inches (to .001") and in millimeters (to .01 mm). It has a power button, which allows you to turn gauge off
after correct VTA is dialed in, inches-millimiters switch, and zero button. It works like a charm.
Since I switched to this arm from pivoted, there is no going back. Inner grove distortion is practically
non-existent, and that alone is worth it. Packaging on current version is greatly improved as well. It is
HIGHLY recommended, especially at it's price point. Granted, it requires somewhat more care and attention
than your proverbial Rega, but it's performance is WELL worth it.
2. Soundsmith cartridge rebuilding service
I have had recently two cartridges rebuilt by Peter Lederman of Soundsmith Corp. One was a Shelter 901
with a broken cantilever, and another - my cherished Koetsu Onyx, either a Gold version, or an early
Platinum, don't know for sure. The Shelter was redone with a new ruby cantilever, and a mid-range stylus
(line-contact), all at a ridiculously low in today's world price of US $250. Peter has sent me all tech specs that
he has measured with it as well. The cartridge came out beautifully, with greatly improved tracking (it now
rivals my Signet 5.0, which is as good as Shure V in that department). There are some changes to the sound
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
11 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
presentation, and I beleive they are actually an improvement. Most pronounced is a more open charachter,
with highs more prominent, and a tighter upper bass.
Koetsu was a wreck going to Peter. He performed a true miracle. When I first got it, stylus was worn, it didn't
track at all (someone adjusted suspension too tightly), and there was a channel disbalance of a mere 3.5 db! I
tried to bring it back to life, by releasing the suspension a bit, and got it to play somewhat, but it was in need
of a serious attention. While Shelter took about 2 months to get done, Koetsu took nearly 6. After I received
it, it became clear to me, that the wait was well justified. Because of Peter's low prices, he is literally
swamped with work.
What he did: he installed a brand new stylus of a profile that closely matched original, INTO ORIGINAL
BORON CANTILEVER, INTO ORIGINAL OPENING! I repeat, stylus was NOT glued to cantilever by a
blob of glue, but was installed into exact spot where the old stylus used to live. He was able to balance the
channels within .3 db, and it tracks at 1.5 grams, which is unheard of in any Koetsu. This reduced tracking
force was made possible by a special material, which retains damping properties while being softer. At this
tracking force Koetsu sounds also more open with more highs, with less of that familiar Koetsu bass bloat. In
fact, this one is a the one I'm planning to keep for a long time. Potential customers should go to Soundsmith
web-site, where there is a disclaimer for specialized cartridge work. Koetsu, because of the amount of work,
and delicacy of it, was more than Shelter, but still well below all other rebuilders, forget about Koetsu Japan!
This review is not about virtues or problems of cartridges in question, but rather of Peter's ability to work on
and bring back to life a huge variety of cartridges, from inexpensive to the most exotic ones.
In conclusion:
We are extremely happy to have Peter around, who can perform this kind of highly specialized work right
here, in USA. I would highly recommend to anybody, who's thinking of sending their cherished cartridges
overseas, to consider Soundsmith. And while the wait is long, - it is well worth it.
P.S. I definitely like my Oracle Premiere better than VPI mk IV, even with a TNT platter. It is more alive,
more musical, albeit loses in the low bass dept."
Personal Notes- I believe a Digital Caliper can be used with any tonearm. First, you make a measurement
from the tonearm base to the actual arm (or another part, which moves up and down, which can be easily
measured). That measurement becomes the reference (starting) point ("0"), and then you can go up and
down from there, measuring in .001" increments, while always knowing you can go back to the reference
starting point again. Once the optimization point is found with any particular record, it can be noted for future
use. Very importantly though...
It is critical to make sure that the original measurement be made only after you've optimized a particular
record(s) you are very familiar with. This optimizaton with a particular record(s) must be done, because if you
change cartridges (or tonearms), you must go back to this particular record(s) again, optimize it again, and
that particular number once again becomes the (new) reference starting point ("0"). I plan to do this
procedure myself, and will report back when I have some relevant experiences to share.
Cetech LP-12 Upgrade Now Available Again
I recently received this message from a reader, that expands on a previous post above:
"I was reading your comments on the Linn LP-12 and Cetech. Steve is up and running again. You can go to
http://derwent.co.nz/index.html for all the details. He also puts them on eBay."
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
12 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
Top
SEPTEMBER 2008
NOW MOVED TO CLASS A SPEAKER CABLES
Coincident Extreme
This cable has been a "Reference" (Class A) since April 2005. However, it has always been in the "Lower"
category, because I still preferred the Polk Speaker cables with SET amplifiers on my reference speakers.
This has now changed. There are no longer any "qualifiers". The Extreme cables outperformed the Polk on
my current reference system when I, and an associate, conducted a "shoot-out" in May, 2008. Further, I
feel the cables have even improved since then, because of final "break-in", though only slightly.
The differences between the two cables were not "huge", but were still easily noticeable. The sound was (at
the least) more immediate, transparent and dynamic. The soundstage was also larger and more expansive. The
fact that we were both "surprised" by these results*, make me feel convinced that this was all "real" and not
just our joint "fantasy".
*Due to our unavoidable prejudices, based on the negative results we both previously experienced back in
2004. At that time, the Polk outperformed the Coincident Extreme on my then reference system, using SET
amplifiers. We couldn't help avoid the thinking that those same final results would be repeated. I have long
felt that being "surprised" is one of the most important experiences in "Audio". If nothing else, it keeps one
humble.
Top
**********************************************************
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers' letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the March 2008 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective Reference
Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers Letters".
If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in the file of the
component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
Yamaha Vintage Electronics
This short letter is from a veteran reader:
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
13 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
"I recently read some comments (see April 2008) sent to you by a reader concerning these units. I have a
CR-2020 and would just like to add my 2 cents in the discussion. Here is my impression:
-Extremely good tuner, the best I ever had. Beats the hell out of my Yamaha digital tuner.
-I replaced the pre-amp stage with a B&K Pro 10MC and got better (slightly but noticeable) soundstage
clarity and definition of instruments. This may be because the B&K is better or just because the Yamaha is so
old. I don't know.
-I am still using the power stage (100+ Watts) and I find that it is quite good. That being said I haven't had a
chance yet to compare it to a modern S.S. amp."
Top
OCTOBER 2008
IMPORTANT NOTICE!
"Recommended Components"
are now
"Reference Components"
I've never been comfortable with the title, and the implications, of the word "Recommended", and now I've
finally done something about it. There are several reasons for this change:
1. The mainstream audio magazines, and Stereophile in particular, have now cheapened, discredited and
even debased the word "recommended" to the point where it has become an acute audio embarrassment. (Not
to them though, they are completely shameless.) When basically every component that is "reviewed" is then
later "Recommended", the word must inevitably lose all of its original impact, usefulness and meaning, which
is exactly what has happened.
2. Replacing the term "Recommended" with "Reference" removes, at least to some degree, an unwanted
association of this website with any form of "commercialization". Having witnessed the ongoing journalistic
degradation of the mainstream magazines and websites (Stereophile, TAS and Soundstage etc), one more
degree of separation is highly desirable, if not a requirement, at this time.
3. I've also had a practical problem with the term "recommended", because it could be misleading at times.
For instance, on regular occasions, I found myself advising readers to consider components that were not
"officially" on "the list". This is because these "other" components, usually in the "Interesting Components"
section, were a better match for the reader's system, budget and/or objectives.
4. In reality, the posted list of components has always been, in my own mind, my personal set of
"benchmarks" (or "yardsticks"), and nothing more than that. By this I mean that their performance, in one
or more categories, set a particular "Reference Standard" for both myself, and for my "associates" (in either
absolute terms or "for the money"). These standards were/are then used in my/our subsequent component
comparisons.
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
14 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
I hope this clarifies this important issue. Finally, it's going to take some time to edit the entire website to
reflect this change, so I started off with the titles and headers, and will eventually alter the text, but this will
take me a few weeks.
****************************************
Top
**********************************************************
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers’ letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the April 2008 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective Reference
Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers Letters".
If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in the file of the
component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
Shure M-65 Phono Preamplifier
This letter from a reader is further evidence that this vintage, tube phono stage is "a diamond in the rough". I
really regret never having the opportunity to hear one of them. There's only some minor editing, and my bold:
"I checked the Shure M-65 preamplifier, and its structure is similar to the classic idea of two-stages with
12AX7s. However, there is a difference in values if it's compared with Stanley Lipschitz's RIAA. Actually,
the M-65 uses two branches:
B1: 470pF in parallel with 100KOhm
B2: 1800pf in parallel with 7.5 MOhm
B1 is connected to the anode of the second tube and in series with B2,
B2 is connected in series with the cathode of the first tube.
While in Stanley Lipschitz's RIAA circuit, that you have (in your modified Jadis JP-80):
B1: 1.21MOhm in parallel with 2640pF
B2: 100KOhm in parallel with 750pF
A friend of mine was impressed with the sound of the original Shure M-65, and decided to build it with top
components. The tube-rectified and tube-regulated power supply stays in a separate box. Only the filament is
rectified using Schottky diodes and regulated using LT1086 devices. He does not have a line stage.
I had an audition with some friends in Salerno, and I have to say I was amazed how good this old classic
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
15 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
circuit sounds. The comparison included several turntables, carts, and preamps including (my) Counterpoint
SA3000, ARC SP-10, SP-11, and a couple of diy tube preamps. The rest of the system comprised mid-to-low
B-class.
Two things were worth of honorable mention: bass performances, and micro-dynamic. Very impressed. My
friend says that he checked the frequency response, it seems that this RIAA arrangement gives a +3dB at
10Hz and than slowly become linear as frequencies increase. I would say this is consistent with what we
heard."
Linn Sondek Platter (Under)Weight -Addendum
Below is an update from a reader whose original letter I posted in August 2008 (above). His problem was
solved by Linn, which doesn't surprise me, because I've long felt that their customer service was excellent.
Some minor editing:
"After a long and boring dispute, Linn replaced that faulty outer platter. The replacement outer platter (dated
September 15th, 2008) is correctly weighted and balanced and is cosmetically perfect. My feeling is that Linn
has just revised the production process because the new production is excellent (perhaps my claim was
useful). This performs better than the older ones. (The Linn now) sounds more controlled, relaxed and richer
of inner details with a more stable and accurate soundstage."
Denon 103 Cartridge Upgrades
Here's some very interesting information from a reader about the famous and popular Denon 103 series of
cartridges. There's some minor editing and my bold:
"I have used the 103D version for over 25 years, my first was looked after by the late-lamented Garrott
Brothers. A new cantilever once, several styli, including their own microscanner. I am still proud of their
compliments on the even wear pattern on all my styli! They came to expect it.
The latest is a VDH, type 1 tip, with a boron cantilever. Under a stereo microscope it is very well aligned, at
least as good as the original 103D. Both versions track at 1.4gm! The 103D version of the 103 along with the
103S, suitably updated, and even at VDH prices is an absolute bargain. Not just because they sound as good
or better than a similarly rebuilt 103C, but because their dynamic compliance substantailly extends the range
of suitable arms, right into the 'damped low-mass' range. Both were more than able to decode CD4 vinyl,
when we tested for this at Duratone.
Trackability!? - I was a long-term user of a Garrotted Shure V15/III, finding that 47K/450pf total with
styroseals caps worked very well. The first MC I used was the original Ortofon SL15(e). It tracked almost as
well as the Shure at just over 1.2!!!! So much for MCs all needing high TF's. Very high output off a SUT."
Top
NOVEMBER 2008
Nothing Yet.
Top
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
16 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
**********************************************************
READERS LETTERS
CAVEAT-Please be advised that the readers’ letters posted on this site are solely the opinion of that
reader and may not necessarily represent or reflect the opinions of Arthur Salvatore or High-End
Audio. These letters furthermore, are not to be taken as being endorsed by Arthur Salvatore or
High-End Audio. They are posted because they may be edifying, thought provoking or entertaining.
Further- Almost all of the Readers Letters that are removed from this file, after the standard 6 Month
posting (such as the May 2008 Readers Letters), are subsequently posted in their respective Reference
Component Files: Amplifiers, Cartridges, Speakers etc. They can be found under "Readers Letters".
If the reader's letter discussed more than one type of audio component, I will place that letter in the file of the
component that was the most discussed.
**********************************************************
More Denon 103 News Plus some Various "Unknown" (to me)
Components
Here is a letter from a new reader, but he's also one of my former customers from Toronto. A lot of what's
below is new to me, especially the Denon "body replacement". There's some minor editing and my bold:
"My system is almost finished...it makes me very happy and I really enjoy music through it. My system is as
follows:
Roksan Xerxes/Zeta/UWE Denon 103,
NEC CD Rom & Valab nos dac,
Mapletree Audio 4ASE preamp,
Poinz 6v6 (7C5 military version) mono blocks using magnequest opt (see link),
Altec 19's (horns) with V-cap, Vitamin Q 196p's and Mill's resistors, and modded cabinets (these are
incredible speakers when used with proper caps and high quality ancillary components),
PS Audio Power Plant and various DIY interconnects and speaker cables.
The Uwe Ebony body replacement takes the 103 to new heights. It is easily the equal of the Koetsu Black,
and more accurate in terms of bass response and treble. The UWE is cheap @ $ 150US, but requires some
surgery skills on the part of the end user. I find the stock 103 to be a bit bright, with rolled off bass and a
slightly forward midrange. The Uwe brings out a smoother frequency response, while retaining a more
convincing cohesiveness, with the midrange less forward. The cartridge is more listenable, more detailed and
more accurate in my opinion.
The Valab dac uses the same chip as the 47 labs dac, but uses 8 chips in parallel. The dac is not unlike the
Uwe 103 in presentation; smoother and at the same time more detailed than anything I have tried. I have tried
the following in my system: Audiosector nos DAC, Cairn Fog, PS Audio Superlink, Cambridge Audio
budget player. The Valab goes for $ 150US shipped. There was a fellow I was in contact with who sold his
Audio Note 2.1 and a Pink Triangle dac for the Valab. The Valab has a very relaxed presentation and is
uncanny at unraveling music. The other bonus here is that it has both RCA and USB hook-ups, so that one
could use a laptop as a transport. You can go to Ebay and search Valab. However, you have to email the guy
directly as he is always out of stock and at $150 they go fast. The company is based in Taiwan, and I have a
feeling that he builds them in his living room.
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
17 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
On a side note, the Poinz amp that I am using is really superb and I would be willing to bet that you would
really like it. It is very transparent and very detailed with incredible frequency extremes. it is limited in power
though at 12 watts a channel. If you would like more info on it, I can provide you with other links."
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=tubediy&n=72203&highlight=7c5&r=
http://www.audiotropic.net/MachineUsersManual/mmUsersManual.html
http://www.oswaldsmillaudio.com/images/media/Bodies.pdf
http://www.oswaldsmillaudio.com/2007a.html
Top
More to Come!
Two Interesting 300B Output Tubes
Coincident Frankenstein and Dragon Amps driving the Pure Reference Full-Range (A
report and comparison)
Klipschorn Modifications (From an Experienced Reader)
Coincident "Extreme" Interconnects
Top
THE SUPREME RECORDINGS
These are the most recent LPs to join The Supreme Recordings. They are too new to place in an upper
category, and there aren't any descriptions ready either. Also, I am now back to systematically playing all my
records, starting with where I left off in October 2001 (when I left Toronto for Florida). I am now auditioning
records of Vocal Music.
AUGUST 2008
A Reader's Letter
"Speakers Corner is re-issuing quite a number of Mercury Living Presence recordings, including The
Firebird/Dorati. This one is available as a part of a box set called “Stravinsky Ballets”, which includes 3
discs and is available in the US at store.acousticsounds.com for $110 dollars. However, there are two caveats
of this box set:
1. The slip case is very tight, owners should really consider not to store the discs in it
2. Petrouchka has a bubble in the vinyl which is audible on both sides (maybe it is only my copy)
It would be interesting to read a comparison on two different re-issues of the same recording. I wonder if this
re-issue would fit into The Divinity.
Classic Records is now going 200 grams, so maybe it is time to re-evaluate their re-issues on your site. They
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
18 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
are even making their own recordings."
My Reply to this Reader
Unfortunately, I no longer have my modest dealer discount with Acoustic Sounds, so I have to pay the full
retail price like everyone else. Even when I was in the audio business, I never received free records for
review. (That’s correct, the record manufacturers and distributors don’t consider me a “reviewer”, despite the
reputation, details and vast scope of my website.)
I will have to wait until someone I trust tells me it's worth the investment purchasing these records (and that
does not include mainstream "reviewers" like Michael Fremer or Jonathan Valin).
If and when I get some of these records, you will read about them, including the relevant comparisons. Until
then, I’m not able to provide any opinion.
Update!- See November 2008 below.
SEPTEMBER 2008
The Basic List
CLASSICAL
HENZE-VOICES-LONDON SINFONIETTA-DECCA HEAD 19/20
The Honorable Mentions
SOUNDTRACKS
EVIL DEAD-LODUCA-VARESE SARABANDE STV 81199
OCTOBER 2008
The Honorable Mentions
CLASSICAL
RAMEAU-ANACHREON-CHRISTIE-HARMONIA MUNDI HM 1090
Notice- Selling Prices are now All Removed
I've recently decided to remove all the approximate selling prices of The Supreme Recordings, including
those in The Honorable Mentions. These "selling prices" were routinely included within "The Detailed
Descriptions" of the recordings.
The selling prices have almost all changed, sometimes considerably, since 2000/1, which was when this file
was first written and posted. Since I'm not able to keep up with the prices of literally hundreds of records,
even in the most "ballpark" terms, I will not make any attempt to reestablish current selling prices in the
future.
NOVEMBER 2008
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
19 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
Mercury Pressings "Shoot-out"
I recently made a 3-way comparison of a famous (TAS listed) Mercury recording; "Winds in Hi-Fi". The
recording was made around 50 years ago (1958). I am fortunate to have a mint copy of the earliest original
pressing (SR90173), plus the Mercury Golden Imports Reissue (SRI 75093) and now a new copy of the
recent Speakers Corner (180 gram) Reissue.
In the past couple of years, I've received a number of letters from readers asking me for my opinion of these
latest reissues, but I never heard one of them until now. (I attempted to purchase almost all of the Speakers
Corner Mercurys from Acoustic Sounds, along with many other LPs, but they refused to give me my former
modest discount, so I cancelled the order. I purchased this particular reissue on eBay. I have never received
"free review" LPs from anyone.)
Comparison One- Original "Living Presence" Vs. Golden Imports
I already made this comparison back in 2007, but I duplicated it because I wanted to be thorough. The results
were the same: The Golden Imports (GI) "wipes the floor" with the "Original Pressing". To repeat my
previous post: It's like the differences between the finest moving coil you've ever heard, and a decent $ 50
moving magnet, and that's being kind about the MM. To be frank, and to skip the diplomacy...The GI was
much more immediate, transparent, natural, cleaner, quieter and had considerably more inner and outer
details, greater separation of instruments, plus superior micro and macro dynamics. The sound-floor was also
much lower. The bass and soundstage were about the same on both. The Living Presence had one advantage:
a touch more "body".
Comparison Two- Golden Imports Vs. Speakers Corner Reissue
The Speakers Corner (SC) reissue was well made, which isn't surprising for this company. The LP was both
flat and quiet, and the outer jacket was clear and glossy. The sonic comparison was also a lot closer. In fact, I
even went back and forth a few times (A/B/A/B) to confirm what I heard. The SC had more body, more
noticeable tape hiss and the bass also went a little lower. The GI, in turn, was more detailed (inner and outer),
immediate, transparent and cleaner. Overall, I preferred the Golden Import, though the Speakers Corner was
still quite respectable. Neither of them are "outstanding". To be honest, I was somewhat disappointed with
these results, since I was hoping that the SC would be far better than the GI (like the finest Classic Records
Mercury Reissues).
So, what is my opinion and advice at this point? (which can still change depending on other Speakers Corner
Mercury Reissues I hear)...
The Mercury Pressings Dilemma
There are four different pressings of the Mercury catalog, though only the original pressings are complete.
Based on my auditions, this is how they rank in desirability (and I would read the fine details, because this is
necessarily somewhat complicated):
1. Classic Records Reissues (both 33 and 45 RPM)- These are, by far, the best sounding Mercury
pressings. Unfortunately, only six records were ever released by Classic. Three of them (Ravel, Prokofiev
and Stravinsky) are among the very finest sounding records ever made by anyone. Every audiophile (with a
turntable) should have these "big three".
2. Golden Imports (including the Canadian "Golden Series")- These are not in the same league
as the Classic Records reissues, but a few of them are excellent. In fact, 6 of them are in The Supreme
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
20 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
Recordings, and another 3 are in The Honorable Mentions. There are others that are pretty good, but they
also have some problems, mainly from putting too much music on a side. Further, and in consequence, the
deep bass is rolled-off on many of them. If you find some pressings that match the original's musical
selections, without any additions, then they are a safe choice. If not, then...
3. Speakers Corner Reissues- Outside of the 15 total records mentioned above, these are now the best
choice for the remainder of the Mercury catalog. They are new, and have sonics that are comparable to the
best of the Golden Imports. They should be noticeably superior to those many Golden Imports with extra
music. They also have the original covers etc. Hopefully, they will come out with all of the most in-demand
Mercury recordings, including the rarities. I'm still hoping that this particular reissue is atypical, and their
other Mercury reissues have superior results.
4. Original "Living Presence"- These are desirable only for serious "collectors of original pressings",
who will want them regardless of their actual sound (which they almost always overestimate), and, of course,
for all those music lovers looking for the Mercury recordings that were never reissued by anyone.
Top
REVIEWING THE 'REVIEWERS'
Nothing at this time.
Top
MY AUDIO SYSTEM
While I am very satisfied with the performance of the Forsell Turntable and Tonearm, my main focus is
now on turntables (and tonearms)...
Even though the (stock) VPI HR-X was a big disappointment for me, it still had some important sonic
strengths, so I'm not giving up on modern turntable/tonearm designs. There are other models I'm looking at
right now, but I won't/can't discuss them until I know I can get them. I would also like to get a new, stateof-the-art, record cleaning machine. My Nitty Gritty is pretty old now, and there are a good number of
highly interesting models available, more than I've even seen before actually.
Top
MISCELLANEOUS
Nothing at this time.
Top
NEW LINKS
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
21 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
JUNE 2008
Supra Cables (Swedish manufacturer of inexpensive cables of possible high quality) NEW 6/08
Artisan Audio (U.K. Importer and Dealer of "Alternative/High Value" Components) NEW 6/08
APJ Audio (U.K. Kits and Various Parts) NEW 6/08
JULY 2008
HiFi Hock (U.S. based "Audio Trading Place" with Forums) NEW 7/08
AUGUST 2008
Crafty (Dutch based DIY parts, plus speakers amps etc.) NEW 8/08
SEPTEMBER 2008
KAB Electro Acoustics (U.S. based Phono Specialists) NEW 9/08
OCTOBER 2008
Peak Consult (Danish based speaker manufacturer) NEW 10/08
Top
COMPONENTS NOW ON SALE
Ars Acoustica System Max
This was my "reference speaker" for more than 10 years. Outside of the Coincident Pure Reference, which
replaced it, the Ars is still my favorite speaker, overall, when it comes to reproducing music; completely and
accurately. The speakers have been well taken care of and are in excellent (but not "perfect") condition.
Included in the package are:
1. The Ars Satellite pair (Best Finish)
2. The Ars Subwoofer pair (Best Finish)
3. Complete set of isolating plates, which are made out of the same polymers as the speakers
4. A pair of the Wilson Audio Gibraltar stands for the satellites, so the subs can be placed independently
5. A pair of "sandboxes", that go underneath the Gibraltar stands (and satellites), which both isolate them and
raise their height
The price for everything above is: $ 9,000
Caveat- Because of the lack of adequate shipping cartons, and the total weight involved, around 500 lbs,
the speakers, along with their "accessories", can NOT be shipped. They will have to be picked up.
Please go to High-End Audio for any other components and/or accessories.
Top
12/9/2008 7:23 AM
RECENT AUDIO NOTES
22 of 22
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html#Rec
INTERNAL LINKS
Reference Components
Modifications
The Supreme Recordings
Reviewing the Reviewers
My Audio System
High-End Audio
External Links
AUDIO CRITIQUE.
Top
To E-mail:
Arthur Salvatore
COPYRIGHT 2003-2008 ARTHUR SALVATORE
12/9/2008 7:23 AM