|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.31.215.179
...no, not a dietary suggestion. Saw this line of TTs at Audio Advisor. They look great. The most expensive model has a flat tonearm, a design I've never seen before (but I've led a sheltered life).
Anyone heard these TTs? Comments?
Follow Ups:
I recently purchased an E-Flat. It is a well engineered and beautifully appointed turntable. Simple to assemble, particularly mounting and positioning the cartridge on the tonearm. Its uni-pivot design is easier to handle than others I have addressed in the past. I have no concerns regarding the geometry of the arm, or about its length to height ratio. Apparently, no one will have an issue about its width to length ratio, except that it interferes with the last step in a Feickert protractor set-up routine. I can think of other arms that are far more 'adventurous' along these lines - Funk, WTL, Reed - where this aspect of their design was gladly accepted. Rotational accuracy appears to be dead on and it was the first audible quality that I noticed as compared to my previous table. I had thought that really good was good enough, until I heard the difference. If considering something new I would take the time and check it out. The E-Flat is far from their most expensive table, maybe just as far up the line that Audio Advisor chooses to carry.
The EAT turntables are closely related to the well known Pro-ject 'tables.
Pro-ject is run by Heinz Lichtenegger and his wife Jozefina runs EAT. Both turntable brands are made in the same factory. EAT also make vacuum tubes.
Both brands have high reputations in their particular price sectors.
I'm pretty sure the arm on my MMF-5 is a pro-ject arm.
Tom
Could be but as Music Hall doesn't exist in the UK I cannot say for sure.
That's a 700-900 cart for an extra 500. Not bad.
These are good times for TT buyers...
I'd be more interested in how their C Major and C Sharp stack up against the competition. These have a more conventional (heh..) carbon fiber arm that look the business...
Many years ago NAD sold a table with a flat tonearm. It was actually a PCB that used printed circuits in place of the tonearm wires. It was a pretty cool idea, but as John said a flat arm is a really BAD idea.
.
Freak out...Far out...In out....
I suspect the reason you haven't seen flat tonearms before is because it's a poor design from a mechanical point of view. It has good structural integrity in the lateral direction but poor structural integrity in the vertical direction. It's interesting, though. It's just not a good design in my opinion. YMMV
Happy New Year!
John Elison
And a Happy New Year to you as well, JE! Still happily using the TASCAM 3000 after your rec, nearly a year now. Many, MANY excellent 24/192 recordings to show for my efforts.
Thanks for the input on the flat arm design problems. At least the lower priced tables have a traditional design that looks awful good.
Glad to hear you like your TASCAM DA-3000. You should try recording an LP in DSD(128) just for fun and see if you think it is any better than 24/192. Of course, I suppose I should probably try making a recording at 24/192 because I've never done that. I used to copy LPs at 24/96 with my Alesis Masterlink, but when I switched to the TASCAM DA-3000 I just went right to its highest resolution capability and never looked back. I've got over 35 LPs recorded in DSD(128) so far.
Happy New Year!
John Elison
John, I did try a couple, but the file sizes were so large, and it took so much time to process that I set it aside early on.
I've found 24/192 to be the best combination of quality and file size for me, though the files are still huge. An album at 24/192 consumes between 2.5 and 3 gig. Storing, saving, copying and processing are all issues. I keep a copy of the raw file, as well as the WAV-based file split into tracks. Then, I have the FLAC version needed to play on my laptop and portable units (Sony A17 and Pono player), as they are limited to 128 - 196 gig. Memory is cheap, but that's still a LOT of memory.
I use TASCAMs HiRes Editor to process the files. With DSD, it would take minutes to open files, and minutes to export. And more minutes to copy. As I turned 60 this year, I'm not sure I have enough time left to deal with DSD, LoL. 2TB hard drives fill QUICKLY. And my 1TB drive on my laptop is already bumping at it's limits.
I've recently bought a Chord Mojo, which processes DSD, for my desktop listening, so that may prompt me to re-do certain of my favorites in DSD in the future.
In any event, Happy New Year to you and yours, and again, MANY thanks.
Why do you save the raw recordings? That's a waste of memory. I save only the mastered recordings, but I save multiple copies on different drives for protection against a drive going bad.
Happy New Year!
John Elison
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: