Prizo: in the third group of sentences must say: can't and not only can.
R. |
Dear Dbcooper: I still think and support that the best DD TT plinth is NO Plinth.
I heard many of those beautiful DD ( Denon, Technics, etc. ) with new plinths and none I heard has better quality performance than the non-plinth TTs I have. Including designs by Mr. Porter or Mr. Doobins.
IMHO there is no plinth with out self resonances and TT/plinth related resonances and like it or not that plinth/TT resonances were " capture " by that extremely sensitive microphone name it: phono cartridge.
I know that a no-plinth DD TT can looks even awful but I'm not talking about the TT looks but about what IMHO is the more critical and important target for the ones that are " music lovers ": first rate quality performance.
Yes, today many people are doing business with those plinths that IMHO does not help to improve the DD TT quality performance.
So, this subject is more of what we are looking for about: quality performance or better look.
Maybe there are not many persons that already tested his DD TT in no-plinth fashion: I think could be a good " audio exercise " to do it, just for fun!
Even seems to me that my SP-10s and Denon's could perform even better with out its metal bottom cover. I don't try it yet but maybe is time to make this test and see what happen.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Of course. I don't mean that all of you that choose the plinth in yours DD TT were/are not looking a better performance, sure you are looking that.
What I'm telling is that the better plinth IMHO in no plinth. You will need to hear a SP-10/DP-80 with no plinth for understand what I'm refering to. That's all.
Yes, I respect all of you: why should did not ( I not ) ?, I have no single reason for.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Lewm: A debate can start on the subject but only if who want to debate already heard both alternatives.
When you already do it maybe you still like the plinth option and I'm sure no one " die " for your choice.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear David: An aluminum stand alone tower but you can use any material you want like: steel, brass, wood, acrilyc etc, etc.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Pryso: What you refer on my SP-10 is right and that was its configuration.
Latter on I change for a true non-plinth and separate tonearm tower. This one is what I'm refering to.
IMHO we DD TT owners has a rare and unique opportunity ( that maybe never comeback. ) to test and enjoy a non-plinth TT with what for me is and has IMHO better quality performance against the same plinth TT.
What any one can lose if they try it?
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear John: First than all I'm not diminish the Albert job or any other person job. I was very clear in my answer to Lewm about, please read it.
In the other side and like Albert point out too: why don't test a Denon/Technics/Pioneer/Kenwood in non-plint fashion and then share your experiences against the plinth version.
+++++ " The first plinth made from Baltic birch was very good and in it the SP-10 MkII trounced the Walker, using identical cartridges. " +++++
that test IMHO was invalid because there were at least 2-3 different parameters that had influence in the quality performance that preclude a precise answers: different tonearm, different arm board and different tonearm wire.
In that time and when I was ( for second time: thank you Albert. ) in Albert home I told him this.
Btw, I'm not only twice in Albert's home listening his audio system but the second time I knew 7-8 persons of his group and I have a more or less clear their aptitudes on system listening/discern, not only that but Albert knows very well my " ears ".
Additionally I had other audio systems DD TT plinth experiences other that with Albert.
Not only that I own two different ( self design. ) heavy plinths ( 50 kg each one. ) that I used and test with my DD TTs ( Lewm, no stand alone arm board. ).
So I'm not totally unaware like you think.
Anyway, the subject is that there are more than one alternative for the DD TT overall approach.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Jlsemrad: +++++ " Be that as is may, the differences in pace and tracking as well as noise are more attributable to plinth and turntable motor than to the above mentioned. " ++++
who/whom told you this? how can you validate this? peace, tracking and noise: and you think that the tonearm/cartridge/wire relationship were less important?
I don't know who you are but for what you posted in this thread IMHO your overall understanding/knowledge on the subject is poor for say the least, you ignore many things on the subject or you know something that I did not.
I can understand that a person likes more a orange than an apple: because IMHO this is what you do on that Walker/Technics tests, but " trounced the Walker "? this is very/totally different issue.
If you have on hand facts behind your statement then I'm willing to learn and if not IMHO is futile that I continue argueing against your ignorance.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear John: Attacks?, for me some one that is unaware of " something " it is an ignorant on that subject.
How do you name your ignorance, that kind of " unaware/ignorance?
Allnic?: just pathetic.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear friends: It is curios: all of you speak about the benefit of high mass and disagree with the non-plinth subject but; at least for what any of you posted here, no one of you already tested ( in the last three months ) a non-plinth version against the plinth fashion one in the same "" serviced system in top working condition "".
Btw, the platter mass in a BD TT design is a must and different on the DD needs. The Monaco is a today example of this.
The subject of plinth or no plinth, high mass or low mass, etc are important subjects that gives different quality perfromance but IMHO what really matters and makes " the difference " is the platter build material or the mat that is in " primary " touch with the LP: here it is the " secret " of different performance level.
Btw, mi position about Walker vs Technics is on the TT it self where IMHO and with all respect no one here can say that the Technics/Denon is better TT than the Walker.
I'm a DD oriented person but this does not means that we can make light statements about with out true validation.
A TT is an incomplete audio item that needs a tonearm/cartridge combination to shows its performance. The tonearm/cartridge combination IMHO and through many tests about makes a heavy difference in any comparison.
The same cartridge with the same tonearm in the same TT with the same wire/cable but in a different headshell performs different. Albert you can test it now that you finally own a headshell removable tonearm design.
No, I'm not talking with " passion " ( not even with the Allnic subject. ) but with objectivity through hundreds maybe thousands of TT/tonearm/cartridge tests. I can validate every single word I post here, usually I don't " speak " on subjects that I'm ignorant or that I can't validate or validated by first hand experiences.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Albert: No, I did not. Could you send me a sample just for fun?
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mapman: How about, combo of mat and tonearm/cartridge. Most important?
well IMHO the mat makes a difference and has a critical importance. Hard to say which TT link is more important but IMHO whatever you think the mat could be at the top.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Genesis168: Everything can be VALID depend what we want to find out.
Many years ago I offered Albert to make a test on the SP-10 against the Walker with the same tonearm/cartridge combination: I offered to give two same tonearms and the Technics for the test and only that he has to find a stand alone arm mount device for the Walker.
For different " factors " that test never happen. The target was to know how these two different TTs performs one against the other.
I don't have any bias in favor of the Walker or Technics or any other TT I'm only trying to say that because I like more oranges than apples the apples are " trounced " because certainly there are other cartridges that could be a better match with the Walker tonearm and can " trounced " the Technics.
I remember very clear what I told Albert when I heard the Technics in his system instead the Walker: " Albert I prefer your system performance through the Walker ". He was gentle enough to explain me the circumstances around that I was not take it in count.
This is not what Albert wanted/liked to know or waited because their audio friends prefered the Technics except one of them that agree with me.
The Walker/Technics example seems to me that is not totally fair, it is like if some one with the Rockport TT ( with dedicated tonearm like the one M.L owns. ) made a comparison against a Garrad and then a group of persons likes the Garrad over the Rockport: " trounced " the Rockport.
Could this means that the Garrad really " trounced " the Rockport?, certainly not.
I read a lot of posts where the people said that the SP-10 is better than the Walker. The people speak on this " rumor " only because in a comparison some persons like more a Technics configuration that a Walker different configuration.
Seems to me that is really unfair for the Walker. IMHO the Walker TT is not inferior to the SP-10 and maybe even better than the Technics in similar " circumstances/environment/set-up ". I own three SP-10s and I'm not against Technics is only that IMHO is totally unfair that " rumor " with out validated true foundation.
Anyway, as you say it is only an opinion.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Nandric: Thank you. My first big laugh of the day!!!
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear mapman: Very good point of that " solid foundation rack/plattform ".
Now that you mentioned maybe I forgot to think on those low mass BD TTs like Linn or Oracle or Michel that have a different approach and that in a precise/right set up can " sing " too.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Slipknot1: Pathetic was for Jlsemrad that bring to the thread an audio item that has nothing " to see " with the TT subject, I wonder what he want it to explain ( I don't care at all any more. ).
+++++ " Rule number one " +++++
btw, maybe those rules were " writed " by the AHEE and I don't always follow its rules. Even I don't always follow what I learned into the AHEE, remember?: " thinking out of the basket " .
If I need it or ask for I always like to share my experiences with out hide anything even if goes against me or against my audio item designs.
I can't be in other way or change that attitude.
Example, if you ask me something: what do you prefer? that I give a nice answer only for you be " happy " or you want to hear what I have to say about?
Do you know something?: time ago my audio friends call me to meet me at their homes along other persons to heard his system and give my opinion along the other people opinion. Through the time these same audio guys now call me for the similar " job " but along no one: just me ( private. ). You know why?, exactly that's why.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Albert: +++++ " This test occurred over many, many months with dozens of participants. Raul was here for only a few hours..... " +++++
I have a training that permit to know in " hours " what you could take " many months ". I already explained this to you in other thread even you " live " how fast I can detect " errors " or virtues due to that specific training.
Any one can do it if has the training/discipline process need it for.
I respect the members of the " group " I knew at your place ( including a reviewer. ) where I knew their listening aptitud too.
I think that you don't need to justify your choice because my posts.
As you I know what I heard.
Albert, my opinion is only that: just an opinion. What it matters is what you think and your opinion because is you who has to live with that system and who has to be happy with: not me. If you are happy then I'm too because of that.
The subject IMHO goes beyond personal " affair ". Maybe Mr. Walker can comes here and could give us his thoughts on the whole subject, things could be that I'm wrong.
In the other side: do you already tested the sp-10 nude version?, because IMHO this is what the thread " owner " would like to know.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Maybe I'm wrong but I can't read where Mapman posted that DD TT are noisy per se.
Anyway I thinmk that the noise TT subject it is not a cue for real differences in TT drive mechanism performance.
If we take the best DD we can have noise figures like -96db in the SP-10MK3 ( it will be interesting to make a measure today in one sample of this TT. ) or around -100db like Rockport but there are good examples in the BD side with TT in the -90db values. I can't speak on this specific noise subject about idler drive TTs.
What for me is or could be interesting is not to know those " fantastic " values/specs but to know which is the TT noise threshold where there is no or where don't have any more influence in what the cartridge " takes ", where is that threshold TT noise figure/value where there is no more influence in the quality performance we are percieving.
Because: how can we sure that those -90db or -100 db or whatever are good enough?
This is something IMHO that belong to the TT designers as many other TT subjects/questions that today there are no clear and precise answers.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mapman: Speed accuracy and speed stability is IMHO a critical main target in any TT design but seems to me that in the best TT set ups ( either drive mechanism. ) that is not any more an issue, I can be wrong but that's what I think.
What I don't know for sure because I never measure it is that if my vintage BD and DD TTs are right on original specs as my today TT designs ( that I assume are on target in this regard. ).
All in all I don't heard/precieve any trouble with my units regarding speed accuracy or stability.
Regarding DJ the main problem is that DJ's needs heavy torque ( at any " moment " ) with the TT and very fast start/stop TT characteristics and I don't know yet any BD that can meet DJ needs job.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mikelavigne: We have to remember too that in the case of SP-10's or EMT these TT's were designed for Radio Stations/broadcasting more than to home audio systems.
Nice to hear that I'm not totally wrong about my thoughts on a nude ( non casework. ) SP-10 as a improvement.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike: No, I'm refering almost on what you posted about nude. This is what I posted in my firsat post in the thread:
++++ " Even seems to me that my SP-10s and Denon's could perform even better with out its metal bottom cover. I don't try it yet but maybe is time to make this test and see what happen. " +++++
Regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Mike/Albert: I'm not asking and don't need that you support nothing I posted.I know exactly what Mr. Doobins made because I seen at his place.
In my personal nude version I can't go with out the top " case " only the bottom one because I need it ( the top one ) to put on place the AT footers.
The subject is that many " things that surround the original SP are resonance/vibrations focus so is good to work with out it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike and friends: You posted: +++++ " although i have not listened that way myself, i would be skeptical it would be optimal. " +++++
I think this statement, that I respect, said all about nude version discusion:
+++ although i have not listened.... +++++
My subject is not if I have reason or not. I already heard several DD TT with different new plinths and the nude version. At least what I'm saying is because I heard it.
All the ones that are " skeptical " on the subject never had the opportunity to heard a nude version and the ones that in direct or indirect way are already in the commercial plinth market have no interest about.
Enough and useless to go on from my part.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: On other topic: TT torque. I would like what do you think on the whole torque subject?
In a home system IMHO we really don't need that fast start/stop that the SP-10 or DP100 or EMT has and that was asked in Radio broadcasting job or for Djs. These TTs were not designed for audiophile specific needs.
I never had on hand the today DD Monaco design and I can't speak if comes with that kind of very high torque.
We really need it? or a DD design for home systems really does not need it and maybe could work/perform better with lower torque? what do you think?
Maybe Teres too could put some light on this important TT characteristic? or Monaco TT owners and of course any one that could share his experiences about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Thank you, T-Bone.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: My experiences are very similar and that's why I'm asking. That very high torque looks that is no linear to DD quality performance at all.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Dear Jfrech: I'm not disputing the MK3 quality performance against your Monaco. I asume that your experience/comparison was not in your system with the same tonearm/cartridge.
So: don't you think that your statement about is not only unfair but almost useless? because IMHO you are comparing two totally different set ups, I mean that yours is totally different to the Albert one in almost any audio link. IMHO the only similarity is that both systems reproduce music recordings.
Maybe I'm wrong and you heard it with the same surrounded " environment ".
I heard twice the Monaco ( unfortunately not in my system ) and at least one of them in system I know very well. I like what I heard and I like its build quality too. IMHO the Monaco is a very fine piece of " music " and I think it is one TT that belongs to the top today TT designs along other ones.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Lewm: I would like to add: and the right TT mat.
Raul. |
Dear Pryso: What Albert decided and why he decided on the subject is only his privilege and no one else.
In the other side that I disagree with him as I stated/posted is my privilege and IMHO at least I put my " mouth " on what I believe, other prefer stay in silence: that's their privilege.
I totally disagree for many things ( between others ) that you take ( hipothetically )two different sources ( phono cartridges ) with two different tonearms with two diferent tonearm wire to make a two TT comparison: how can we do it? when both sources has its own " signature " that between other things can put in your " brain/mind " some kind of bias/preference, how can you be " neutral "/non-biased to one source or the other only by its " signature " sounds?.
Two different sources that not only has its own " signature sounds " , these " signature sounds " means IMHO: that handle different the audible frequency range because has different frequency response, different crosstalk/channel separation, different distortions, different frequency range at both frequency extremes, different tracking " hability ", different, different and different...., there are no two cartridges alike that I know even in same cartridge model could be tiny performance differences.
How could you compare two TT where the TT's are " surrounded for different: source/cartridge/, tonearm, wire/cable and the like? Please let me know how can you do it? Pryso think for a moment: when you test a Dynavector XV-1s ( or any cartridge. ) in two different tonearms ( everything the same. ) you always will have two " different " performances. Now imagine when you have all different ( not only the tonearms. ) as you propose.
I have to say that I can't imagine that comparison but if you explain to me I will try to understand it and maybe is time to change my overall point of view on the subject.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Albert: As I stated/posted I'm not questioning your decision in any way: it was and is your decision.
What you quoted of my post was in reference on Pryso statement where he think that to matched different cartridges in two different tonearms makes " the work " for comparison on two different TTs where everything is different.
In your case ( and I mean your case because Pryso put your TT comparison as an example. ) we only have two variables: different tonearm and different tonearm internal wire and I don't know if you use the same mat in both TT if not then three variables ( I assume was used the same plattform to both TT's. ).
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Pryso: +++++ " So what I'm trying to understand is how you and all others who accept only a "single variable comparison" think it is fair to mount the same arm and cartridge on two different tables and then judge which table is best? Yes this may tell you which table you preferred within that particular "system". But in my mind it will not necessarily tell you that your choice will be preferred in all systems,..... " +++++
well I don't know what others can think about my take is this:
if I made the test process using only one cartridge then I agree with you that in that " system " ( as you name it ) I prefer one or the other TT but we can take this preference as " universal " one.
Never is easy to make serious audio comparisons always exist so many parameters that we can't ( many times ) involve all of them.
A TT comparison has ( between others. ) some critical points: tonearm, cartridge, mat, plattform and electrical source. If I want to decide one TT over other first take for me is to choose the RIGHT cartridges to do it. It is not only that I need to know the performance of those cartridges but that almost all of them had/have low low colorations with a wide frequency spectrum and I said " almost " because I like to have at least one not so good cartridge performer a cartridge with " especial "/wrong/bad distortions.
IMHO my comparison conclusion will be as good as the cartridges choice. Obviously that a test comparison has a whole process including LP's tracks choice to do it and many things but the source/cartridges I choose were and could make " the differences ".
In my analog test comparisons and reviews I try to put at minimum the system variables even I use the same internal wire in tonearms under test.
Btw, I don't like to make test audio comparisons/reviews in items over " long time " like M.Lavigne point out he use to do it. I prefer a short time before my ears be equalized with the sound under test and I could lose an " alert " brain attitude about.
Everyone has his own procedure/process on the subject, the important thing/point here is IMHO that that your own process almost always function/be precise with the lower mistakes in the conclusions.
The other subject is that I don't belive in " massive/group " tests/comparisons on any audio item.
That a " group " like here in the thread arrived to the same conclusion means IMHO almost nothing, let me explain about:
each one of us are different, we have different audio/music/sound priorities, we like different kind of colorations/distortions we even have different audio knowledge/experience level and different ears frequency response: how in the life 7 or 10 or a " group " with so many differences can have the same conclusion in an audio item when additional to all these differences exist the " group " bias/push?
This is easy to prove: take a small group say 6 persons that are listening in front of an audio system, then they are trying to decide about quality performance with the track they are listening and happen that the person with the highest know how move its head to one side and the other ( saying NO. ): you know what? this sole movement makes a difference in each one opinion.
But we don't have to go very far to look answers to this " group " subject: here in this forum in any thread we read there are many many times that two almost same know.how level persons can't agree in an audio subject now imagine a " GROUP ". I respect the ones that do/did it but for me with all respect ( I'm not talking on each one person but the process it self. ) that means almost nothing.
In the same manner that two or more persons take the same audio item choice and change what they own at home means that " group false emotions " put its sign in each person in that group even if they don't like it. The group feeling belong sometimes is very strong.
I never take decisions because a " group " and not because I don't respect other people ( that I did/do. ) or because I dimish other people about ( that I did not/do not. ) but because my targets are my targets and almost I is the only person that can understand in deep due to subjective factors .
Anyway, I think I understand your point of view and I hope you could do the same on mines.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mapman: +++++ " are you saying basically to trust your own ears? " +++++
not exactly and not so simple. I trust in my very long training process that was/is already tested under any " real " audio environment here at my place and in several ( dozens+ ) other audio systems, including the Albert one, testing any audio item or whole system you can imagine.
My ears are only part of that testing process and certainly a trusty tool. I'm trained on purpose not at random, the process follow a discipline at each process stage.
Till today that process show it his value, confidence and validity when repetition is need it. I can't remember any significant fail on the process in any test with any audio item in any audio system.
Yes, IMHO and due to my in deep training that process is " bullet proof ". Is it the best out there?, certainly not but is the one with almost 100% of success.
Some Agoner's are witness of its effectivity and could give a testimony about.
Have I golden ears? can I hear better that other people?, no it is only that I have a procedure a self training procedure/process where I know exactly what to look for and how find out or not, " simple " as that.
This testing/evaluation process permit me to have audio conclusion in hours when other people needs weeks or months to do it. Btw, in anyway IMHO if you are unaware in the first listening hours of the main virtues and " errors " of the audio item under evaluation then over the time you just can't do it in precise way.
I can't explain step by step all the evaluation/test procedure/process and there are " things " that even I can't explain how I can discern on it other that my day to day training.
Btw, my first step, out of my place, is to heard/hear the system by 15-20 minutes through digital source. One of the main/critical factors in the process is to have/choose the right music tracks on LP's/ CD's and the knowledge level on those recordings.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Dbcooper: +++++ " Did either of you use or have commissioned any sort of measuring test on panzerholz and soft slate?
I ask this because of the near endless material one could choose from for a mass loaded constrained layer plinth be it man made and or ftom mother nature " +++++
this is the third time that you ask the same looking for the answer that can tell you/us if there are scientific/measures/numbers behind the plynth TT build material choosed.
NO answer till this moment from any of the ones involved in the build of those plynths for TT.
My common sense dictate that IMHO they don't have any scientific study/ies that serve as foundation to those plinth designs choice.
I hope I'm wrong and they come here and shows those measuring tests that shows differences in plinth build materials and plinth different shape design, we will see.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Weisselk: First than all I'm not a plinth designer as you and the other gentlemans are.
Second Dbcooper ask for to you the manufacturers and third my post on the subject was only trying to understand that measurements always could help.
+++++ " With all your audio knowledge, I would imagine you would know the scientific parameters of significance? " +++++
certainly and due that you are in the plinth design/build as the other gentlemans you have more in deeep knowledge level that any of us mere audiophile " mortals ".
What I can say you is that for the time ( very remote this could happen. ) I take the design and build plinth " enterprise " you can be sure that I will be aware of those scientific measurements that could help in my design.
That you and the other gentlemans you name it do not have ( yet ) or even are not aware off means only that you don't have it: not big deal, this is a normal part/fact of the AHEE and we are accustom to.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Weisselk: +++++ " Given this thread, with people like Raul saying they know what the best sound is, I really doubt that there would be a lot of agreement on that score. " +++++
it is obvious that listening is a kind of " measurement " and in some ways a scientific measurements. I know too that listening has its own limitations and more than all that we don't have a standard on the subject.
Measurements IMHO always help, sometimes to understand ( more or less ) what is happening " somewhere " and sometimes only as a " sign/sight " .
There is no doubt that TT plinths can be measured to have information that can give the designer at least an idea where the design goes.
The real subject on measurements in an audio item ( including TT plinths. ) is that the designer has to know what to measures that can " predict " its quality performance or at least that that set of measurements can confirm ( be near. ) what he is listening.
In the case of TT plinths I think is important for a designer to have some measurements where he can compare the " differences " between different plinths.
That no one do it does not means it can't do it or that it is useless.
Seems to me that many high end audio manufacturers in some audio products works by " feelings " when measurements can help them and can help us to have better quality performance products.
Anyway only my thoughts about.
+++++ " with people like Raul saying they know what the best sound is.... " +++++
well, IMHO everyone , including you, " knows " what the best sound is and more than take your statement like an obstacle on the subject I would like that you and other designers take it like a challenge a good challenge to attain better performance targets.
I know that " ears " are very important but the critical subject here is that does not exist a: STANDARD to take it as true/real reference for design. Every designer has its own standards that could or could not match yours, mine or any other persons.
Not an easy whole subject. Sooner or latter I hope/my hope is that some designer/manufaturer take the challenge to create a model that can take in count all those parameters that has influence in audio items quality performance and that make a precise relationship between them through the model for we can have: real ANSWERS about.
Today measurements say only a very small part of what is happening, why is happening and how to improve it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Tellefsen: Maybe could be good for you to read this thread:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1283151240
not only me but some other people are enjoying their DD TTs ( including the SP10s. ) better than ever in the naked fashion against those same TTs plinthed with heavy plinths including Obsidian one.
IMHO the naked alternative not only could gives you a better quality performance level over a plinthed alternative but you don't have to invest almost any money for: is almost by " free "!!.
Anyway, it is another alternative.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
