Hi Rwd. About the low level rumble on that record, there is some possiblility that it is the record that is the problem. If the rumble does not occur on other records, I wouldn't worry about it.
Regarding upgrades, the order of upgrading in analog systems is first the TT, then arm, then cartridge. Upgrading the TT will yield more sonic improvements, than upgrading the arm or cart. Also upgrading the arm will yield better sound than upgrading the cartridge. However, in your case, where you seem to have a particular difficulty with your arm/cart matchup, then this needs to be addressed.
Of course, personal opinions on which TT to consider, are subjective. My personal feeling on moving to the Basis 2500, is that it is a small move. It may be a little better than the Aries, but not alot(IMO). If you want to move up from the Aries, you are going to have to make a fairly major step, because you are getting into the area where small improvements start costing alot of money. A Verdier La Platine, or a TNT Mk V, or another turntable in that kind of range will be required to get significant improvements. This is not to say that the Basis or others wouldn't help, but the change won't be overwhelming(IMO).
Of course, and you knew this was coming, if you were to get a Teres Model 255 Signature in Cocobolo for about $2800, you would be way up there in the high end performance levels, for not alot of money. A major step up from the Aries, for about the same cost of the new Aries.
With a upgrade of the TT like this, all the changes in arm and cartridge will sound all the better, because the TT will give a better foundation for them to work with.
If you can't make the leap of faith to go with the un-auditionable Teres, then you are relegated to the major brands that we are all aware of. This is fine, except you have to pay alot more to get a similar performance level to the Teres.
If you email Chris at Teres, and tell him you are considering a 255, he may send you one to try out. You won't be sending it back once you hear it. Tell him you need the armboard cut for a Graham 2.2.
Phil Sieg, a reviewer for Listener magazine, who owns a Platine Verdier, posted this on Bottlehead Forum April 27,2002 after he reviewed the Teres and other offshoots from the Teres project.
"I will say this. If your TT budget will stand $3K (w/o arm & cart), you can make your final TT purchase. Certain manufacturers of 5-figure American tables should be very, very scared." Phil Sieg, Listener Magazine
So I am not alone in my opinions of this table. |
Have no fear, RWD. This is nothing that hasn't happened to a million people before you. It's just that alot of things change when you decide to start using lower compliance cartidges.Medium and higher compliance cartridges will get along with just about anything these days, so long as you don't try to mount them on a brick. When you get to the lower compliance stuff, all-of-a-sudden, things are a whole lot different. One of the main reasons for this, is that there has been a trend for years now, towards lighter arms and unipivots, for better vertical tracking performance. But this is the worst thing to have when you are using a low compliance cartridge. So it radically narrows the field, in terms of the arms you can use. It is my opinion, that eventually the "audiophile with an ear" will discover that the best of the MC carts are low compliance. When that happens, the whole world is upside down. Most of the arms don't work anymore. Very great care is required, in your selection of arms and carts, because of the high energy that is transferred back into the arm by these cartridges. Any weakness in this area, will immediatly be displayed to you. FWIW, the Lyra website specifically states that a gimbal bearing type arm should be used on all their cartridges. Most unipivots are immediatly obsolete for this type of cartridge, although the Graham does have a record of good performance with lower compliance. The outrigger weights are the "saving grace" of this design. I can't think of any other unipivot that will suffice with the low compliance stuff. And even with the outriggers, it still doesn't have the bass response of gimbal arms like SME V or Origin Live. Also, gimbal bearing arms are subjected to the rigors of low compliance, by a potential of "bearing chatter" if the bearings are not of the highest quality and precise adjustment. And stiff, anti-resonant arm tubes are also required. With low compliance you are putting the arm to it's maximum stress test, and anything that is not superior will not perform well. But, when you have a sufficient arm design, the low compliance cartridges will give sound quality that is quite unlike everything else. That is why Koetsu, Shelter, Supex, Lyra, Denon, and the like, have the sound and reputation that they do. These are not made low compliance simply to make the arm have a hard time. They are made low compliance to sound better. The makers would not make them like this is if it wasn't necessary for the sonic end-result.
The added weight, stiffness and bearing configuration that makes an arm suitable for these cartridges, is not necessarily ideal for the other higher compliance type of cartridges that are so prevalent. So arm makers are making light arms to suit the majority of carts, which are medium to high compliance. You need to zero-in on the arms which are correctly suited to the type of cartridge you plan to use. If you plan on Lyra, Koetsu, Shelter, Denon, or "classic" type MC designs, then you need to get an arm that will suit them. If you plan to go with Benz, Clearaudio, Dynavector, Grado, VDH, and the like, then you can use most any of the better available arms.
I am telling you this now, so that you will know what you need to know before you spend any more money. You have found out what can happen, and now is the time to re-assess, and make a well thought out decision about the future of your analog rig. You must know the direction you want to go, before you choose a road. There are known guidelines that have existed for the last 25 years or more about how to go about this process. I am trying to show you some of them. |
Jackcob, yes I agree with what you say about that, as I definitely prefer gimbal bearing arms with low compliance. But, there is a somewhat mitigating factor with the Graham, because it has the "outrigger weights" that tend to stabilize it better than most unipivots. That said, I am strictly into low-compliance cartridges and have a gimbal bearing arm, because I think that is "where it's at" for controlling a low compliance cartridge.
However, one must realize that there are some strong points to unipivots, especially in "liquid" midrange reproduction, that some people are after. And, with all the unipivots out there, many people have a "bias" or "desire" to have a unipivot.
So, taking that all into account, I still think a very high quality gimbal bearing arm is preferable, but if a unipivot must be selected, the Graham is by far the best candidate that I know of. It is undoubtedly one of the best tonearms made, and it has some stabilizing features that help it overcome some of the traditional difficulties that unipivots have. I did not say, nor will I say that it might not have some small difficulty, or be "on the edge" of its capability. I did accept RWD's seeming desire to remain with a unipivot design, and made the best recommendation for the application, as far as a unipivot is concerned. The Graham 2.2 has been used by many with Koetsu carts, which are lower in compliance than the Lyra, and good results were reported. I still do think that an OL Illustrious would be the best candidate overall, because I have the OL Silver, and it has the "liquid midrange" qualities of the best unipivots, as well as the stability and bass response of the best gimbal bearing arms. The Illustrious has a higher lateral mass than my Silver, and should be even better at bass response, and also has a better bearing set than my Silver, so should be even better at resisting any chatter. My Silver handled a DL103 quite well, which is far more demanding than the Lyra. The Illustrious has some lateral mass advantages over the Silver, and should be a better performer because of this. However, the Silver is a competitor to the Graham, at a much lower price. It is a good value in this regard. But RWD is looking for a "flagship" quality arm, and the Illustrious is the "flagship" of the OL line. Any improvement in performance over the Silver puts the Illustrious at the top of the heap, of all pivot arms(IMO). The Silver is at least a match for any of the others, like Graham 2.2, SME V, Ekos, Aro, JMW, etc. Possibly the Breuer may exceed it. I seriously doubt that any pivot arm exceeds the Illustrious. There are precious few that may exceed the Silver. They may in a certain category of performance, but not in the overall. The SME V may have 1% better bass response than the Silver, but cannot match the Silver in the midrange, and musicality. The Graham may have a touch more liquidity in the midrange, but cannot match the Silver in bass response. The Ekos may have a slight edge in detail, but sounds clinical compared to the Silver. Overall the Silver is within a hair of all of the strong points of all the other great arms, and has them all together in one arm. It is an extremely balanced performer of a very high level. The Illustrious is even better, and that should speak for itself. |
Zaikesman, there is some information from Rwd's previous threads, that is at play here. He is having a problem with the JMW and the Helikon, as a combo. The Benz is not a problem, as I see it. From his previous threads, he has identified the JMW/Helikon matchup to be less than ideal. Apparently, he would rather switch arms, than the cartridge. So this is what this discussion is revolving around. The latest discussion on TTs, relates to a new question he posed about whether he might change TTs also, when he is making this move. I think he needs as much input as possible, because this is a major move for him, and alot of money is at stake. This is the time to strike at the heart of the matter, so he can get the best combo, the first time out. |
Rwd, I think that looking at your situation the way that you are is very commendable. You are looking at moving toward the best sound that you can get, without "clinging" to any one particular item. This is the way to get the best out of your system. If I found another TT, arm, or cart that I could afford, that gave me better performance than what I have, I'd jump on it in a New York second. And then I'd tell everybody on here about it.
I recognize that there are different opinions on what you should do. I am only offering my opinion based upon what I know. There is more than one way to "skin a cat". The things I recommend are from my point of view, on the best sound that I know of. But, certain things are "written in stone" also. If you have a good working knowledge of the "written in stone" things, you can make your own judgments based on the good foundation. I tried to make some of these available to you so you could be as informed as possible on the subject. Ultimately it is your decision on what you do.
My personal belief is that tonearm stability is of paramount importance with low-compliance cartridges. Also cartridge/arm mass matchup is critical. Sufficient lateral mass is crucial. Rigidity, anti-resonance, and bearing precision is vital. Without ALL of these factors properly matched, you will not achieve maximum performance from a low-compliance cartridge. Yes, they will work if not perfectly matched, which you have found out, but they will not work as intended, and that is where alot of discussion comes into play, because some people think that just because a cartridge is working in their arm and sounds good, that it is doing all it can. This is clearly not the case. Much closer attention to all the particulars is required to extract the full extent of the arm/cartridge capabilities. And this is where we are at, isn't it? So you must be diligent in pursuing all the data possible to arrive at the best combination. Only then can you determine which cartridge sounds best, or which arm, or which combinations. Without that, you are making decisions based on a somewhat reduced sonic performance level, that is provided by a less-than-ideal matchup, and thus the conclusions will be flawed. I am of the opinion at this time, that you aren't yet aware of just how much that Helikon is capable of. It hasn't been allowed to perform at its best. To hear it at its best, you must put it into the proper carriage, which is what we are looking at.
In addition, you must remember, that an arm can only provide what the TT will allow, and there is room above the Aries for improvement, so even if you get the perfect arm for the Helikon, you will still not be hearing it at its maximum. All aspects must be considered as individual parts, and as a total system. The Helikon is good enough to be sitting on the world's best TTs, and be quite at home there. As you improve your TT, you will hear even more from your Helikon, that you didn't even know was available from it. If it is in the right arm. |
