Dear @downunder : """ Here we have a report on Tang’s wonderful system ... ""
Wonderful for who? maybe to you. What I see and read there is a very whealthy gentleman with very log MUSIC/sound knowledge levels that’s the worst combination: to many money to waste along to high ignorance levels.
The one person that made the four days review maybe is good to handle tonearm/cartridge set up but I don’t know or did not showed his skills down there:
in that " shoot-out " were used two way different phono stages and worst than that both with those " terrible " tube designs along its sut’s ( I don’t know which is worts the Ayon or the EMT, I think this last. ), different tonearms with different tonearm internal wiring, with no specific test process/specific whole methodology to match each cartridge to each tonearm and in the removable headshell tonearm designs the gentleman did not talks the use of different kind of headshells to match in better way those cartridges with, how that gentleman knew that the differences he reported were more by tiny phonolinepreamp SPL used by its attenuators/volume ( he did not says if even the SPL with each cartridge and phono stages when making the comparisons ), he used normal recordings ( I own at least the 90% of them. ) that in reality can’t tell us differences in between those top cartridge performers: how can he knew for sure that the differences he shared/reviewed are really better and not only different when he has not a true methodology where he can identify the better or worst from the different? ? ? ? ? ?
The review is full of faults and can says almost nothing real nothing where we can trust on it.
The owner obviously is truly satisfied and proudly with what he can shows to his friends even owns that " terrible " non-accurate EMT 927. Why " terrible " non-accurate?
Next is something that I posted many years ago in an EMT thread in this forum where many gentlemans said was the " holly grail " TT when certainly it’s not:
""" These are the true facts ( not " illusions. ) measurements/specs in the 1957 designed 927:
speed unnaccuracy: +,- 0.15%, the swing tell us that the speed unaccuracy in reality is: 0.30% ( the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
wow an flutter: +,- 0.05% with a swing of: 0.1% ( again the worst I ever seen in any TT. ).
signal to noise ratio: 58db ( again............. ).
as I posted: the 927 was designed for radio stations.....The other " touted EMT vintage designs are not relly better but only non-accurate units:
the 938, 948 and 930 models had a signal to noise ratio: 70db and wow and flutter: 0.075%
where the 950 shows a less poorer ( but still a poor and along the others the worst specs I seen in my life for a TT that several people things are top ones when certainly are not. ) spec on w&f: 0.05%.
All of them speed innaccuracy is : 0.1% when an average Denon model ( Not the top, from those times. ) has: 0.002% """
downunder, I respect your opinion but to many facts that said that the words " wonedrful systems " has no facts for its foundation. Maybe you have those facts, who knows.
R.
|
Dear @lewm : You know that I know you very well and the same respect that you have for me is exactly the one I have to you.
We can disagree and as a fact we did it several times but always there are no insults in between.
Things are that sometimes I have a misunderstood with the true meaning that other people post.
Never mind, I consider you as a real audio friend.
R. |
Dear @daveyf : " remember this....your music may in fact be someone else’s distortion..."""
yes, that happens with every one of us but always exist " but ".
What happens if through the years you were building your room/system with a main traget: to put at minimum every where the room/system every kind of distortions at minimum where some of those distortions even disappeared and others are way down the room/system noise floor?
First than all to achieve all those you must be trained/self educated to identify all those kind of distortions and need to learn at least two things: from where are developed and what to do to fix it when you can fix it or put at minimum.
All those is a day by day job and your room/system will improves as you learn the better and when you are " there " then you can be sure that your system/room has lower distortions than the majority of the other gentlemans room/systems. To be sure about you have to have a very good evaluation room/system proccess.
So, in your statement my " music " in reality in true are distortions for other people and their music are only higher distortion because their main target is not to put at minimum the room/system distortions but other targets as can be ( example ) : what they like it.
""" and those that you might consider to be an expert, others may consider to be a neophyte. """
well, at technical levels those gentlemans I named that you can find out in VA as Kelly or Ellison are truly experts in their technical areas. As lewm pointed out Ellison is very good in tonearm/cartridge alignment and if you have good knowledge levels on that kind of subject you can’t name him a neophyte.
I read or ask to experts when my ignorance levels are really low in some music/audio subjects but an expert will be always an expert till one day some other one can prove with facts and with out single doubt that he is totally wrong.
In some technical subjects @dgarretson is a true expert and in those subjects no one can tell he is neophyte.
Months ago in the Agon technical forum I made some questions to a gentleman that down there and the audio subject he is an expert unfortunatelly he did not help me and I still think he is an expert.
Well, two days ago I was in touch with Mike Kelly ( other Kelly not the VA one. ) designer and owner of speakers Aerial Acoustic company, this was the second time I asked something in the last 20+ years.
Things are that he is the designer of my ADS L2030 speakers and was ADS designer chief before he started his today own company. I asked something I want to do with my speakers and he was kind enough to gave me a truly great advises about. Now I'm in " trouble " because I'm looking money to follow his advise.
I always like to ask experts and in this case no one else than the " source " him self.
For others can be a neophyte in those speakers?, certainly not.
In general always exist other experts with different knowledge levels ( higher and lower. ) than your own experts but not for that an expert can be degraded at " neophyte ".
R. |
Dear @daveyf @lewm: That we have to have some matured attitude for not insult directly as Jeff and you.
The other issue is to insist that each one of us has to improve our knowledge audio/MUSIC ( including me. ) because by so very low-inferior/ignorance levels in some subjects discussions can goes out totally of a mature " hot " discussion. I was banned from some forums for poor ignorance levels of some gentlemans down there, including some of its founders.
The other aspect is to share with you one of my roads that I took to improve my knowledge levels and was certainly reading to other true experts in several and different MUSIC/sound main subjects. A newcomer/roockie can grow up faster reading and testing that if he did not but the ones with more experience can improve too.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @jeff1225 @daveyf : I was banned from several audio forums over the net including WBF and in reality I was banned more because very low music/audio knowledge levels/ignorance levels there that for insult to other gentlemans.
I don’t use the word " idiot " with any one and and word " stupid " almost never not even many years ago when I was as an " hurricane " attitude and always trying to win. A stupid person is a person with very high ignorance levels in some music/sound subjects and that is not abble to learn through the time and that never grows up and likes to stay everywhere/forums showing his stupidity level.
Anyway, the removable headshell design against the fixed one has several issues other that high or lower distortions because of that.
The real issue here is not whom has the reason but which trade offs are better for the MUSIC sound reproduction.
Btw, from some of those forums were I was banned people thoughts were that I was and am a troll when in reality I’m not.
Yes sometimes I " sound " like a troll but only because sometimes I need to push for annswers obvious answers that could permit to go more deeper in the main subject under analizis.
With out a matured dialogue no one of us ( including me. ) can’t learn almost nothing.
My self target is to improve my self MUSIC/audio knowledge levels that means to lower my ignorance levels in several subjects.
How any one of us can groiw up if always are entilted with our believes and just do not " open/opened " our mind to other gentlemans experiences. Just can’t do it.
For several years now I read VA and DYERS forums where there are great experts of almost everything that have very high technical knowledge levels and skild that I can’t ever dream to have it.
I never participated down there I only learn in those forums and try to learn or confirm if my believes are wrong or just fine.
As Ellison in VA is a top top gentleman that I think every one knows for his very very high technical levels: Kelly.
It’s not the only sample of gentlemans that when they " talk " every one ( as me. ) just close mouth and open ears/mind. Kelly posted in the past in Agon and one of the latest great knowledge level gentleman was Wyn Palmer that maybe you can remember him was in May/June in this forum and he came here for the very first time and have a dialogue with other two well regarded Agon gentlemans that just can’t proved to him their theories and he proved why them were not rigth, this Wyn not only posted his very high technical knowledge but he has on hand a real time electronic/electrical modeling and posted about to prove why he said what he said. He worked for several years as an engineer in nothing less than designing devices for Analog Devices.
That’s kind of gentlemans ’m talking about that can help every one to grow up, to understand why we are wrong in several of our entilted believes and why we are rigth in other ones.
R. |
and the system owner posted that he will change one SAT for the terrible double knife bearing design SAEC 506/30 that I owned. This is double knife when the 3012 is knife/gimball.
Which kind of advisors has Tango and some of the other gentlemans posting there?
R. |
Dear @daveyf : The WBF link you posted speaks/confirm very cler on wht I just posted bout wht define the room/system qulity levels: https://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?26052-American-Sound-AS-2000-Installations-Far-East-(T...With all respect to the one that posted that and that's an " industry expert " and to the system owner I have to sy that both have very high unknowledge overall MUSIC/audio levels and not only because the 3012's but becuse is full of those terrible tubes electronics and to many horns drivers. A " whealty "/$$$$ system means almost nothing other than is $$$$$. Anyway, to each one its own. R. |
Dear @daveyf : Ideally by whom. The headshell junction makes and changes the vibration/resonances/noise/distortion frequency that helps about. Yes, a non wiring junction could be better por the signal but as I pointed out in the other posts has a trade off or maybe many: additional to that tonearm fixed design resonance signature in its self tonearm you will have a for ever signature for that continuosly wiring that you really can't know if that wiring is in true the best out there.
We have to choose the best trade offs and if for you the fixed headshell designs is the choice just live in peace with.
The cartridge/tonearm is full of trade offs depending each one choices.
In a room/audio system the overall quality level performnce depends only in each one of us good judgement for the trade offs we choosed. Nothing comes at random.
Each one of our choices depends only on two factors: our knowledge levels in MUSIC and our knowledge levels in audio. Ignorance levels is the name of the overall game.
R. |
Dear @daveyf : I posted that always exist trade offs and that the ones in a fxed headshell design are worse than in a well designed removable headshel tonearm.
I agree with @halcro in that audio regards and as him I owned/own both kind of designs and the fixed one has no single advantage you can be aware vs a removable headshel design.
I remember that Da Vinci very well regarded and expensive tonearm design was not only with fixed headshell but with out the possibility to change AZ, this last trade off makes no sense to any one and not for a tonearm manufacturer.
Guess what?, after many critics everywhere in the net including in this Agon forum about those two trade offs they changed for the better and the tonearm comes with AZ mechanism and removable headshell.
Makes no sense to stay " married " with a signature sound in a fixed headshell tonearm designs.
The SAT is the same because you only can use its dedicated headshells.
Btw, In that WTBF are many whealty gentlemans, some audiophile/music lover experts and a lot of very low knowledge levels/high ignorance levels in MUSIC/audio. That's why the fest for that 3012 and many other kind of audio items including the SAT and I'm not saying that the SAT is a bad tonearm because it's not but is not " perfect ", nothing is in audio.
And any one of you can post my post down that forum and you will read every kind of reactions that can confirm about.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @fleschler : The real problems with the 3012-R even with today re-wiring are that knife bearing type and not very well damped design.
I own Sao Win top LOMC cartridge and his advise in the operation manual says: don't mount the cartridge with knife bearing tonearm designs. I owned SAEC knife bearing design tonearms and Sao Win is rigth, that kind of bearing is not for top LOMC cartridges.
That's why from some yers now SME just left to use tht type of bering in its tonerm models.
Perhaps an advantage of the 3012 as any other removble headshell tonearm design be eactly this: removable headshell.
As always in audio exist trade-offs but in the case of removable headshells designs this trade-off is for the better:
a removable headshell designs makes a lot more easy to match the cartridge needs with the tonearm due that we can choose different headshells with different builded materials ( that resonates and with control of those resonances different too. ), different shapes and different weigths.
So we can find out the rigth headshell for any cartrige can shows it at its best, something that in a fixed headshell designs can't do it and not only that but due that we can choose a headshell with different weigths we can stay always inside the ideal cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency range.
Other very important advantage of a removable headshell design is that we are not " married " with the signature sound that always exist in a fixed headshell designs. Only if the fixed headshell tonearm design is " dead neutral " that non-ideal signature could disappears but the trde offs in a fixed designs are worse than the trade offs in a removable headshell designs.
R. |
Dear @lewm @daveyf : Agree with both of you.
The SAT designer has his own merit to manufacture the tonearm and his privilege to go from 30K to today 48K in the new model.
The problem there was the reviewer that from the start he did not compared apples vs apples because he compared tonearms where the alignment set up was way different.
A fair comparisons/tests are to align all non-SAT tonearms and the SAT with the same alignment set up: first taking the parameters manipulation that the SAT designer did it with the most outer and most inner groove and calculating L¨fgren A with those parameters and second evaluation is to align the SAT and the other tonearms taking same Löfgren A with IEC standard. Obviously using same system, same cartridges and same LP tracks.
Till today no single " professional " reviewer did it. So all of them are reviewing and from where they said is the " best "? where are the proofs/facts that gives certainty to that " false " opinions.
Whom win there and whom losted there?. That's why I said and speak of that corrupted AHEE where all we belongs.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @fleschler : The problem with reviewers as MF is that.
Other example of MF no evaluation bullet proof methodology is this:
Technics sended to him for review one of its new TT/tonearm designs and they send it with a top Ortofon LOMC cartridge with the alignment made it by Technics for that review.
What was the first step in that MF review?, with out listened a single note through the Technics set up he changed it.
What happened with the SAT review?, instead to change nothing he tested following the manufacturer advise. Different approach with no single reason/common sense to do it that way and not only that: the SAT is a stand alone after market tonearm so the owner/reviewer can use it with the manufacturer alignment advise but IMHO and for 30K the reviewer has the responsability and I can say the obligation to test the tonearm to a standard alignment as the IEC Löfgren A or B where the reviewer must have to change the P2S to the new alignment parameters and MF just did not.
MF not even ask why that dedicated SAT alignment? how will performs with a different alignment vs the dedicated one?
Very untrusty reviewer ( in reality he has not a system that he use it as his " reference " because several times he took electronics/cables/cartridges/TT/etc etc that he has at hand to review it and is the way he made his reviews. ) and it’s not the only one, all the other reviewers of magazynes or through the internet made it almost the same ! ! ! I know ( first hand experiences with. ) that some of them have a misunderstood/unknowledge deep levels on the tonearm whole alignment issues.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @fleschler : """
My friend with the Caliburn/Cobra/Kiseki purchased it based on MF reviews """
Many gentlemans bought because MF reviews.
That Caliburn/Cobra review is a good example of what I posted on MF: the true and real star in that TT/tonearm combination belongs to the Cobra tonearm not to the Caliburn/platform.
MF just listening/reviews what he like it but with out a fixed methodology/proccess for serious audio evaluation items in reality he does not know what to look for with precise and specific detail/knowledge. Normally the differences in between top audio items are truly elusive and several audiophiles and reviewers gone for what " I like it " and not on which one performs nearer to the recording that's is way different.
If we know what to look for and our room/system were " builded " with tha evaluation fixed proccess then you never make or pay more attention on that " I like it " as the " truer to the recording " that means truer to what the recording microphones pick-up that along means to stay nearer to the live MUSIC/event.
MF is just out of that real audio game.
The foundation of a home room/system MUSIC quality performance belongs to the bass frequency range and if we own passive speakers always we need to have at least two self powered subwoofers integrated in true stereo fashion ( the passive main speakers working with a high pass filter. ).
MF owns passive speakers with out those subs and I think he does not has it because his speakers goes to 20hx and feeels is done when it's not done.
Nothing can compare to a good subs design against a full range passive speakers handled by top amplifiers that where designed for use it as a " universal " way with different passive speakers when the subs the amplifiers where designed to fulfill the subs drivers needs/characteristics. This makes a huge differences for the better not only in the bass range but in the overall room/system frequency range.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear gentlemans: Whom say is the best tonearm out there? why the whealthy audiophiles bought it?
The one that puts that " best " characteristic was M.Fremer who said that those first 70 tonearm samples were sold because of him and yes that’s why those SAT owners bought it.
Certainly is not the best tonearm in the world and certainly could be a very good tonearm as other out there tonearms.
Now, the MF SAT reviews are faulty ( and I say this with all my respect to him. ) by origen and why I said that, look:
I followed and follows for many years MF reviews ( as from other magazynes reviewers. ) and from some years now understanded how to read/understand each of his reviews.
Through those years reviews I learnend that MF has not a fixed evaluation overall proccess/mhetodology to his item tests.
It does not exist there a norm/rule to use exactly the same LP tracks for the test item evaluations, he suddenly listen to a LP that he just bought it or that he listened 30 years ago and then over these kind of rule is his evaluation foundation. Makes no sense to me.
Why use the same LP tracks for overall item evaluations/comparisons?, first because through the time we will have a deep deep knowledge of those tracks even the sound/performance of its clicks/pops on those tracks. Different knowledge tracks are a necessity to make a whole evaluation because on one part of a track we could be ( example. ) evaluating transiente response when in other part of other track LP we could be evaluating dynamics or other characteristics and so on with other LP’s trcks.
We choosed those different LP and different tracks because were and are the ones that can shows us the best quality level performance of that specific characteristic and sometimes too are tracks really dificult to listen to it and to be aware of that characteristic: example a tiny sound of a triangle in an orchestra symphonic climaxes where only one or two top crtridges cn shows it cn mke that I can hear it, of course tht we hve to hve in that proccess/mhetodology evluation tracks where we finally can evaluate the whole item quality performance. To long to explain it I hope you can have the idea about what I’m talking.
For me MF is way faulty and I really can’t trust in his reviews ( for what I said here and other mis-information he gives. ) and were from there were the SAT took " the best ".
Today the new SAT models goes to 48K.
In the other side what Syntax posted is rigth, many whealthy gentlemans with 500K+ room/systems in reality performs inside a so so/mediocrity for that kind of money and the problem is that those gentlemans has a very poor knowledge level not only in audio but the more important issue in how live MUSIC performs in the ner field position. Money is always important and helps a lot when we have the knowledge level to use it.
I can’t say as @harold-not-the-barrel that the SAT is for fools only but more for unknoledge level persons that could have at least the same quality performance level spending lower money through other today or even vintage tonearms. But at the end every one privilege is to spend his money as he wants.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @bimasta: Not exactly as you said. Any one can listen and align any pivoted tonearm taking SAT parameters, independent if the effective length is 9", 10" or 12", por calculations.
SAT calculations uses Löfgren A, so instead to use IEC standard just changing it for: 75mm and 143mm.
The calculation will point out the NEW alignment parameters for the specific efective length tonearm: P2S distance, offset angle and overhang. All 3 parameters are NEW ones and you can have to change all of them according the new calculation.
It does not matters the efefctive length the null points always be: 80.6 mm and 126.1mm that are the exact null points for that kind of alignment.
As always, accuracy on the set up parameters is the name of the game.
R. |
Dear @invictus005: """
At 80mm null, SAT will not be adequate for my music collection. """
Problem is that in general is not adequated to any music collection. Manufacturer numbers does not disclose the reality behind it.
"""
Why this discussion continues is beyond my comprehension. """
Only one reason: worth 30K+? with out ask or knowing what is happening down there?
I know that customers are happy and reviewers seems that too: no one ask but me because " curiosity " on a so expensive item where the manufacturer just decided not disclose customer's critical subjects, even today no tonearm effective mass spec.
Anyway, who cares but the owners.
R. |
SAT says: """
higher level of fidelity for 95% of the time over having less angular error on 5% of the tracks. """
that's a tricky statement with foundation in a non true premise that the most inner groove is at 75mm when it's not.
SAT says that made it its own measurements:
"""
values that better represents the vast majority of real-world 12” LP records produced.... """
I don't know from where found out that 75mm instead 60mm. As I said I made a quich research with around 20 LPs an today I made a new measurements with these LPs:
Dire Straits ( Love over Gold. Vertigo ), Witches?Brew ( LSC ), Berlioz Fanthastic Symph. ( Reference Recording. ), Folk Singer. MoFi ( this was the only that is over 70mm. ), Claire Marlo ( Sheffield ), Rebeca Pidgeon ( Chesky ), P.Barber ( Modern Cool ) and Lyn Stanley ( Potions. ).
All but the MoFi are inside the IEC standard and totally out those SAT 75mm. I checked at random too some London, Decca, Mercury and Vanguard and happens the same.
So the former statement is untrue because at least around 25% is out of that 95% SAT talks.
Now, I'm not against what were the SAT alignment parameters choices but in what SAT said and write as an advantage when it's not the way SAT says.
In the link for @advanced101 SAT speaks of the importance to resonances control/ stifness, moment's inertia and the like and as they showed in the past when every customer has the rigth to know the specs tonearm specs SAT always not does it like the alignment subject that after more than 2 years that started to sell the tonearm finally disclose but again even that's an important parameter for the customer and with all the SAT explanation on the 9" vs 12" tonearm length SAT still does not disclose the 9" and 12" effective mass ! It's nowhere its site.
I think that problem is that customers just do not cares about but if I want to buy a 30K+ tonearm I need to know, especially after read all what SAT says.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @advanced101: Well, what SAT did it was a paremeters manipulation choosing stays out of IEC,DIN or JIS standards. SAT says that those standards parameters almost never happen but I measured 20 LPs and I found out no one that even the SAT numbers ( two of them are shorter. ).
So, that manipulation seems to me that more to be for practial terms is more for better measurements that almost never happens. But always exist trade offs and one of them in the SAT is longer linear offset.
Nothing is for free. If we want better distortion/tracking numbers than the SAT ones we can have it changing from 75mm to 76mm ( inner groove ) and from 143mm to 144mm ( outer groove. Former numbers are the SAT ones. ).
The numbers that I posted way before in this thread and as I stated were trhough IEC standard with out any manipulation.
Any one of us always can change any or all the input parameters/values with Löfgren equations/calculations.
@invictus005, yes you are rigth and problem with that is that because the parameters where out of the standards the length at what you said " inner grooves " is an extended length from normal: almost 20mm.
Well that's the SAT choosed and dedicated alignment.
I think that 3 days after this thread started I ask to one of the SAT owners to try Löfgren alignment according IEC standard and I gave the new parameters including the new P2S distance, unfortunatelly and even that he posted here he did not tell us if he tested in that way or not and what find out.
He said ( before. ) that he tested a normal alignment and did not likes but I think was because he did not change the P2S distance but stays with the original SAT one.
@halcro , very good point.
Anyway, good that SAT disclose its alignment parameters.
R.
|
Dear friends/owners: In other thread a gentleman ( @perkri ) who made a reference to this SAT thread posted:
""
Music, live or reproduced, is not about math. It is about ART ""
Yes, MUSIC is ART ( btw, has implicit maths. ) and as ART we like to preserve its integrity. It's like a paint and original one of say Goya.
What is what a museum or an owner has as main target and responsability?: to preserve ( over the time. ) the paint integrity in all posible ways.
With MUSIC is not different and we have the same responsabilities about and to preserve that cartridge signal integrity or at least mantain at minimum its degradation the tonearm/cartridge/TT alignment is absolutely essential doing that alignment not only with accuracy but choosing the alignment that overall can gives the lower tracking error and lower tracking distortion levels,
That is a sen equa non condition when we are talking to play LPs.
Today all know that the dedicated SAT alignment is totally away from those premises and far away to preserve the ART.
I have no doubt that the SAT is a very good quality performer to accomplish that if we don't use its dedicated alignment parameters.
If your audio system/room target is to preserve that cartridge signal integrity ( ART . ) to stay nearer to the recording then you can ( at least ) try the advices here.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @parrotbee : No, I don't heard it yet.
"""
clearly the SAT somehow does have those further returns.
People who have the coin, having optimised everything else are always in pursuit of that tiny bit extra - """
everything has that " returns ". The main subject here is that even if we like what we are lisetning through an item like this what we like is something that's " severe " faulty by design. As if was made in on purpose.
Why something " faulty " could makes that we like it?.
Well, first because is a new listening experience that sounds different of what we are more or less accustom to. Second, because we already bougth it and with a so high price tag we have to convince our self that is excellent. Third, because all ignorant reviewers said is excellent, so it " has to be ". Fourth, whatever you want to say.
The real issue here is not if we like it or not but that the SAT alignment is totally wrong about the distortions generated against almost any other pivoted tonearm, even against Stevenson A alignment.
What is incredible and bording in the ridicolous is that in all the reviews made it in the audio magazines made it by in " theory " proffesional analog experts no one of them made it what a gentleman here who is a SAT's owner did it: he tested with a different kind of alignment.
That gentleman is @tli . He posted that did not like it what he listen and the main reason was ( maybe I'm wrong. @tli can tell us. ) because he made the different alignment tests with the same P2S distance.
That's why I recomended him and other owners to intent new tests with the rigth different alignment parameters and I gave to all of them.
If the SAT is so good pivoted tonearm then makes no sense that with way lower tracking error and distortion levels with the different alignment can't performs way better. One thing is for sure can't performs bad.
Btw, one of those professional reviewers ( and that's why I speak of corrupted AHEE. ) followed with the SAT a different " protocol " that what he showed with other tonearms under review.
One of his latest reviews was a TT that comes designed with its own tonearm and he received with a top LOMC cartridge mounted and previously aligned.
Well, before he test it as the manufacturer gave to him his first move was ( with out reason. ) to change the cartridge/tonearm alignment ! ! ! and through his SAT review time he never did it.
Even he bougth the SAT and did not do it as @tli did it whom is not a " professional reviewer but an audiophile as you or me ! !
Not only that, those reviewers already know the SAT alignment " problem " and no one of them made it till now any comment to their readers but neither the SAT manufacturer or its dealers.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @dsholl1 : """ why is it so important to you that you make them aware that they are not true audiophiles? """
Now I'm really worry about. If you can think that then the SAT owners did it too and my intentions on the whole subject are far away to " blame " directly or inderectly to all those 70 gentlemans and I never intented to make them aware " they are not audiophiles " because I know for sure they all are true audiophiles and not only whealty people.
If that is what any one or all those 70 gentlemans think when read this thread please accept my humble apologies to all of you.
Problem is that English language is not my native one and I have a lot of vocabulary and gramatical limitations. Sorry for that.
Btw, this main subjects in this thread is more a critic to one of the main parts of the AHEE where we all belongs:
the SAT " stampede " was and is under the command of the tonearm designer and I like and want to think that he did it in good shape and due to his personal believes and not only to make money.
I'm not questioning his credentials he showed/writes in his site but more that he has not the expertise levels in audio analog that he showed in the other site areas and the tonearm anomalies confirms that fact.
In the other side the first and second line on that SAT " stampede " was commanded by the main parts of the AHEE that are the professional reviewers and audio sellers/distributors and here is where belongs all the responsability of the no-sense " stampede " and it's here where I'm questioning in deep way because we audiophiles/customers are the ones from all of them receives our money: all of us pay for a responsable work and all of them ( in this SAT regards. ) just falls in a dark and " corrupted " hole:
it's incredible that no single reviewer and I mean it never made it for his self ( just by curiosity ! ) the questions: which the tracking error and tracking distortions in the SAT with its dedicated kind of alignment? which anti skate level needs the tonearm for its cartridge set up? which advantages or disadvantages has that prefered designer VTF lower cartridge/tonearm set up? stylus tip wear levels? centered coils? LP grooves wear level?
because all those questions are their minimal responsabilities for a reviewer that appreciated him self as a professional reviewer. This is what I'm questioning and as an analog audio customer I have/own the rigth to ask all of them and waiting for a precise and clear answers of their " actions " or " not actions ".
As is proved in this thread and elsewhere exist several anomalies in that tonearm design and designer preferences ( that insist is not the designer culprit because he has not experience levels. ).
Again, before any cartridge mounted in the tonearm already develops higher distortions for that dedicated kind of alignment choosed and additional skating and other faults because the designer preferences on VTF set up.
The sellers/distributors? they can't talk because with his " mouth closed " is how they took the money from customers with this tonearm.
We have to remember that ignorance and mis-information is a kind of corruption and that's why I talk of " corrupted AHEE ".
Were all of them whom commanded the " stampede " and the 70 gentlemans the " victims " of that " no reasons stampede ".
Was in favor of the 70 audiophiles like @tli or @jareko that I gave my advise to make tests in their system using Löfgren alignment inside the IEC standards and with its respective P2S that's way different from the designer tonearm alignment. It has/must be to sounds/performs good not as @tli found out: " dim and flat ".
Overall that's why I losted my trust in the AHEE and that's why I always take/took my audio actions thinking " out of the box ". From some years now there is no single audio issue where any one of us can learns inside the box/AHEE.
Pity but is a shame of reality.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @lewm : Even between that tonearm null points its develops higher distortions than through standard alignments, so the designer choices were not good enough even " there ".
As I told to @tli @jareko the SAT offset angle of 26.1° is another critical bad choiced parameter because that angle does more harm to the cartridge signal than any good and affect too to the cartridge suspension/cantilever due that puts more stress ( that develops additional distortions per sé. ) to it than the 23° ( around. ) standard alignments offset angle.
Even develops higher skate all over the LP grooves. How that can be a good choice?.
A friend shares this info:
" Marc ( SAT's designer. ) has set up different cartridges in his arm and determined the VTF he thought sounded the best while at the same time avoiding mistracking. So lighter weight, no mistracking, assuming coils in optimal position, less record and stylus wear. He also came with his own Atlas and tracked that at 1.5 gms; so one assumes that's where Marc felt it sounded the best. "
Any one of us can test any of our cartridges and make a VTF test with any one of those cartridges setting up a VTF that stays lower than the manufacturer VTF range specs and all of us can find out that we have no " apparent " mistraking and that the sounds is good but all those does not means is really rigth and in favor of what is in the recording because at microscopic levels exist mis-trackind that we can " see " detect as mis-tracking but part of that good sound as some kind of colorations.
That microscopic mistracking ( that's where the groove and stylus tip works. ) develops higuer wear in both sides: stylus tip and at each single LP groove.
Additional to that cartridge coils are not centered, so we now are not nearer to the recording but far away from there and damaging the cartridge stylus and my LPs ! ! !
How all those can be good choices?
I understand why the tonearm owners say nothing about and could be because not only invested 30K+ in the tonearm but that all of them trusted in the tonearm designer, reviewers and tonearm distributor when all these 3 sources are wrong and were really irresponsables.
Again, I'm not questioning if the owners like what they are listening through it.
I know true expert gentleman in this forum that I would like to ask what they think about those proved tonearm anomalies ?
I respect ( between others. ) these two gentlemans: @atmasphere @dgarretson . Your contribution as audiophiles and music lovers appreciated.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @bluewolf : Now you again ! !
What do you think of the SAT's faults?. Your contribution welcomed.
R.
|
Dear friends: It's just " unique/incredible " that almost all of you but @tli and @jareko posts far away to chime of all the proved SAT design " anomalies " and professional reviewers irresponsability whay you choosed was and is try to " hit " me ( some way or other. ) even that almost all think are audiophiles/music lovers and no single of you think that the design goes against to stay truer to the recording due to its proved design faults.
So what kind of audiophiles think are you? certainly not a TEA or at least a TA not even an A.
That is what really surprise me more in this thread. Seems to me than other that the tonearm owners for all of you everything with the tonearm is great and its anomalies means " nothiing.
It's clear that other than the tonearm owners
you deserves what you listen through your audio system, no matters what.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @ibelchev: Sorry to disturb you. I'm a little slow to understand some things.
Can you explain me the meaning from what you posted?. Thnak's in advance.
R. |
@jperry : " inferior quality performance levels with higher distortions ".
The key in that statement is: " higher distortions ". I was emphatic that those higher distortions were using Löfgren A ( IEC: ) with the SAT set up parameters and against any " normal " tonearm. Those means playing with that overall alignment rules not with that tonearm custom rules.
In the other side, if " something " develops higher distortions, even if we can't detect it, then its quality level performance is an inferior one.
R. |
Dear @jperry : Wrong again. I did not tell if sounds bad, average, good or totally bad.
Where did you read that?
R. |
Dear @jperry : First than all I’m not reviewing any thing but trying to understand what’s behind that 30K+ tonearm.
Thank’s to @tli owner’s post I posted something that’s really important for the tonearm’s owners ( could be that any one of them is interested on that. ) and was and is to make that tonearm/TT/cartridge set up using standards alignment taking in count the manufacturer 235mm effective length spec and those standards rules.
Even my advise was that after those tests ( I gave the new P2S for both standard alignments. ) they can make other test with 220mm on P2S.
Of course that I did not heard yet the tonearm but the important subjects are for the owners not you or me. Even if I have that kind of money that tonearm is not for me, I own my self tonearm design.
In the other side, if you can’t ( yet ) give an opinion with facts on something that you never heard/listen that only tells that you and me have different audio training with different kind of experiences and means that your knowledge and ignorance levels between you and me are different. Tha’s all.
I know for sure that in the future when you can do what I do you will understand perfectly the whole subject.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @advanced101: Obviously you are to " advanced " for me.
Your marvelous post was and really enriched the thread and other posts on it.
Thank's for your great contribution, as always was and is a learning one.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R. |
Dear @tli @jareko SAT’s owners: """ The sound was not as good. They are dim and flat when compared with SAT one..... """
I seen no apparent reasons for that kind of bad quality performance.
Now, the SAT choosed alignment is a custom one that " plays " inside its own " rules " and if we want to test the SAT with the standards as Löfgren A or B then we have to play inside those standards alignment " rules ".
I think that all of you have a universal protractor with standards kind of alignment and all of you can make some tests changing the SAT custom alignment to one of those standards alignment preserving some parameters.
My advise to all of you is that do it using the " normal " protractors you have.
To do that you have to start changing the P2S distance where you have the SAT rigth now for the tests goes according the standards alignment " rules ":
for Löfgren A/Baerwald ( IEC. ) the P2S is: 217.36 and for Löfgren B ( IEC. ) is: 216.86mm.
@tli your smart tractor is useful for the P2S distance. Now, if you made those tests where you found out a bad performance and did it changing the P2S distance then try a new intent and obviously listening to LP tracks you know extremely well.
I hope that the SAT headshells slots permit the new offset angle that has advantages over the 26.1° in the custom alignment.
I’m taking my time with the SAT because I always try to understand what is happeniing " down there ". Unfortunatelly I don’t have the SAT " on hand " to make those tests but all of you have it and those tests will be really enligthing for all of you.
If the SAT/TT permit it and all of you have the time after that kind of tests you can try a P2S of 220mm. and " see " what happens.
Will be and is appreciated that you share those tests experiences with all of us.
Btw, any one of us can develops any kind of custom/dedicated alignment and the only trouble is to have a dedicated protractor for each custom alignment we want.
This thread is not to blame the SAT but to understand it and if I can help to the owners/audiophiles then that’s the main subject here . Maybe all ofg you already did it and then you just do not need any " help " about but maybe for some of you can be interesting to test it just for " fun ".
Thank’s in advance.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @genesis168 : Measurements always can be correlated with sound if we know what to look for and how to do it.
Through the AHEE all we " learned " that subjectivity is the name of the game but this was and is for convenience of that AHEE.
Today what measures good sounds good, in the past things were way different. Today audio designs achieved a very good grade of maturity in almost all orders.
In many ways the AHEE accustomed to like more what is " wrong " than what is good and they teached us with no single explanation/facts other than : " listening is bealieving or I like it ", no matters what.
I'm not against the SAT, every audio newcomer is always welcomed, no doubt about but there are not very clear information on it. That's all.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @lewm @tomwh @perkri friends: I know very well the JE analysis and learned many things from him. Now I was enfatic that the measures were taking Löfgren A with IEC standards.
Maths is a perfect science what's not perfect is any pivoted tonearm and in any kind of alignment ( even custom one. ) exist trade-offs, always exist a compromise. Stevenson is the extreme of those compromises.
lewm, I'm not talking of inner grooves. If we have a little lower distortion level in between null points then out of those null points we will have higher distortion level.
Any one can choose to has a custom alignment as the SAT designer and that's why we need to use its dedicated protractor.
If I remember VPI mix/combine two kind of alignments and that's why was a pain to align it with universal protractors.
Seems to me that that could be the SAT kind of alignment using " in box " calculations ( btw, I always try to think " out of the box " and see what happen. ). The main knowed parameter ( critical if we don't know what choosed the designer. ) in the SAT is the P2S distance and using a custom standard ( not IEC, DIN or JIS. ) inner most/outer most groove we can be rigth there. Combined Löfgren A and B is not so dificult due that both alignments comes with the same offset angle.
Again, with its own trade-offs. My post to @tli try to explain why with his protractor tools using a " standard " alignment he said that the sound is not so good but dim and flat.
Dim is not a good thing but flat is a different matters.
tom, I built my own tonearm and yes there are several variables that have an effect in the quality of sound and one of those variables, other than bearing and damping, certainly is the alignment of the cartridge/TT/tonearm.
Now, in no single way I'm diminished the SAT build quality level or the designer " credentials " in his specialities. The subject is different.
The SAT price tag deserves for the customer a clear information that can corroborates the reviewers/owners believes on that " unique " kind of sound.
Seems to me that the SAT owners/reviewers experiences tell me that all today tonearm designs comes only with average/mediocre quality level performance.
Btw, we don't know the two newcomers models ( 4 units. ) operation design and the already SAT owners do not know either if they will have a retro-fit for the very fast " obsolence " of their units and the main subject here could be if the new units outperforms the out of production today SAT.
I can think the newcomers will outperforms the today ones. Where outperforms the today ones? this is something that only the today owners can answer .
Anyway, there are things with the SAT owner/reviewers that makes not exactly sense as is those top cartridges that were mounted with a lower VTF that the manufacturer specs and " everybody " happy with.
I don't know what J.Carr or J.Allaerts or Ortofon can think about because that VTF range specification is to have centered coils as a main target and asure the best quality sound level.
Only think that the Allaerts MC2 Finish/Formula one has only 0.05grs of tolerance on VTF ! !
The VTF specs were determined by the cartridge designer not only for best grooves tracking during playback but to asure that the cartridge stylus tip and the LP grooves can " suffers " a minimum wear and more preservation time.
I don't know what all of you and especially the owners can think on my points of view but I don't think that as some of you already did it try to diminish all those facts.
@jperry , no I don't have the opportunity to listen it yet and I'm not in a hurry. Better to wait not only for the new models but for a more steady/experienced designs.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @jareko : """
I bought it, because it is as much free of distortions as could hear, ....."""
How do you know with certainty that: " as much FREE distortions? how do you know that those " free distortions " are not only new distortions levels listened for you by the very first time? where are those facts that can tell you for sure about " those free distortions?
If you have the answers about you only have to share with every one including the designer and reviewers.
I will repeat what I already posted:
WITH ANY CARTRIDGE MOUNTED AND ALIGNED IN THAT TONEARM AND BEFORE THE CARTRIDGE STYLUS TIP HITS THE FIRST RECORDED LP GROOVE THIS TONEARM HAS HIGHER DISTORTIONS THAN ANY OTHER TONEARM IN THE MARKET .
That is a proved fact and objective one and till this moment nowhere the designer or reviewers refute/deny with true facts that my statements here are wrong/false. I hope you can do something to put some ligth on that " free distortions ".
"""
This is another kind of "theoretical" discussion. Do the people that criticize the SAT arm design actually had the arm in their system ? ....."""
No sir it's not theorethical and I have to say that I don't need to listen the tonearm because your self and my self training in audio/MUSIC certainly is different and I know is different because your question that says you can't understand how in " hell " I can speak that way.
When you through your future audio/MUSIC self training experiences permit you can understand that subject then you are " there " and you will know what I'm talking about.
Btw, I'm not diminish its build quality level and excecution of the tonearm, it's not the subject. No one charge 30K+ in a tonearm just for fun.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
@tli : Knowing with certainty what " listening is believing ". That " knowing/certainnty " is what makes the paramount differences against what the AHEE pushed all of us through the years to believe, that's wrong.
R. |
Dear @tli : Scientist?, not me either. As you first than all I'm a music lover. Tonearm alignment is not rocket science. It's extremely simple, almost a kinder-garden game.
The SAT comes with its dedicated protractor and the critical subject is your post that helps in some ways to put some ligth about the designer choosed higher distortions through the dedicated alignment in the SAT where you said that with other kind of normal alignment you said: " thesound was not as good.Dim and flat...". Let me to think in " loud voice ":
the SAT comes with a non-standard knows aligngment by design. J.Ellison says: """
most tonearm manufacturers don't understand pivotal tonearm geometry! "" and I can add that reviewers neither.
It's obvious that the SAT designer dis not likes what he listened with any of the standard alignments ( Löfgren A, Löfgrens B or Stevenson A. ) and he made it calculations for a dedicated alignment where he likes what he listened ( I don't know in how many different audio systems he tested/voiced the tonearm and certainly with which different cartridges. Certainly too no one of us know the tonearm designer priorities in audio/music and his targets/goals to fulfill those personal priorities. ). Exist no mathematic models that can tell me what will likes me or not so he had to do it my test & error till he found out what he likes it.
All the reviewers and owners ( like you ) are in love with and you said:
"""
You may call it as distortion, but to me it is a distortion in a good sense. """
sorry but for you or for any one and especially in analog audio there are no distortions " in the good sense ". Distortions at any level and everywhere always are not welcomed even if we like it and are not welcomed because are something added through the audio room/system that does not comes in the recording, it's an added coloration but even if we like these " colorations " all of them are a bad thing are wrong. Our target always must be to have all kind of distortions at minimum to stay truer to the recording that's where MUSIC BELONGS .
We can like those " new " SAT distortions and I can't argue against what all of you SAT owners or lovers like but what I can say for sure is that are wrong.
In the other side, if with a standard tonearm alignment the sound comes flat it can says at least: lower distortions . and this fact is incontrovertible because calculations says the dedicated alignment has higher distortions over the LP surface. @lewm the area between SAT null point is only 46mm against 56mm in Löfgren A but even in between the SAT has higher than with Löfgren A or B.
@tli , you like those " new " distortions and as the other owners can't be in other way because all of you already paid 30K+. So you have to like it.
The designer knews very well what I posted in the MF thread because he showed he read my posts through his answer to my mail and I'm sure he knows the existence of this thread and I think is a clear opportunity for him and all SAT owners that he can comes here or at MF thread and give an explanation why he is rigth on what he did it and why I'm totally wrong.
I think that's the minimum responsability he has ( like it or not. ) with all those in good faith gentlemans that gave those big dollars to him. They all deserves an explanation even if they are not asking for.
In the other side those reviewers have the same responsability to disclose those information in their respective magazines. Which is the each one reviewer explanation on that SAT alignment subject? with facts why they like what they listen trhough other that that no sense subjective: " I like it what I listen " that has no real value against " to be truer to the recording ".
@tli , """
Listening is believing . """, wrong. That's what the AHEE teach every one of us but it's absolutely wrong. Welcomed to that " corruption " where all of us belongs.
That's what we learned, what they on purpose teached but unfortunatelly for us is totally wrong. What you learned trhough is why you like the SAT .
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @larryi : """
As for the claim about adjusting the bearing, there is no such thing as a perfect bearing and any particular design/adjustment involves tradeoffs between rigidity and friction; that the SAT arm allows for adjustment can hardly be deemed a fault in the design. """ Certainly it's and that's why the designer changes in the new models: """ A new small yoke houses new bearings that are pre-loaded during manufacturing and then sealed. They will keep their pre-load and extremely low and even friction characteristics throughout the arms’ life; they are not user-adjustable. This new bearing system for the movement in the vertical plane is stiffer and much more robust than the previous design. The risk of damaging the bearings during shipment or handling under normal conditions is eliminated. """
You posted:
"""
I have not heard this arm at all, so I cannot comment on its sound. It is clearly designed to go into a system where very little compromise .... """
how is that? did you consider " little compromise " the huge distortions choosed by its alignment design?, for me is a " huge " compromise so you can have any audio system quality level because by " design " is faulty as that Ferrari Testa Rossa example.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
Dear downunder: """
Btw the SAT tonearm is now discontinued and will be replaced with two new models . One of them is a 12 inch.
You would be so happy your 30k tonearm is obsolete in only a few years """
I don't know what @tli can think about been a SAT owner or Tango whom bougth two units ! !
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
Dear @ferrari275: """
this person initiating the thread has never owned nor heard one. ...."""
agree but that is not the main subject here and elsewhere.
What we ( you, me or any one else. ) like it or not is non-important but to stay truer to the recording, this is my main home audio system/room target.
Now, please let me know if ( even that you have the kind of money to do it. ) or ask your self:
will you buy a new Ferrari Testa Rossa knowing that it has/comes with a motor/engine manufacturer defect/failure?
Well, that's something similar on what happens with the SAT tonearm and even worst than that.
The whole SAT subject goes " deeper " that what we can imagine and let me explain a little on it:
- it's incredible that all the prpofessional reviewers and tonearm distributors along the tonearm designer never ask by it self: WHAT AM I REVIEWING OR SELLING OR DESIGNED FOR ???
- the tonearm was reviewed by at least two gentlemans considered in the AHEE as the analog " gurues ", no one knows more than they. Obviously that the corrupted AHEE tell us a different history here.
- I'm not a professional reviewer not even a reviewer but only a learning ecah single day audiophile but even that I'm only a simple " mortal " in the last years I don't trust any more in that corrupted AHEE and the SAT tell to all of us the whys/facts.
- a professional reviewer has at least a minimum responsability that's to inform audiophiles what is happening " down there " in any item review and no one of those gentlemans did it and I'm convinced ( I have facts ) that they did not by their ignorance levels on the SAT subject.
- I want to think that the designer did not disclosed those numbers by " ignorance " too because if he knew those " numbers " and choosed not disclose it then the situation is really critical. So, it's better for all us to think was by his ignorance levels on that regards.
- I made the SAT calculations first to know if those 30K+ dollars comes with a true advantages over what exist in the market and to my surprise I found out that it not only does not comes with advantages but that comes with true disadvantages even before the mounted cartridge on it can hits the first LP groove ! ! !
- as I told MF: good that you like it but problem is that what you like are only higher distortions. Obviously that those higher distortions is what like too the other reviewers and all those SAT owners that losted ( this is the rigth word: losted. ) 30K+ dollars .
- I'm in " shock " that no one analized nothing on the SAT overall design ! ! ! This was and is the analog centuries " stampede ":
" hey why are we running ? don't ask and keep running . To where? : never mind and keep running . Ovbiously to nowhere, a complete disaster.
But look what one of those regarded reviewers said it:
"""
What I found fascinating is thatbMarc tracked my two cartridges ( Atlas and A95 ) way below their recommended VTF with no mistracking. That results in less groove deformation as well as less wear and tear on stylus. .......................................................................................................
Let's say listening to the SAT arm really answers a lot of questions about the analog medium. It is a very special arm. """
Sure is very special but he ignored why is so special ! ! ! ? ? ? ? That reviewer was the worst ignorant of all them.
You posted:
"""
Nevertheless, the SAT tonearm remains on my short list . """
Go a head and welcomed to the AHEE where all of us belongs.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
|
