1. Home
  2. analog
  3. 197815-75654

How important is low W & F performance anyway?

I recently completed work on a direct drive motor controller for a turntable mfr with IMHO, rather impressive results (0.004% 2 sigma method, 0.002% RMS).  In measuring other tables actual performance (vs published specs) I was shocked at the rave reviews two tables received that have rather lousy measured performance (but impressive specs).  It made me wonder whether the goal of ultra low W&F performance was really necessary?  I trust the measurements as they were verified by several methods and software tools and they correlated rather closely, yet the reviewers almost universally praise these tables.  It made me wonder if the reviewers even know what they are hearing or listening for and not to put to fine a point on it, does it even matter? 

phoenixengr
lewm
14,695 posts
 

Some audiophiles are going to look at specs if for no other reason than they have no opportunity to listen.  Others with the opportunity to listen in a controlled environment, are going to read the specs maybe after purchase. Many do not understand how to interpret test results, anyway. And many are swayed by bling and the philosophy that if it costs more, it is better. 

phoenixengr's avatar
phoenixengr OP
120 posts
 

Published specs vs actual measured performance is another issue, but is related to this discussion.  One of the DD tables in question has a published W&F spec of 0.008% but measures 100x worse at 0.8%, yet still receives rave reviews from the press and public.  So: Do specs for W&F (or measured performance) even matter at this point?

The other table in question sells for more than $50K and has a laughable W&F spec of 1PPM (0.0001%) but actually measured 0.16%.  Again, nothing but praise from the listening tests.  One would have to conclude that specs are irrelevant since mfrs can claim almost anything they want with impunity and the fact that reviewers and owners of these tables have nothing but good things to say about the sound leads me to believe that even tables with lousy W&F performance apparently sound good to just about everyone.

phoenixengr's avatar
phoenixengr OP
120 posts
 

The Monaco Gran Prix 3.0 says their DD table W&F is so low it can't be measured (odd, because the previous DD table published a 1PPM W&F spec even though I've never seen an instrument or software with that kind of resolution).

Maybe the reason these numbers are meaningless is because the W&F of the recording process would most likely swamp any W&F contribution from a decent table.  Even the first DD example (0.8%) which is undoubtedly worse than the cutting lathe would not add a significant amount of temporal distortion.

Are we witnessing what happened in the 70's & 80's with amplifier distortion figures that got vanishingly smaller yet the sound was indistinguishable between competing components?

oddiofyl's avatar
oddiofyl
4,586 posts
 

I have SOTA's Quasar with RoadRunner and Eclipse Motor/ Controller.   It is an awesome table.  Sounds fantastic.   It's obvious speed stability lends to it's great sound I believe.  If there is W&F it is not audible. 

A great table for the money.  Love it.  

kennyc
2,979 posts
 

Raises several questions:

  • At what level is it noticeable?
  • Does system transparency affect noticeability? 
  • Does listening ability affect noticeability?
More to discover