2. analog
  3. 1205104320

Raven v Walker. Colored v Accurate?

This post has been generated following Jonathan Valin’s recent review of the Raven AC-3/Phantom combination in TAS. What intrigues me is not that JV has been lucky enough to review and buy or have on permanent loan yet another world’s best product. A truly astounding strike rate for any reviewer it must be said. Rather, it is what JV readily describes as the colored sound of the Raven/Phantom combination and the apparent appeal of this sound compared with what JV described as the more accurate sound of the Walker that piques my curiosity. This is not, I hasten to add about the relative merits of either table or their arms. The intention is not to have a slug-fest between Walker and Raven owners.

What really interests me is how it is that a product that in the reviewer’s opinion more accurately conveys what is on the source material is perceived as somehow less emotionally satisfying than one which presumably exaggerates, enhances or even obscures some aspect of the recorded information, if one can accept that this is what colored sound or the product’s character is. It appears counter intuitive and the deliberation of the phenomenon is making me question my own goals in audio reproduction. These have been pretty much on the side of more accurate is better and more emotionally compelling with due consideration to financial constraints in my choice of equipment in achieving this goal.

On face value and if you can accept the hyperbole it appears that the colored is better route is a little like going to a concert and putting on a device that allows you to alter the sound you hear. You twiddle a couple of knobs, sit back with a smile on your face and say “Ah! That’s better, that’s what I want it to sound like” You like it but it’s not necessarily what the musicians intended you to hear.

It seems logical that the closer one can get to accurately reproducing every piece of information recorded onto the medium then the closer you should be able to get to the actual performance, together with all the acoustic cues existing at that performance. I am making an assumption here that the recording medium is actually capable of capturing these things in the first instance.

We have our 12 inch pieces of vinyl on the platters of two systems under evaluation. We are not in the recording booth. The musicians are not on hand to play the piece over and over so that we can compare the live sound to the master tape and even if we did every performance is unique so we can never compare a second or third live performance with the one we just recorded. How then can the accuracy of a turntable/arm/cartridge combination and its ability to convey the emotion of the recorded event truly be evaluated? Ideally we should at least have the master tapes at hand to play on the same system in which we are evaluating the TT’s. The comparison will of necessity still be subjective but the determination would seem to be more believable than if the master tape were not part of the evaluation. If the master tape gave the listener no emotional connection with the musicians then I would contend that there would be something fundamentally flawed in another part of the playback system.

So in evaluating the two combinations would the more accurate combination be the more emotionally appealing? I cannot see how it would be otherwise unless we just don’t like what has been recorded or the way it has been recorded, the musicians have not made an emotional connection with us and the slightly flawed copy is preferred to the original. Is this why God made tone controls?

I have used the words seems, appears and presume quite deliberately, not to have a bet each way but because I am cognizant of the fact that we are, in audio reproduction dealing with the creation of an illusion and creating that illusion with people who have varying levels of perception, different experiences and tastes, different playback media and different physical replay environments so the task at hand for audio designers, humble reviewers and even we poor consumers could not be more complex.
phaser
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
12,798 posts
 
Dear Halcro: +++++ " Don't you imagine that before putting into production his ' masterpiece', he has tried everything to see if any improvements can be wrought in the prototype? " +++++

IMHO, I think that is almost impossible to try " everything " in a TT design specially something like the vacuum hold down system that it is not easy to execute ( plug and play ). I always stated that almost all the TT out there are " incomplete " products and one of the reason is that the designers/builders can't try/test " everything " and that's why we customers/users always we are " tweaking " in different ways ( platforms, clamps, power cords, Vacuum systems, footers, mats, etc, etc ) our TTs, Halcro there is no perfect TT ( not yet ).

+++++ " The only caveat I would have to this is..........once you accept the designer's choices, I find it hard to understand the fact that you think you can improve upon his design? " +++++

it is exactly what we do: looking how to improve the quality sound reproduction of our regular/line TT, the Vacuum hold down AT platter mat is a way to do that.

Now, you don't have to trust in what Emailists or I already told you about, just try it and decide: your call!

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
stiltskin
499 posts
 
Halcro,
I like the word "proportion"

The word itself can be used in many different situations, choices or events in life.

One example is this hobby.

Proportion,the comparative relation between things with respect to balance or symmentry.

Thomas Woschnicks hard work and listening has found a harmonious proportion with his turntable design.
What does he hear with his design that he is so satisfied with for now?
Who here has heard his system?

Halcro,you have found a harmonious proportion within your system using the Copperhead arm.
Who here has heard your system?

I like to think that I have found harmonious proportions within my budget for a system choice and the room its set up in.

The word proportion, I like it.

sirspeedy
738 posts
 
Halcro,I, myself, never thought you were denegrating the employment of vacuum in any turntable...You have demonstrated your entitlement to your own opinions,and I have no problems with any of your thoughts.I have my own,as do many others.
Firstly I have "definitely" had good success in further improving my Sota Cosmos.I intend to introduce these modifications to my new series IV,as soon as it arrives.I have done so through years of trial and error,AND have run these mods through the mfgr who has no problems with them whatsoever(I believe Loyd Walker has employed mods,from learning experiences,on numerous occassions).I have also recently received multiple personal E-mails from a major foreign importer of the table(he loves the design,and carries three other expensive/high priced designs as well,but "now knows how good a maxxed out Cosmos can be"...his words)who wanted to thank me for turning him on to these minor mods,which just happen to add a "significant" degree of performance enhancements to an already superb sounding design.He went through each mod(I think there are about four)and was quite happy with the results,which will be employeed into many tables sold by him.
Sota's owner/chief designer(I know him very well)does not employee these(actually one,of the four has been employeed) as there are ergonomic issues,where some less experienced folks might not be as meticulous as others in committing to utilizing the mods,to best advantage.In other words,most folks are not like the audiogon crowd.They just want to play their music,and not worry about the last iota of fanaticism!
It would also increase the price,and there are mfgrs,like SOTA who really care about keeping money in their customers pockets.I know this from dealing with them for over twenty years!Hence,my absolute loyalty to SOTA's corporate "good character".
BTW,I used to like to NOT take the "five seconds" to "shut down" and change out my LP's,for each side too.It was when I had a Linn table,which did not accept a clamping system,so I kept it running and switched on the fly,like you apparently do.
These are all decisions we make to satisfy each of our ergonomic preferrences.Some folks like multiple arms/cartridges/tube topologies,and have no problem taking "whatever time" it takes to gain some enhancement.
In the long run,the LP "side change thing" is mighty inconsequential when one factors in the significant improvement I personally hear from a good vacuum set-up."One" I even improved on,a bit!...I'm quite happy,as I am sure you are -:)
Best.
downunder
1,329 posts
 
Myself and Phaser will have the pleasure of having a listen to Halcro's system this coming Sunday.

Should be a bit of fun and very interesting.
halcro's avatar
halcro
2,664 posts
 
Raul,
If only life were as easy as Hi-Fi?
You (and many others), believe that you can improve all the individually designed components of a high-end analogue system.
And you in fact may have the electronic and technical understanding and ability to in fact do so.
But even YOU reach a limit of ability and practicality in the modification process whereby you are happy to accept the designers' products?
Why for instance, do you not change the boron cantilever of someone's cartridge to ruby to see how THAT might sound?
Why don't you remove some coils from your favourite MM cartridge to see how THAT might sound?
Why don't you change the line-contact stylus of your favourite cartridge to eliptical and see how THAT might sound?
Instead, you have dozens of cartridges which you use and accept for what they are, and how they are designed.
I'm afraid you cannot have it BOTH ways.
Either EVERYTHING can be improved by the user.... and SHOULD be.........or we insert and/or eliminate those components we can readily access which give our systems.....' proportion'.....as Stilskin likes to say.
Another problem I have with your readiness to change the designs of commercially available components, is that we.....the committed audiophiles out there....... no longer KNOW what you're talking about?
We must accept your word alone, that the changes have wrought sonic improvements.
Now I'm willing to believe that even minute changes can deliver large sonic differences.
What I'm never willing to blindly accept, is that those ' differences' ........are in fact IMPROVEMENTS.
It's hard enough to reach any sort of agreement amongst audiophiles with KNOWN components?............if we enter the land of ' trust me it's better....I wish you could hear it?', there will be no discourse available, simply a collection of individual stances of superiority.
More to discover