|
| Many of you will be familiar with the writings of Anna Logg, whose work appeared regularly amid the pages of the abso!ute sound®. Anna Logg was the (clever) nom de plume of one Valerie Kurlychek, one of the most gifted writers to ever take time out to review audio equipment. Alas, we lost her following a long struggle with her health just a few days after Christmas, 2003. Here is a copy of her first correspondence to me, one that started a dear and all-too-short friendship. |
To: feedback@soundstage.com Subject: Greg Weaver's VR4/II Review Date: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 11:45 AM
Dear Greg,
My personal bias toward VSR aside (and that is well known on the 'net), I want to commend you on the quality of your report of the Von Schweikert VR4 Gen II's. It is one of the most articulate -- and artful -- audio reviews that I've ever read, and I daresay that you are going to be a hard act for anyone else to follow.
Your ability to verbalize so clearly and understandably what you heard and why you liked it -- plus the obviously painstaking effort that went into your complete and thorough evaluation of this product -- puts it way over the top in my personal book. While some may disagree with your opinion of these loudspeakers' performance or sound, none can quarrel with your workmanship, and few could equal your craftsmanship in conveying not only the factual information but the sheer musical exhilaration that a truly great, once-in-a-decade, audio product such as this inspires.
Congratulations on a simply superb job! Best, Anna Logg
Link to the article under discussion. |
| This exchange between Dr. Jerry Kindela of UltraAudio and myself came about as I simply could not believe that someone, strike that, ANYONE, could make such an enormous sonic blunder, then credit the previously overlooked revelation SOELY to the virtues of a $20,000 amplifier. I have highlighted the relevant sections of this exchange. You may also click on the hyperlink in each section to see the actual web article. |
October 1, 2002
Stevie Ray Vaughn smokes through "Tin Pan Alley." Every lick, run, wail, and bend of steel string is alive with crisp energy and a sense of immediacy that only a complex mixture, rich with an overlay of blues progressions and harmonic structure, can deliver. And then there’s that SRV voice, raw earth tinged with the history of experience, exquisite, and in a way emblematic of the best in modern electric blues. This all sounds so very real. But despite this suction of involvement, I’ve been going slowly mad, bonkers, in fact, as the nearly 10 minutes of this track of pits unwinds from the stunningly mastered Vorfuhrungs-CD II Burmester compilation compact disc. What is tripping my anxiety metronome to tick in sync with the classic vu-meters of the Accuphase P-1000 amp? It's the mild, but very real, ground-loop buzz coming mysteriously from somewhere deep in the MartinLogan Prodigy speakers' left sound field. It hadn’t been noticeable on the earlier tracks of this limited-edition CD, but like all things that hang just on the periphery of perception, similar to the sound of an annoying but invisible gnat beating air near the ear, the hum has become inescapable. Once something becomes evident, it cannot be ignored, but unlike the gnat, in audio replay it cannot be waved away. So, I start what I call the audiophile prowl, which consists of checking behind the rack, tucking and twisting at the connectors, double-checking the power-cord and conditioner interfaces, as well as the IEC connections, and so on. We all know the drill, but in this instance, nothing is amiss, yet the lightly buzzing gnat in SRV’s music will not go away -- that is, until the next track arrives, at which point all is normal again. Of course, I have played myself the fool. Nothing was wrong with the system (Audio Aero Capitole 24/192 CD player directly feeding the Accuphase P-1000). Wiring was Nordost Valhalla through and through, about as straight wire with gain as one could hope for. What was really going on was simply this: The track itself contains the buzzing artifact, which most likely was a ground-loop hum one so often notices when a group plays music in a club or arena. Simple as that. The hum was probably there at the recording session, but the fact remains that it hadn’t been perceived prior to the arrival of the Accuphase. And the amp did reveal it, in a softly annoying but persistent manner as part of the fabric of the music itself. Period.
So many amps, in the interest of covering up shortcomings, outwit the spirit with an ersatz resolution that, though attention grabbing in the early listening, quickly become fatiguing, annoying, and lacking heart and soul. They produce a bleached prophecy without the core-moving substance that only layered harmonics can deliver. So many amps manage this false musical religion, but not so the Accuphase P-1000, an amplifier that, for me, bridges the gap between solid state and tubes better than any amp I’ve heard to date, including the much revered Halcro dm58 that I wrote about in June. That’s not a dis’ of the Halcro, which is magical beyond measure itself, but more a meditation on system synergy. The near-minimalist arrangement for this review -- after assorted complex variations that included at least three different tube line sections -- seems to be the ideal marriage for the particular equipment-room interface that is my listening space, an anomalous 12’ by 25’ by 18’ structure requiring a significant amount of Echo Buster treatment, from diffusion to diffraction to ceiling-wall interstice damping and more. At 110 pounds, the P-1000 is no flyweight, though moving it, with help, is not as difficult as it seems. An ingenious cardboard mechanism with cutouts for gripping makes lifting the amp out of the box and onto a stand almost effortless. Minor siting adjustments can be made via the substantial fascia-mounted handles. The champagne-gold aluminum fascia measures .57" thick, making it virtually nonresonant to knuckle rapping. The amplifier’s housing, in solid-black aluminum, measures approximately 19" by 10.25" by 21.5". A significant portion of the exterior dimension -- nearly 60 percent of the volume, in fact -- is taken up with 16 heat fins per side, each fin tapering from a base of .4" to a rounded tip (thank God) of .17". The total surface area of the fins -- more than 2200 square inches -- dissipates heat so well that, despite the demanding loads imposed by the Prodigy, the P-1000 never ran more than mildly warm to the touch. The P-1000 is clearly a powerful amplifier. To create a stable yet robust power supply, the amp uses what Accuphase calls a "Super Ring" toroidal transformer (rated 1.5kVA). According to Accuphase, the near-circular core of the toroid allows for "near-circular coil windings with high packing density, resulting in low weight, low losses, [and] low leakage flux" under real-world speaker load conditions. Two massive aluminum electrolytic capacitors are rated at 56,000 microfarads, which allow the amplifier to withstand most power demands. The output side relies on 11 pairs of high-power transistors per channel in a parallel push-pull arrangement -- which explains the massive heatsinking. As well, only minimal negative feedback is employed, while the use of Teflon-based circuit boards -- with a low dielectric constant -- is said to result in greater transparency, as Nordost points out about its own stellar products. A few other noteworthy features include balanced connection inputs with the Japanese standard of a hot three pin (this review utilized unbalanced connections), a dial that allows you to switch from dual mono to normal (or stereo) to mono left or mono right, and unique output taps. Instead of five-way binding posts, the P-1000 has larger-than-life posts, the centers of which contain a deep slot, large enough to handle an entire spade. Insert the spade, regardless of size, and then readily tighten down the massive plastic nut for one of the most solid fits and maximum contact pressures I’ve encountered in years. There’s a lot more technical information, and you’ll find it at the Accuphase website. As the synergistic quality of your system improves ("melds" is probably a better verb because of the many variables involved), the quality of acoustical reproduction edges toward cohesion. What I mean is that if you’re fortunate in this respect -- and infinitely patient about finding the confluence of equipment -- music, its comprehension, the movement of line and tempo, the composer’s intent, and the listening experience itself increasingly become a marriage of both analytic sense and deep feeling. For after all, both sides of the brain must be engaged if you are to appreciate music as art; both must be available to you so that you get a sense of the flow of it all, of the interplay of notes toward some conclusion. With the right combination of ingredients -- which include gear, and not necessarily price-no-object-stuff, wire, room, clean power, even the correct duplex outlet, plus an openness on your part to "receive" the information -- you can experience the music, you can feel it deeply in your soul, your bones, your marrow. If you’re lucky, the marriage of these elements will open a window onto what psychotherapists refer to as an "a-ha" phenomenon or a sudden recognition of the meaning of it all. Thanks in large part to the Accuphase P-1000, many of my listening sessions provided just such moments, such windows into the very heart of music’s emotion. And the experience occurred often enough that I started doubting my critical abilities. In my experience, solid state, after all, is not supposed to be capable of creating an envelope of spirit -- and insight -- so fully. Take Pepe Romero’s Flamenco [Phillips422 069-2]. Until I’d heard "Zapateado" through the present system, I had failed to comprehend fully the very glorious nature of well-performed flamenco dancing. Now suddenly the interplay of heel and toe of one foot against its counterpart became music of its own. Suddenly flamenco dancing was no longer appreciated for its technique alone; now the experience included an additional dimension. The dancing had become expressively complex -- the sound between toe and heel and rhythm differentiated -- while the gestalt of it all included an infusion of something more ineffable and transcendent. Paco Romero’s dancing revealed masculine urgency, powerful, yet filled with grace as he moved -- and the amplifier tracked him -- around sections of the stage, its floorboards occasionally creaking (that last is due to the Accuphase’s ability to transmit even the most minute detail unaltered amidst a torrent of competing sound). So, let me quickly dispense with the whole business of cymbal reviewing. Suffice it to say that cymbal tone, from the harder metallic sound of the center bell of the ride cymbal to the shimmer of its outer edge, is all available to you through the Accuphase -- as long as the upstream pieces can themselves retrieve and then carry the information. Whether it’s drummer Steve Amendola carrying the song along for Pat Martino on Stevie Wonder’s "Too High" on All Sides Now [Blue Note CDP7243 8 37627 2 9] or Brian Blade’s delicate filigree work on "Sun King," Chris Potter’s tribute to Sonny Rollins on his homage to breath-based jazz legends, Gratitude [Verve 314 549-433-2] -- you get it all in abundance, plus more. Triangles, too, which can present a character difficult to capture because of the subtleties of tone they can create depending on the position struck, move closer toward the real when handled by the P-1000. With less, shall we say, sensitive amplifiers, the triangle’s tonality on the opening bars of Ricky Lee Jones’s "Show Biz Kids," from her It’s Like This [Artemis 751 054-2], have an overly crisp attenuated sound. A lot of amplifiers know how to float a triangle in space, but few can present harmonic overlay like the Accuphase can on this track. At the other end of the frequency spectrum, the Accuphase holds the Prodigy electrostatics, with their not-insignificant bass, firmly in its grip -- a bit better, in fact, if I recall correctly, than Halcro’s dm58 monoblocks. Case in point: almost any CD from Ricky Lee Jones, especially Pop Pop [Geffen GEFD-24426], notable for its AAD recording history, and It’s Like This. She's never shy on bass; in fact, the powerful bottom on her discs most often sounds overripe, thick in the 41Hz region, especially when one wants to run full-range speakers. What the Accuphase offered up was crisp, tight, rounded, and full (a bit drier on It’s Like This, thanks, I believe, to its pure digital DNA), presenting bass that was as close to live music as I’ve heard. An amplifier claiming to have the ability to swing 1000W into 1-ohm loads (rated 125W into 8 ohms) means that it should be able to handle extreme dynamic demands, the likes of which can be found in spades in "The Battle" from the soundtrack to Gladiator [Decca 289 467 094-2]. With a massive brass section pushing the edge of the treble frequencies and what seems to be row upon row of tympani demanding absolute bass control, even the best systems will suffer respiratory lag -- they will not be able to breathe. The Accuphase acquitted itself better than any amp to come through my home, including the Halcro, which, despite its absolute lack of grain, sounded a tad, only a tad relatively speaking, more lightweight in the brass section's highest frequencies and in the bass end. Don’t get me wrong; both amplifiers make the music visceral, moving. Both handle micro- and macrodynamics extremely well without collapsing into the middle two-thirds of the space between the speakers. Both differentiate instrumental sections with aplomb and incisiveness, but ultimately my nod, however slight it may be, goes to the P-1000 for its oh-so-slightly richer tonal presentations, which I have come to believe may be the result of minimal connections for this review setup (there was more gear and wire with the Halcros) and room interface issues. (In the interest of fair play, the addition of an Audio Excellence AZ World Power double-cryogenically treated duplex outlet -- the Hubbell 83000GY -- on the digital mains leg during this review seemed to result in enhanced resolution of harmonic information.) The quality of reproduction of female voices and piano colors represents a couple of the surer tests of an amplifier’s ability to reproduce realistically in a listening environment. While you can choose to focus on a wide swath of assessment protocols, for me, the observations rely on the realms of sibilance, how overly sharp an "s" can sound, and on subtle plosives, the mild explosions of breath generated by words utilizing the consonants "p" and "t," especially at a word's terminus. On such parameters, the Accuphase does marvelously well, serving up, for example, Carmen McCrae’s voice on Carmen Sings Monk [BMG 3086-2-N] as a natural rendition of vocal shadings. Ditto for Ella Fitzgerald on Clap Hands, Here Comes Charlie! [Verve 835 646-2]: The sibilance of her powerful, young but already nuanced voice can be distracting through lesser amplification. The P-1000 presents a more natural sounding, grainless Ella, and that’s due, I believe, to the amplifier’s ability to flesh-out overtones in critical frequency bands. Likewise for piano. Fidelis Records’ The Seasons [FR001], a rich, warm-sounding, and evocative piano trio of Tchaikovsky’s sensitive work, readily showcases the left hand’s essentialness in creating color and tonal underpinnings. Through the Accuphase, the piano’s cavity sounds positively sonorous, while the right hand has the correct sparkle and body, meaning it doesn’t sound etched. Truly, there’s something engaging about this sand-based amplifier, which to my ears, tends a bit to the warm side, though to call it even slightly dark would be absolute mischaracterization. No, the Accuphase P-1000 readily reveals even the slightest alterations upstream. For example, swapping out Amperex Orange Globe 6DJ8s in the Conrad-Johnson 17LS line section (used much earlier in the review before the minimalist path was finally taken) revealed a slightly tipped-up presentation compared to the Amperex Bugle Boy "Made in Holland" 6DJ8s, which are considered harmonically richer in the upper octaves and more dense without sounding bloated in the lower registers. The amplifier revealed the differences readily. Also, whether I rotated power cords or interconnects, the amplifier revealed the characteristics of each as I’ve come to know them and without much listening time devoted to the process. Throw harsh goods into the mix, and the amplifier will transparently transfer what it has been fed. On the nit side, and indeed there are a couple of very small issues, the P-1000 just doesn’t quite create the kind of pristine holography that I am used to as a lover of tubed gear. What I’m talking about, however, is a matter of relative degree. Rest assured, the Accuphase P-1000 casts a holographic soundstage the likes of which may be setting precedent at this price point for any solid-state amplifier. When I dropped in the Conrad-Johnson 17LS, with its quad of Amperex "Made in Holland" Bugle Boy 6DJ8s, known for their ability to throw solid images, the Accuphase delivered precisely that -- instruments had a "there" quality that was undeniably enticing. The other critique has more to do with personal bias. I prefer a more forward presentation, somewhere in the first third of a concert hall, not midway or farther back. The Accuphase P-1000 seems to put one squarely in the center rows, which moves the soundstage away from the front plane of the Prodigys. For many audiophiles, this type of seating sense is highly preferable, but I thought you at least needed to understand my bias in this matter. One more item, and that is the house look. I wonder if it would be too much to ask Accuphase to update what has now become a classic look. Mind you, there’s nothing wrong visually, but even Conrad-Johnson has made its look much more modern without going over the top. ‘Nuff said. Ultimately, the Accuphase P-1000 can be ruthlessly revealing of ancillaries -- so be forewarned that it will not add warmth or "glow" to famished-sounding upstream and downstream gear. Having said that, it's safe to point out that this product from a trusted hi-fi name in Japan, with a small loyal following in North America, offers up a sound that would have been described in earlier days as honey-like. Not honey with an amber translucence but rather of a very light, golden gossamer glow -- which is a plus in my book. If you’re in the market for a new amplifier, irrespective of whether you’re a bottlehead or sand-based lover, the Accuphase P-1000 is an absolute winner you must try. I doubt you’ll find much better in so many ways for a similar amount of money (and in many cases for even more money). ...Jerry Kindela Accuphase P-1000 Stereo Power Amplifier Accuphase Laboratory, Inc. Website: www.accuphase.com US distributor:
Ultra Audio is part of the SoundStage! Network.
October 16, 2002 To Jerry Kindela, I have just finished reading your Accuphase P-1000 amplifier review at the new SoundStage! Network site, Ultra Audio and am really stunned at your assertion that you had never heard the obvious guitar-amp ground buzz in "Tin Pan Alley" prior to the Burmester release. I simply can't imagine that this is the first time you ever noticed that session artifact! In fact, it was equally obvious on the initial CD release of Couldn t Stand The Weather, which I gave to a friend when I picked up the excellent Sony SBM release. It is also equally obvious on the Absolute Analogue 180-gram vinyl release. It was so obvious on first play in the shop I was managing at the time that I stopped what I was doing and looked for the noise, as did you. I initially surmised that the hum was generated by a bad ballast in one of the florescent-light fixtures of my demo room. However, that was 1984, some 18 years ago. I find it singularly curious that you never noted that guitar-amp buzz until now. Man, it is even pointed out in the liner notes of the original release! Just for reference, the same amp buzz is noted on the Hendrix cover "Little Wing" on The Sky is Crying, as it was recorded during the same sessions in New York at the Power Station in January and February of 1984. I can only think of two reasons to account for your never having heard it previous to this listening. Either you have never listened to that cut by SRV prior to that sitting or your system had some major flaws that masked it. The fact that you go on to state that it was not noticeable before the arrival of the Accuphase rules out number one and is, in my opinion, doing an injustice to your readers and is just plain ludicrous. You are unrealistically damning other amps when, in fact, it was either your own ineptitude or carelessness, or a flaw in your previous system setup, that was masking this plainly obvious venue sound. If I could discern it in a retail environment while background listening and think, as you did, that it was a sound that was coming from something other than the recording, then you paint too strong a commendation for the amp. Do understand that that I am NOT attacking the Accuphase P-1000; in fact, quite the opposite is true. I know Accuphase equipment quite well. At the time of the release of Couldn't Stand The Weather I was using an Accuphase P-300A with modified Acoustat 2+2 Medallions. What I am saying is that your claim that the Accuphase is something special because only with it in place were you able to notice the utterly obvious guitar amp hum is, well, deceptive and absurd. To infer that other amps mask this part of the recording is just plain irresponsible. I fully suspect that I will not be the only one to point this out. And understand that this is not an antagonistic note. It is only my hope that you will find a way to correct this glaring misconception sometime soon for your readers. Regards, Greg Weaver
Dr. Kindela's Response to my letter.
|
| This flurry of emails came after the now defunct Fi magazine published a budget "table" shootout in with its November 1998 Volume 3, Issue 11. The article featured the $299 Music Hall MMF-2/Goldring Elan, the $399 Sumiko Pro-Ject 1.2/Sumiko Blue Point, the $495 Rega Planar 2/Sumiko Blue Point, and the $599 Rotel RP-955/Audio-Technica AT110E. My concern was that the AT and Goldring carts were average MM carts which sold for around $60-$90, while the Sumiko Blue Point was from the over-achieving high-output MC variety. |
From: "Greg Weaver" <analyst@xta.com> To: "Wayne Garcia" <wgarcia@fi-magazine.com> Subject: November Fi Turntable Shootout Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 17:21:22 Mr. Garcia, I was both surprised and appalled to read your budget turntable shoot out in the November issue of Fi. Surprised in that you failed to mention that the Sumiko Blue Point used on the Rega was of the high output moving coil variety (rather than a less costly moving magnet type fitted to all the other ‘tables) and appalled that you seemed to go to such length to conceal that fact. You write, “Moving to the Rega (with a decent cartridge it’s essentially the same price as the Rotel) …”. Here you again choose to ignore any mention of the cartridge, its entirely different motor structure or its resultant affect on the synergy and sound of the ‘table. Your statement seems almost deliberately worded to avoid having to mention that the cart you are using on the Rega is something above “decent”. As you well know, the Blue Point is 3 to 4 times the cost of any of the other three cartridges used in this comparison. You write further, “The Planar 2’s highs were significantly extended beyond those of the other three contenders, and they were sweeter and more delicate, too. Greater ambient information finally allowed the sound stage to open up, and for the first time there was a real sense of layered depth as well as weight and body to the sound.” Don’t you think the effects you are describing with those two sentences are more suited to a description of the differences between the Moving Magnet cartridges used on the other three ‘tables and the Moving Coil cartridge used on the Rega than that of the sonic signatures of the four platforms? While I will admit that the Rega is indeed a good, affordable platform, your review does a serious injustice to the other three units in the shoot out. I reviewed the MMF-2 back in May (http://www.soundstage.com/vinyl/vinyl061998.htm) and, while I found it had many faults, to a large degree most of its major shortcomings were attributable to the good-but-not-stellar Goldring Elan that came with it. I took the time to mount a good MC cartridge to the table and found it to then perform as admirably as you found the Rega to outdistance the other contenders in your article. What I find most inappropriate is that I am sure you know better; it is very disheartening and concerning that such seemingly irresponsible, bordering on deceptive, journalism is practiced at Fi. I am very disappointed. Sincerely, Greg Weaver - the audio analyst© Rockford, IL Writing for Positive Feedback and SoundStage! http://www.soundstage.com The Internet's leading entertainment publication, with opinions on high-end audio and music, editorials, features, and serious fun. Published monthly since 1995.
To: "Greg Weaver" <analyst@xta.com> Subject: Re: November Fi Turntable Shootout Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:02:07 Mr. Weaver, It seems like you're so focused on being "appalled" that it has distracted you from being a very careful reader. You say that I went to "such length to conceal" the cartridge used on the Rega? Hardly so. In the seventh paragraph of my article I state exactly what cartridges were used on each of the four turntables--before any sonic comparisons are made. You also conveniently failed to read the following: "I also tried the Sumiko Blue Point cartridge on both 'tables [Music Hall and Sumiko], and though clarity and top-end extension improved a bit, the fundamental sound remained unchanged." Mr. Weaver, perhaps you don't have much experience with analog, but most who have are aware that the sonic diffreneces between turntables and arms is typically larger than the differences between cartidges, and that a turntable's colorations affect (and limit) the sound of any cartridge mounted on it. Deceptive journalism or sloppy reading? You be the judge. By the way, I intend to publish your ridiculous diatribe. --WG From: "Greg Weaver" <analyst@xta.com> To: "Wayne Garcia" <wgarcia@fi-magazine.com> Subject: Re: November Fi Turntable Shootout Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 23:07:38 Wayne Garcia wrote: > Mr. Weaver, > > It seems like you're so focused on being "appalled" that it has distracted you from being a very careful reader. > > You say that I went to "such length to conceal" the cartridge used on the Rega? Hardly so. In the > seventh paragraph of my article I state exactly what cartridges were used on each of the four > turntables--before any sonic comparisons are made. First of all, I did not say that you went to great length to conceal the cartridge used. I said that you seemed to go to such length to conceal the fact that one cart was of the considerably more expensive moving coil variety. Big difference. I might say touché to your comment below about sloppy reading. See the snippet below. "I was both surprised and appalled to read your budget turntable shoot out in the November issue of Fi. Surprised in that you failed to mention that the Sumiko Blue Point used on the Rega was of the high output moving coil variety (rather than a less costly moving magnet type fitted to all the other ‘tables) and appalled that you seemed to go to such length to conceal that fact." Sometimes, writing a piece brings one too close to it to spot the obvious. Try to reread the paragraph from the novitiate's point of view. You fail to say or infer anything to alert that reader to the fact that the carts are seriously different, in either cost or design. I read that paragraph, and that is why I was concerned. The uninitiated, the audience for whom I can only assume it was intended, would have no idea just how different those carts might be from merely a listing of their names. My point was that after completely ignoring the differences in that early paragraph, the second time you made mention of it (when you mention the Rega's sound), you seemed to deliberately camouflage the issue with your off-hand parenthetical statement about "any decent cart." You had ample opportunity to at least touch on the price and motor differences between the two types of cartridges. > You also conveniently failed to read the following: "I also tried the Sumiko Blue Point cartridge on both > 'tables [Music Hall and Sumiko], and though clarity and top-end extension improved a bit, the fundamental > sound remained unchanged." I will admit to missing that part of the paragraph. In my scanning of the piece, I did fail to take that all in. My apologies. > Mr. Weaver, perhaps you don't have much experience with analog, but most who have are aware that the > sonic diffreneces between turntables and arms is typically larger than the differences between cartidges, > and that a turntable's colorations affect (and limit) the sound of any cartridge mounted on it I certainly don't wish to have this reduced to some form of "pissing contest"; my point was that I was stunned at what seemed to be great measure taken on your part to avoid discussing the serious and undeniable sonic differences between the two types of cartridges. I have been in this field since the late sixties and have been experimenting with, setting up and modifying turntables since the early seventies. I am well aware of how much difference EVERYTHING can make. I find compliance mismatches between arms and carts to be something even "well seasoned" vinyl adherents can overlook. My issue with you was that you completely ignored the significance that the cartridges under evaluation, in particular the Blue Point, made. While you’re are correct in pointing out that anyone who knows much about turntables knows just how much difference each platform can make, they are also just as aware of how much difference there is between a $60-$90 moving magnet cartridge and an overachieving $200 moving coil like the Blue Point. To try to suggest otherwise is really beneath you and, in my opinion, not a viable defense. I don't know if you remember the letter I sent you last spring telling you how much I was impressed with the then recent staffing and resultant writing changes at Fi. This current letter was not sent to you to strut and preen or to flex some maladjusted ego, but to express my serious concern. I feel you did a tremendous injustice by not outlining the sonic differences between entry level MM and over achieving high output MC carts. Differences which, with two such carts alternately mounted on the same arm and table, would likely fall into categories very similar to the ones you noted. > Deceptive journalism or sloppy reading? You be the judge. I freely admit to missing the sentence about using the Blue Point on the Pro-Ject and Music Hall. None of us are perfect, what else can I say. It still doesn't explain why you chose to skip the significance of the sonic differences imparted by the carts. And if you are expecting anyone in the know to accept your theory that a Goldring Élan and a Sumiko Blue Point, mounted on the same table/arm combo, won't make a notable difference, I suggest you seriously re-think that position. > By the way, I intend to publish your ridiculous diatribe. > > --WG I am sorry that you find another veteran analog fan questioning your methodology, which on the surface seems less than forthright, to be ridiculous. You may of course print both the first letter and this response if you care to do so. Thank you for your time. -- Greg Weaver - the audio analyst© Rockford, IL Writing for Positive Feedback and SoundStage! http://www.soundstage.com The Internet's leading entertainment publication, with opinions on high-end audio and music, editorials, features, and serious fun. Published monthly since 1995.
First this...
Subject: Re: November Fi Turntable Shootout Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 13:41:32 Mr. Weaver, Ah, the joys of e-mail. While I stand by my defense of--and feeling that you misread and selectively quoted from--my article, I apologize for my snotty reply to your letter. Even though I try to have good manners, e-mail makes it easy to fire off unfortunate responses when we're angry. Again, I'm sorry for the tone of my letter. I hope that that the things you missed in the article are now clear. I had no intention of misleading anyone--and sincerely believe that all of the many hours of work that went into my evaluations resulted in accurate descriptions of the 4 turntables' sonics. Sincerely, Wayne Garcia ...then this...
To: "Greg Weaver" <analyst@xta.com> Subject: Re: November Fi Turntable Shootout Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 13:20:13 Dear Mr. Weaver, Thanks for your reasoned response--which I assume you read before my note of apology. It's true that we can be too close to our own writing, and, with that in mind, I was too casual about the differences between the cartridges in my article (yes, it was written for the novice--something I guess I forgot along the way because of my own familiarity with the subject). I'm sorry that it came across as a deliberate witholding of information in order to mislead. I assure you that it was not intended that way (the Rega needs no help from me or the Sumiko cartridge to better the other units). In any case, though I am still ashamed of my defensive and angry first response, I feel that there has been value in our exchange and I thank you for pointing out the weakness in my article. Sincerely, Wayne Garcia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: "Wayne Garcia" <wgarcia@fi-magazine.com>