Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Well, Paul, a majority of audio Morons is that in their infinite chase for a “better” turntables approach the subject of turntables’ assessment using fundamentally faulty techniques. 
 
Let pretend, juts for sake of illustration, that a price of TT is directly relates to the TT’s Sound and a more expansive TT performs better, proportionally to the TT’s price, juts for sake of illustration…. Pretend a person has an average TT, let say the one that costs $1.5K. He spins the cords and he is happy. Then, a person listens a “noise” that analog people spread or read the thing that the Framer-like write and the person is ready to do “upgrade”…. What is VERY important that the person does not identifies for itself the Sonic problems with his current TT but instead got for another TT - a one that does not do “better” but juts sounds differently. Pay attention to what Framer-like do. They never identify problems with a current reviewing TT (or any other product they touches) but they/he only proposes some “differences” between a new reviewing product and some kind of deprecated product that does not need to be promoting anymore. Some people feel that Framer-like do it because their “marketing savvyness” but I do not feel so. The real reason why Framer-like-airbags do it is because they are completely ignorant in more or less civilized assessment procedures. The only real motivation for TT upgrade (or change of any audio component) should be a person clearly defines for himself what specific sonic shortcomings his current TT has. Then, ONLY AFTER THEN, a new TT should do nothing else but addressing those specific shortcomings.
 
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=432
 
So, the Framer came up with his “Continuum Messaahis”, but in realty in my eyes he did nothing but spoiled a subject of objections-loaded turntables. You’ve never seen Framer, or any other similar to him empty-head, complaining about a specific performance of his current TT… until they endorse a new model and then they sell to subscribing public the imaginary benefit of a new TT. Doing that, a reviewer suddenly discovers that his old TT had some issues with sound and “of course” the new TT “accidentally” addresses the problem. What actually in realty happiness - is that a reviewer conceives a set of artificial problems (juts for a sake of review) and then just cash out the “solutions of conceived problems” by proposing the new model.  Is very important to understand that a reviewer in this case is completely enslaved within a primitivism of own reviewing methodology. They write big words and try to sound cogent and intelligent but the core of it is that in the reviewing (as it exists today) when a review only intended to be written then the set of the “solutions of conceived problems” have already been pre-cashed. In this environment writing a review is juts dumping on the page a pile of word of to fill the page. That is why I seldom read review: becomes they are all writhen because the wrong reasons.

For instance the last TAS published Jonathan Valin’s observation about “competition” between Kuzma and Walker turntables. They both what is called “expensive” TT of the similar price-range and for an ignorant person the setting looks very reasonable: identically set up TT, the same needles, the same rest of the system (including a dead phonocorrector and insulting acoustic system) and so on. I also do not question the Jonathan’s desire to pick honestly the differences in sound that he was able to observe. However what Valin did I consider was a completely idiotic experiment, the idiotic enough to be conducted only by a reviewer of Jonathan Valin’s stature. Valin’s observation would be a valid entry at some like of AudioFederation blog but as a major article of a national publication and Valin’s journey looks... like …  all the rest Jonathan Valin’s doodles. If Jonathan Valin (or Fremer with his Continuum) are not able to take a “TT itself” and are disabled to say what the TT does wrong sonically then they have no business to write up for audio publications. Who the hell needs to read about the freaks comparing the sounds!?

Anyhow, the biggest problem is that they are not really understand with their short and limited reviewing minds the format in which their reviewing listening inelegance operates makes their observation about their turntables useless.  Therefore that hypostatical person with his “average TT” that I proposed above as an example is completely not served by the “Framerizm”…

A few weeks ago a have a friend of mine called me and told me that he has a change to “upgrade” his $5K TT to $15K. He named two well know to me models and asks my opinion. I asked his what is wrong with Sound in his current setup. The guy was throttled….

Yes, the Continuum is might be a good turntable but …what is wrong with SOUND of other turntables, the turntables that are not called “Continuum”? The Michael Fremer and rest writing clowns are not in position to handle this quest – they are too busy to sell turntables to the empty cretins like Mike Lavigne what whom Sound is a “Robb Report” of own mind. I am sure that the “simplified” Lavigne will be happy, the Fremer and the Continuum’s accountant will be happy…. However, the interests of Sound and the interests of the “person with an average turntable” still will not be affected. Yes, I would not be surprised if an “average turntable” (in context of proper reference points) would perform identically or better then the Valin’s or Framer’s “inventions”. But obviously those guys are disabled to see it, even if it was the case.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site