Revel Concerta2 F36, Mac Mini, Oppo 203, Emotiva UMC 200, Emotiva LPA 1.
Room dimensions 14 x 17
18 Likes
Update on phono preamp. Mare Connoisseur broken left channel. Replaced with Esoteric E02 phono. Incredible sounding phono. Never heard better.
10 Likes
Just thought to post what my audiophile friend’s turntable looks like. It is definitely a unforgettable sound once you hear it. Analog at it’s best.
Clearaudio Master Innovation with Clearaudio Goldfinger Diamond needle. Wish I had the funds for this one.
7 Likes
I wonder that he uses a Graham tonearm on this table instead of the big Clearaudio linear tracker? Is it for general reservations against linear trackers (which have their validity)?
The Clearaudio linear tonearm was very quirky. It was very difficult to adjust and stay adjusted, and the sound was questionable. He likes the Graham Phantom Supreme II more. Sounds incredible the combo.
Yup, I understand this.
FYI, Fremer has a $4k Kuzma 4-Point on his $130k rig. Says it performs way beyond its price point. Synergy : )
Yes I know…not that the Graham is cheap 
I think the linear trackers really have a few too many and serious quirks.
The Clear Audio tonearm is a design by Lou Souther. Yes it is difficult to set up right. I use the TriQuartz version of The Souther Tonearm and when it is set up right sounds fantastic and plays the record without inner groove distortion that every pivot tonearm suffers from. If it is not set up properly you will have the tracking issues and will not get the sonic benefits.
The reason my friend did not get the linear tonearm was because at the showroom, we couldn’t keep the tonearm adjusted and stable. After a few plays, we would be fiddling with it again. Even the salesman couldn’t keep it adjusted. So maybe we weren’t hearing the best from it. But the Graham never had a problem and it was easy for him to adjust VTA which he does often. Different records sounds better with correct VTA. Anyway, he is very happy with the Graham.
1 Like
Very few people are capable of setting it up properly. I hate to toot my own horn but with Lou directing me I learned the correct method. I love using it to transcribe my records to digital using my NPC andVinyl Studio I get excellent results.
Great if you achieved to transfer the theoretical points of superiority of the linear trackers to the practical.
1 Like
The biggest difference I find is no inner groove distortion and stable imaging across the record.
Yes, less inner groove distortion is fantastic! There are other implications at the inner groove area where also linear trackers suffer, but less is always good. If you simultaneously have enough bass control and impact with that arm, great for you. I wish I had more experience with linear tone arms than with the Revox…so I have to rely on others…so far Fremer’s opinion put me off from expensive experiments…but I’d love to have a safely functioning and good sounding linear. At the end…it at least doesn’t seem so easy, even if you have it.
The Souther design is unique as it is driven by the whirl just like a pivot arm. It has low vertical mass and moderate horizontal mass. Unlike air bearing tonearm does not require a noisy pump. One drawback is the short stylus to pivot distance which makes it more susceptible to warp wow. This is a non issue except with excessively deformed disks.
Just for information here Fremer”s opinion on linear trackers (not only air bearing ones) from one of his writings about it.
——————————————
“Then there are the so-called “tangential tracking” tonearms. The best of these use captured air bearings that move smoothly on a fixed cylindrical rail. A less satisfactory method fixes the air bearing and moves the massive rail. Others blow air through tiny holes in the rail over which slide passive cylinders buoyed by the pressurized air captured within. Another design uses a tiny trolley-wheeled device that slides along quartz rails. Still others move the arm and maintain tangency via a motorized servo-mechanism.
All of these designs look cool and appear to be “linear trackers” but few are. Most actually “crab” their way across the record surface, creating a series of microscopic arcs that produce more and repeated tracking error than does a well designed and set up pivoted arm.
Again, unless the bearing is so tight it won’t move, the spacing necessary to allow movement in such arms, produces fore and aft, or up/down motion, or “yaw” along the cantilever’s zenith angle—all at a microscopic level invisible to the naked eye.
Differing horizontal and vertical masses produce their own serious sonic and mechanical issues as does the need to move the tonearm wires across the record surface along with the arm.
In my experience with air-bearing type arms, only those using captured bearings that maintain uniform pressure around the air gap can truly be called air “bearing” arms and only those can truly maintain tangency. The others are hover-crafts of one sort or another. Don’t get me wrong: some of those can work pretty well and sound good but I’m not convinced they can truly maintain tangency to the groove.
And even those pressurized type air bearings that do maintain tangency have another serious problem: the air has to go from high pressure to ambient room pressure in a matter of inches as the pressurized air reaches the annular gap. If you want to see what that’s like, blow up a balloon and let it go. Consider that behavior and imagine what’s happening at the gap as the bearing moves “frictionless” across the record surface and the air struggles violently to escape and reach ambient room pressure. The only captured air bearing arm that compensates for this issue, to the best of my knowledge and at great expense, is the arm on Andy Payor’s “out of print” Rockport Technologies System III Sirius.
What I’m trying to say is that when you read some of the online hype for one technology or another as a “breakthrough” in perfection and the description doesn’t attempt to deal with any of the inevitable downsides of that “breakthrough” technology, don’t believe what you’re reading!”
————————————————-
2 Likes
You can see our stereos here https://www.psaudio.com/hifi-family-system-photos/
1 Like
Thorens TP92, non tangential, all adjustable, yet KISS.
Linear tone arms are fascinating devices though. I remember the old Revox B79x with tangential arm it’s been a highly regarded “Reference” turntable back in the times.
Yes I know the Revox well (my father still has one). Not near today‘s expectations of sound quality but very convenient.
The Souther is the only design that does not waddle across the records surface. it has extremely fine bearings and the 3 wheel design ensures the carriage stays in contact with the rails. I wish Lou was still alive because he can thoroughly defend his design. It is so good that is why he managed to sell it to Clearaudio. I remember many horror stories from Lou where he set up the tonearm properly for reviewers, they diddled with it before listening to it to right their review and than did not appreciate it’s performance advantages. When he got the turntable back he found it was far out of adjustment. If one is not capable of setting it up properly they will not love it. I have yet to hear any pivot track a record with the accuracy of the TriQuartz. I take reviewers words with a grain of salt! As far as Air bearings go I would not even bother. The servo controlled arms are not tangential trackers at all.