-
Is this cartridge overkill?
I have a Pro-Ject 1.2 turntable. I replaced the stock cart, a Sumiko Oyster, with a NOS Parasound cart with significant improvement in balance. The Oyster favored hi frequencies and sounded thin to me. But the Parasound was only $35.00 and was intended to hold me over until I had the money to get something better. Now that I'm ready to upgrade, I'm considering the Grado Reference Platinum. My table was $285. The Platinum is $270. Is this too much cart for the Pro-Ject?
I was originally thinking of spending about half the cost of the table. My other choices are the Grado Prestige Gold or the Ortofon Super OM 20, both of which I've found for around $130. Your thoughts or other recommendations will be appreciated.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_martin
I have a Pro-Ject 1.2 turntable. I replaced the stock cart, a Sumiko Oyster, with a NOS Parasound cart with significant improvement in balance. The Oyster favored hi frequencies and sounded thin to me. But the Parasound was only $35.00 and was intended to hold me over until I had the money to get something better. Now that I'm ready to upgrade, I'm considering the Grado Reference Platinum. My table was $285. The Platinum is $270. Is this too much cart for the Pro-Ject?
I was originally thinking of spending about half the cost of the table. My other choices are the Grado Prestige Gold or the Ortofon Super OM 20, both of which I've found for around $130. Your thoughts or other recommendations will be appreciated.
My experience is that the Pro-Ject arms are good enough to work with more expensive cartridges. I don't think this would be overkill despite the prices. If you were going to get into the stratosphere of cartridges, I'd suggest you upgrade your turntable but I think you're going to be pleased with the improvement. The Grado should sound better balanced and give you some nice bass as well! Enjoy!
-
I've always felt that the cartridge is every bit as important as the turntable itself. I had a 14-year old Ortofon OM body that I'd been swapping out with the 20 stylus every couple of years. Given the age of the cartridge body, I decided try something different and went with the Sumiko Black Pearl, and I've regretted it since then. By comparison, the Sumiko just sounds bland. It has a very fat sounding midrange, but that might be because its high end extension is not all that great. I'm now waiting for the stylus to wear out, so I can either go back to another OM20 or the Grado Prestige Gold.
The OM20 is a very good midlevel cartridge that I thought was too often overlooked until The Absolute Sound made it one of their best buys last year. It tends to extend the highs a bit, and the midrange might be a bit thin, but its overall linearity and coherency is excellent. And I tend to prefer my sound somewhat punchier, and you definitely get that with the OM20. I also like that the cartridge has a fairly high output, and works great with a variety of tonearms because of its lightweight and removable counterweight. But, like you I've also been looking at higher priced options for my next cartridge.
-
Years ago I had a Dual turntable that I bought on a clearance sale. Although it came with a basic cartridge and it was not what you would call an exotic turnatable. However when I upgraded to a cartridge that cost as much as the table I was impressed with the improvements. In fact it sounded better than many turntables that cost more if a cheap cartridge was used.
It all starts with the needle and cartridge when it comes to vinyl, although the turntable and arm are also of importance, they each have a job to do. This is one area CD lovers have an advantage and do not have to spend money on.
Presently I am saving my money so that I can get a nice turntable. At least I kept all my records in good shape and boxed them up for storage. Might have been one of my smarter moves, we all get lucky now and then. So go for it and enjoy the music.
-
I would agree with the others here - go for it. Bottom line - if you want to upgrade the table in the future you will be able to take that cart with you. Hell - my cart costs 4 times what my table cost originally.
As it happens a friend of mine is going to get himself the Project 1.2 as well. To start him off properly he'll take it without a cartridge and I will lend him my spare - a Clearaudio virtuoso 2 which is at least double the cost of the table. It also has the advantage of being a high output MM cartridge and works a dream with my spare project phono box.
-
yup, go for it
I have always spent more for a cartridge than for the tt and never regretted it. The cartridge is in many ways the most important piece in the puzzle. You should be able to hear an improvement and as someone else stated, if you decided to upgrade your tt later, the cartridge would be good enough to do so. If my cartridge was still being made, it would cost at least 5 or 6 times what I paid for my tt. This might be extreme but even if I bought everything new, I'd probably spend as much or more for my cartridge as I did for my turntable and tonearm. It seems the only way to get the most out of your turntable. This little formula would probably change if you got into the 10k and above tt's.
Bill
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_martin
I have a Pro-Ject 1.2 turntable. I replaced the stock cart, a Sumiko Oyster, with a NOS Parasound cart with significant improvement in balance. The Oyster favored hi frequencies and sounded thin to me. But the Parasound was only $35.00 and was intended to hold me over until I had the money to get something better. Now that I'm ready to upgrade, I'm considering the Grado Reference Platinum. My table was $285. The Platinum is $270. Is this too much cart for the Pro-Ject?
I was originally thinking of spending about half the cost of the table. My other choices are the Grado Prestige Gold or the Ortofon Super OM 20, both of which I've found for around $130. Your thoughts or other recommendations will be appreciated.
There are several major considerations when buying a phonograph cartridge. The turntable, tonearm, and cartridge work together as an integrated system. It is critical to match the cartridge with the characteristics of the tonearm. An expensive cartridge demands a tonearm with well damped resonance well below audibiity, excellent bearings (jeweled are better than ball bearings), both static and dynamic balance, and good geometry. The ability to adjust vertical tracking angle is useful also. It is useless to try to install the best cartridges in lesser tonearms because you can't get the benefit of the added performance capability you paid for. As for the turntable, not only should it be able to turn at exactly the right speed with no audible wow, flutter or rumble especially if you have a wide range sound system, but it should have a well shielded motor so that hum doesn't become a factor. Some cartridges, especially low output cartridges are susceptable to audible hum from poorly shielded turntable motors. Usually, the manufacturer of the cartridge or the turntable can recommend suitable cartridges for a particular turntable model.
As for sound, the main difference between the "sonic signiture" of most cartridges is the high frequency resonant peak present with many cartridges. Some audiophiles like this, others don't. It's not onlly a matter of taste but of the other equipment you own. However, in addition to a well damped high frequency resonance and extended flat response, I personally value trackability, that is the ability of the cartridge to track heavily modulated records without distortion and at low tracking force. In this regard, I have always been pleased with Shure. I know many audiophiles do not like this line of cartridges because it doesn't have a "zippy" high end. But IMO, this can be easily compensated for if necessary through equalization.
-
I use a basic little Shure M97Xe with my NAD 533(a Rega 2 mod made by Rega). I can attest to the cartridge making a difference because the NAD came with a Goldring cart which was bloody awful. Light on finance then led me to the Shure because it supposedly is easier on the vinyl for one and tracks better...which I figured would help compensate for the fact that the NAD is no high end table and the Rega 250 arm is no high end arm.
The results are pleasing - still not quite where I would like but I need a proper stand. Right now the table is on the top shelf of one of those old 70s stereo racks - which is a bit jiggly. But I don't want to spend HUGE money on isolation platforms.
Shure makes a highly regarded Cart V15xMR which Stereophile raved about...and was one of the cheapest available - well cheap for expensive carts. http://www.shure.com/catphono_hifi.html
Most I have talked to about cartridges have said that Shure is a bit of a "SAFE" cartridge in that it tracks well, wears out your disc less, and rarely has issues of noise. At least compared to the goldring the M97Xe lives up to that.
-
Thanks for all the responses...
my original plan was to go with the Ortofon OM20 because 1) I had an old Dual that came with a cart made by Ortofon that I liked and 2) the Pro-Ject tables come with Ortofon carts in Europe. I've also heard good things about Grado carts (except for the hum issue w/Rega tables) and considered the Grado Gold because I can get it for about the same price as the OM20. When my Christmas bonus was a little more than expected, I thought the Grado Reference Platinum for a little over $100 more would be interesting. It's $270 from audioadvisor with their 30-day guaranty. I can't justify going over $270 at this time - too many albums left on my wish list.
Pro-Ject and Sumiko are distributed in the US by the same company so I haven't asked them to recommend a cart thinking they would probably recommend a Sumiko cart.
The first cart I purchased was a Shure M92e for a Technics table (it's on an old Marantz table now), but I haven't really looked at their line lately.
Anyhow, I think I have a handle on my choices. Part of the fun for me is narrowing the field before I lay down the cash. Unfortunatley, living in a rural area makes it hard to audition fine audio gear. Thanks again.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_martin
my original plan was to go with the Ortofon OM20 because 1) I had an old Dual that came with a cart made by Ortofon that I liked and 2) the Pro-Ject tables come with Ortofon carts in Europe. I've also heard good things about Grado carts (except for the hum issue w/Rega tables) and considered the Grado Gold because I can get it for about the same price as the OM20. When my Christmas bonus was a little more than expected, I thought the Grado Reference Platinum for a little over $100 more would be interesting. It's $270 from audioadvisor with their 30-day guaranty. I can't justify going over $270 at this time - too many albums left on my wish list.
Pro-Ject and Sumiko are distributed in the US by the same company so I haven't asked them to recommend a cart thinking they would probably recommend a Sumiko cart.
The first cart I purchased was a Shure M92e for a Technics table (it's on an old Marantz table now), but I haven't really looked at their line lately.
Anyhow, I think I have a handle on my choices. Part of the fun for me is narrowing the field before I lay down the cash. Unfortunatley, living in a rural area makes it hard to audition fine audio gear. Thanks again.
Auditioning cartridges at a dealer is nearly impossible. First of all, the chances that they have the turntable you'll be using is often remote. Second, even if they do, you're still in unfamiliar territory with probably unfamiliar ancillary gear. Third, if you want to compare two different cartridges, bring your lunch while they swap! And going back and forth will be out of the question for all but the most accomodating and/or bored salesman.
Add to this the fact that playing around with different cartridges is confusing at first because nothing except speakers has as many possible sonic differences. MC's don't sound like MM's, most MM's sound different from one another as do most MC's. I don't find too many of the high frequency peaks that Skeptic mentioned. Rather, I find the "fast" cartridges are fast because of an unveiling of the midrange. Anyway, as you travel up the price structure within a certain brand, you'll start out with fairly large diffs until you hit a certain price point, around $1000. Then they get extremely subtle. I'm not saying the diffs aren't worth it to many people but they really aren't to me anymore. But the cartridges at the low price points are the most annoying - not because many of them don't sound good but because they have such magnified sonic signatures. RGA mentions the Goldring Elektra that came with his NAD. It was a lousy choice for NAD to use unless their point was to push an upgrade! The Goldring Elan that comes with the Music Hall MMF-2 is likewise a piece of crap. But the jump to the Goldring G1012 that comes with Music Hall's MMF-5 is very nice. RGA also mentions the Shure which isn't much more expensive than the Elektra but is at least 3 times better sounding. My point is you'll go bonkers as I have trying to piece this all together at once. I play around with different cartridges because it's been a guilty pleasure of mine for years. There's no set of rules among cartridges using measurements or even within the same brand. You just have to hear them over time and even then your memory is likely to fail.
P.S The Grado woodbody cartridge will make your Pro-Ject sing like a bird! An acquaintance of mine replaced his Shure (which was no slouch, but I can't recall the model - it wasn't their top of the line, though) on that same table and he's one happy camper with no further thought of upgrading. He's not only happy, he's wise! :)
-
DMK
My weakest point in this hobby is turntables because I grew up on tape and cd. So I'm a late comer.
If there is an upgrade to make with the NAD set-up which way should I go? It's certainly good enough so I may just wait and make a bigger move one day to the Audio Note TT1 which was rather amazing actually. Well I should not say amazing since the owner there has over 35,000LPs so you'd figure he'd like something nice to play them on.
-
35,000 LP's is just a few more than me, well actually over 34,000 more than me. Maybe he should send some to me so that they get more often. Just tell him that they will go bad if they are not used, the notes will float right off the vinyl, or something like that.
Could not tell you about upgrades for your NAD but if it is a modded Rega 2 I would look at what is available for the Rega. Skeptic pretty well says what a turntable and it's parts must do. You could try a better cartridge such as the Shure you have mentioned, as this is where it all starts. But then you could save up for the big jump.
With all it's flaws I still like the sound of vinyl. As well I am saving my money up for a new turntable. Just wish new records did not cost so much but there are some great deals on used records.
Spin that vinyl and enjoy
-
As Skep said...
...the table, cart, arm and phono pre work as a unit... I'm certainly not intimately familiar with many different set-ups, but my a friend of mine went with a Gold on a 2.1.
This combination is miles ahead of the stock cart (which I found quite lifeless). Everything across the board is better, including a big reduction in surface noise. In my mind, there is no question that the $160 was well spent.
Now - is it woth moving up to the Platinum? How much difference would there be? Not sure, but I have the Platinum on a Perspective... again, there are improvements in weight and scale along with the LPs appearing quieter yet. I can't say if it's the table, the cart, etc. Nevertheless, it sounds good.
Another poster said the arm would be good enough to appreciate the cart differences, subtle or not. I agree.
The wood body Grados have a great midband, always mellow and rich. Go for it!
-
Pardon my butting in
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
DMK
My weakest point in this hobby is turntables because I grew up on tape and cd. So I'm a late comer.
If there is an upgrade to make with the NAD set-up which way should I go? It's certainly good enough so I may just wait and make a bigger move one day to the Audio Note TT1 which was rather amazing actually. Well I should not say amazing since the owner there has over 35,000LPs so you'd figure he'd like something nice to play them on.
I actually like the NAD table but I agree the stock cartridge was pretty bad. You've done yourself a service by replacing it with the Shure. I suppose you could upgrade cartridges further but I think your setup is good enough until you decide to go with the Audio Note. I was lucky enough to hear one of those with a Lyra Lydian something or other cartridge and it was, as you say, "amazing". I don't know what DMK might say but I think you've already come up with the best advice anyone could give you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
DMK
My weakest point in this hobby is turntables because I grew up on tape and cd. So I'm a late comer.
If there is an upgrade to make with the NAD set-up which way should I go? It's certainly good enough so I may just wait and make a bigger move one day to the Audio Note TT1 which was rather amazing actually. Well I should not say amazing since the owner there has over 35,000LPs so you'd figure he'd like something nice to play them on.
Knowing your preferences, I would suggest trying out a moving coil cartridge. That would probably give you the most dramatic difference from what the Shure delivers. Ortofon makes several high output MCs that don't require an outboard preamp. The disadvantage to MC is that the stylus cannot be swapped out when it wears out like you can with a MM cart. You typically have to have the cartridge retipped or traded out. Also, a lot of the higher end models require an outboard step up preamp.
If you don't want to spend a lot of money, you should just verify the setup on your turntable. Things like the overhang, the VTA, anti-skate and stylus force, and tonearm counterbalancing all have an immediate effect on what you hear.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
DMK
My weakest point in this hobby is turntables because I grew up on tape and cd. So I'm a late comer.
If there is an upgrade to make with the NAD set-up which way should I go? It's certainly good enough so I may just wait and make a bigger move one day to the Audio Note TT1 which was rather amazing actually. Well I should not say amazing since the owner there has over 35,000LPs so you'd figure he'd like something nice to play them on.
35,000 LP's??? Whoa! Obviously, the call of convenience (Redbook CD) hasn't hit him. Well, his ears are all the better for it.
I recall the NAD as being a pretty decent turntable. I suppose you could upgrade the cartridge but if the Audio Note isn't too far off - say, less than a year or so away - you might just save your funds for that. I've never heard that 'table but it got a killer review in one of the Brit audio mags a couple of years ago. Good build quality - I have seen one even if I didn't get to hear it. Your Shure is a fine cartridge in its price range as well. If you could find a great deal on a Benz Glider, they do well with Rega arms and Rega-sourced arms such as what is on your NAD. But best price I've seen on those is $550. That may be something to consider after you pick up the AN. The NAD isn't the best turntable around but who owns "the best"? Not me! Well, I do consider the speakers I own to be the best I've ever heard but you own an integrated amp made by the company that makes the finest SS integrated I've ever heard - the A21A. I'm not familiar with yours but if it sounds like the A21A, you own the best!
To sum up, unless you found a deal on a higher end MC cartridge, I wouldn't take the plunge until you're ready for the AN. Quite honestly, the AN is purported to be a finer 'table than the one I currently own - the VPI HW-19 jr. I use the Rega RB300 arm but I'm considering upgrading to a Morch DP-6.
-
The Audio Note designer owner, Peter Qvortrup, at 35,000LPs+ has one of the largest if not the largest collection in the world.
The TT1 is based off of a SystemDeck II and the Arms for the units are modified co-ventures with Rega based off of the Rega 300 and 600 arms but have been re-wired with An's Silver wiring among other things.
The Dealer here has the TT1 which he claims ot be a lot better than the more expensive Linn Tables and he also carries Linn's line so that is interesting. The TT1 comes with the AN Cartridge.
Basically Audio Note makes the entire audio Chain though they basically take proven designs they like best and make them better. My speakers are based off of the very original Snell speakers, The turntables as I said are based off of the System Deck and Rega arms, their amps are their own and the probably make the most expensive and widely considered BEST integrated amp and DAC available at 90kUS and 50KUS respectively.
The A48b sounds more tube like than the A21a is a high bias Class A class A/B design and is ~70Watts. The A48 was selling for 20+ years but was less competitive as all the new tube amp companies came out making the A48B a little redundant...plus the A21a is a better unit overall at the same retail level. Sugden probably felt that people would go for the A21a on sound despite average looks to get class A. The A48B looks exactly the same as they use the same chassis but because it isn't pure class A people would likely shift to a more functional unit.
I bough the A48B because it had a phono board and was a mere $400.00Cdn used circa 1997 and retailed at around $1899.00. I compared it to the 3k MF integated and anctually preferred it with the Paradigm Stuudio 100. Very pleased with the amp and have considered going with the Sugden Headmaster as preamp because I'd like to upgrade my tube headphone amp one day.
I think I will hold off for the Audio Note because A) it sounded awesome and Audio Note front ends are designed using their speakers. Few companies make excelent stuff front to back and geared to be used as a complete system, LINN and Quad are two others that come to mind. Hell AN makes their own soldering material and glues.
Interesting side note. One of the AN designers works at Sugden and Peter Qvortrup knew Jim Sugden and was a dealer for Sugden's original products which he sold with Snell Type E, K and J speakers.
I find it kind of amusing that I came to both Sugden and Audio Note products by simnply listening and after buying all that find out these tidbits later.
People who claim to hate Solid state I often sggest to give a listen to Sugden. Incidentally both AN and Sugden use the same Transport/Dac to this day which is TDA1541Crown DAC which was in the 80s and both companies prefer the units.
I dunno I found it interesting that I gravitated to these companies which have gravitated to eachother. And the NAD is really a Rega and they too co-venture with Audio Note. Weird and wild stuff.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
The Audio Note designer owner, Peter Qvortrup, at 35,000LPs+ has one of the largest if not the largest collection in the world.
Barry Hansen (aka Dr. Demento) has a collection of over 200,000 records, plus countless tapes, CDs, and other oddities. Not sure if he's in the Guiness book, but it's definitely the largest collection I've ever heard of. It doesn't hurt that he hosts a radio show and gets a lot of his stuff for free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Basically Audio Note makes the entire audio Chain though they basically take proven designs they like best and make them better. My speakers are based off of the very original Snell speakers, The turntables as I said are based off of the System Deck and Rega arms, their amps are their own and the probably make the most expensive and widely considered BEST integrated amp and DAC available at 90kUS and 50KUS respectively.
I know you're rather smitten by AN because you love their speakers, but the expertise behind making turntables, amplifiers, DACs, speakers, and cartridges are pretty different. I'm a bit skeptical that one company can be the "BEST" at all of the above. I mean, haven't you stated in the past that the best speakers are made by companies that specialize in making speakers, and not those companies that also make receivers and CD players?
There are plenty of great turntables and cartridges out there, some wildly different approaches, and some not so well defined price points. Each of them has their strengths and weaknesses. If that AN was indeed collaborated with Rega, then it should have some merit and consideration. For all it's worth, I've always felt that the Linn Sondeks were a bit overrated. They're great decks, but they also charge a lot for what you get. They use a suspended platform isolation similar to the one that AR invented in the 1950s and several other companies copied since then (including the Dual CS5000 that I use).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
The Audio Note designer owner, Peter Qvortrup, at 35,000LPs+ has one of the largest if not the largest collection in the world.
The TT1 is based off of a SystemDeck II and the Arms for the units are modified co-ventures with Rega based off of the Rega 300 and 600 arms but have been re-wired with An's Silver wiring among other things.
The Dealer here has the TT1 which he claims ot be a lot better than the more expensive Linn Tables and he also carries Linn's line so that is interesting. The TT1 comes with the AN Cartridge.
Basically Audio Note makes the entire audio Chain though they basically take proven designs they like best and make them better. My speakers are based off of the very original Snell speakers, The turntables as I said are based off of the System Deck and Rega arms, their amps are their own and the probably make the most expensive and widely considered BEST integrated amp and DAC available at 90kUS and 50KUS respectively.
The A48b sounds more tube like than the A21a is a high bias Class A class A/B design and is ~70Watts. The A48 was selling for 20+ years but was less competitive as all the new tube amp companies came out making the A48B a little redundant...plus the A21a is a better unit overall at the same retail level. Sugden probably felt that people would go for the A21a on sound despite average looks to get class A. The A48B looks exactly the same as they use the same chassis but because it isn't pure class A people would likely shift to a more functional unit.
I bough the A48B because it had a phono board and was a mere $400.00Cdn used circa 1997 and retailed at around $1899.00. I compared it to the 3k MF integated and anctually preferred it with the Paradigm Stuudio 100. Very pleased with the amp and have considered going with the Sugden Headmaster as preamp because I'd like to upgrade my tube headphone amp one day.
I think I will hold off for the Audio Note because A) it sounded awesome and Audio Note front ends are designed using their speakers. Few companies make excelent stuff front to back and geared to be used as a complete system, LINN and Quad are two others that come to mind. Hell AN makes their own soldering material and glues.
Interesting side note. One of the AN designers works at Sugden and Peter Qvortrup knew Jim Sugden and was a dealer for Sugden's original products which he sold with Snell Type E, K and J speakers.
I find it kind of amusing that I came to both Sugden and Audio Note products by simnply listening and after buying all that find out these tidbits later.
People who claim to hate Solid state I often sggest to give a listen to Sugden. Incidentally both AN and Sugden use the same Transport/Dac to this day which is TDA1541Crown DAC which was in the 80s and both companies prefer the units.
I dunno I found it interesting that I gravitated to these companies which have gravitated to eachother. And the NAD is really a Rega and they too co-venture with Audio Note. Weird and wild stuff.
I liked the Sugden Headmaster amp. I heard it after I bought the one I own, which is actually an integrated amp that now sees only headphone duty. It's the finest head amp I've ever heard and was a damn decent integrated as well - the fully tubed Mesa Tigris, made by the makers of Mesa/Boogie guitar amps.
Didn't Audio Note make (or perhaps they still do) a DAC that uses no oversampling? I've heard that the thing sounded incredibly analog-like which would seem to make sense based on design philosophy. As I recall, it wasn't absurdly priced. Am I thinking of the right company?
-
1 Attachment(s)
DMK
Yes their entry level DAC/Transport combo was reviewed in the latest issue of UHF and it is a Zero times oversampling cd player. The theory behind it is that if you don't make errors in the first place there is no need to have error correction circuitry...the worse the player the more of that junk it needs....well that's the theory and the hard line aspect to the philosophy how well it works will be judged on the sound...which becauseit will no doubt sound different from current cd players may not be too liked...unless you don't like cd player sound now or have little experience with redbook cd listening then you might like it a lot. UHF said it bettered their reference.
AN has levels of DAC. The DAC 5 in stereophile received the highest rating of any product ever and spawned the zero oversampling approach. Well actually the Zero oversampling was done way back on the original cd players but both Sony and Phillips were clueless on how to get them to sound even acceptable let alone good.
Woochifer
Peter may be one of the high end recroding collection leaders or personal collection leaders...of course 35k is a helluva lot either way.
Companies like Sony and yamaha and Denon have not shown me they can make a good speaker...and receiver makers are not interested in quality sound reproduction they are interested in selling a box with the highest profit margin possible...there is a difference between artisans in business and media moguls in business - the proof is in the products(with exceptions when they try and launch new technology).
Mr. Qvortrup owns several of the premier designs of speakers going from Quads to pretty much you name it and uses it as a platform to improve upon.
AN builds the entire audio chain and WANTS people to hear the entire complete system as a complete system...if you like it or hate it then at least they can say they got flamed with their own gear. If you listen to their amp with some piece of junk speaker people often blame the amp. Makes sense.
-
Actually Woochifer
Audio Note is probably least known for their speakers...because their system look relatively sleak and the speakers due to 70's retro looks stick out a bit. But they do use their own speakers as the reference and measuring tool to build their amps/sources etc.
Stereophile and Hi-fi Choice both used the AN E to test amplifiers for their publications and is owned by some of their reviewers as well as enjoy the music's chief reviewer. So it's not like their speakers are dog ****. And perhaps their speakers are their weakest link...which means the rest of the stuff they sell...well....
-
Sorry about 3 posts in a row.
DMK
Thanks for the update on the Headmaster. I have heard nothing but glowing reports on it...but then I always hear that about Sugden. One plus is the remote control and modular size. I may end up travelling when I become a teacher so it would be nice to take a small amp with me.
Anyway, the TT1 is the lowest end turntable of the series and What Hi-Fi (albeit not my most favorite audio Magazine) seems to like it http://www.audionote.co.uk/reviews/w...003_an_tt1.pdf
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
Companies like Sony and yamaha and Denon have not shown me they can make a good speaker...and receiver makers are not interested in quality sound reproduction they are interested in selling a box with the highest profit margin possible...there is a difference between artisans in business and media moguls in business - the proof is in the products(with exceptions when they try and launch new technology).
Sony, Yamaha, and Denon don't make great speakers, but they're not marketed as great speakers. Only Sony makes anything that costs more than $1,000 a pair (and that particular reference speaker is supposed to be quite good). The rest of those speaker lines exist more to have something available to package with all-in-one systems, and those are sold on price more than anything.
And your assertion that they are not interested in sound quality is pretty laughable. I guess then that the sound quality that I get with my receiver-based system is more an accident than something that an engineer deliberately designed into the product.
Oh please, artisans and media moguls?! Where did you conjure up that example? Or are you mixing up your facts with conspiratorial fiction? NAME ME ONE MEDIA MOGUL WHO'S IN THE SPEAKER BUSINESS! COME ON! EVERYBODY is in the business to make the highest profit margin possible! So-called "artisans" that don't watch the profit margins are either DIY hobbyists or guys that have done time in bankruptcy court. The proof is indeed in the products, but when you start exaggerating to this extent, it just comes across more as blind ranting than anything that has any element of truth to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGA
AN builds the entire audio chain and WANTS people to hear the entire complete system as a complete system...if you like it or hate it then at least they can say they got flamed with their own gear. If you listen to their amp with some piece of junk speaker people often blame the amp. Makes sense.
Again, that does not mean that everything they make is the BEST for that particular category. Hearing a complete system as a complete system, isn't that the same thing as a HTIB system? Granted, it sounds like AN makes a lot of quality gear, but your constant assertions that this product and that product that they make represent the BEST in vastly different categories just invites skepticism and comes across as letting THEIR marketing dictate what your impressions are.
-
First of all you know my stance on receivers. I seriously doubt if you talk to AUDIOPHILES that any of them would take a two channel output from a Denon, Sony or Yammie seriously as high end 2 channel sound or high end sound period. Which doesn't mean they're junk it means they are selling to people with different goals than two channel audio enthusiasts or very deep pocketed multi-channel enthusiasts who would be builting those big Bryston/Krell monoblock set-ups.
You made the point about the speakers not I and I just said that these guys are not producing marquee gear across the board. None of them produces a high end amplifier though Marantz in Britain did bring out their STATEMENT amplifier which not surprisingly is a 25 watt class A amplifer with a switch to bring it into class A/B for more power if speakers demand. That is a nice intelligent feature to cover several speaker demands. This amplifier interests me if they ever sell it in North America.
Artisans can go into business with a different approach than pure businessmen...some make this stuff because they have a passion for it. I would like to sell audio that I like but I don't want to have to depend on making a living off it because then my store would have shift to meet external demands on not my own. The interest that we both share is obvious since we discuss this stuff on audio forums...it's a hobby. Sony is a conglomorate (wrong word mogul too much Baseball Mogul playing lately). Companies like Rolls Royce(before the takeover) and Audio Note are building cost no object items. The statement products from Dynaudio and B&W etc are similar too of course.
Think of it this way. Audio Note makes the entre chain...I'm not saying anyone has to agree with them...but everytihng is designed to work with each other. Another forum and someone didn't believe The AN K could have the sensitivity being a sealed infinite baffle design that can still produce bass with very little distorion at high volume levels with little power required...it can and is so someone has gotten around this issue.
HTIB well this of course is a nice comparison of the conglemorate's approach to system matching...do many of them test their amplifiers with real world speakers or do they just build off a computer...do they listen to their amplifiers. $12.00 total worth of material, shipping packaging (which is probably $9.00 worthof the $12) for $199.00.
Because AN designs complete systems they have more control over what you hear - you want to hear Audio note then HEAR Audio Note. If their 'opinion' and it's just their opinion that SS amplifiers compromise the signal then they would PREFER you not listen to their cd player and speakers on your "initial" listen because they feel SS ruins the sound...or ruins it compared to their amplifier.
And as much as it pains me to say it, my speakers sound a helluva lot better on their system than it does with my Sugden - whcih I already liked better than costlier amps.
Audio Note is not the best, perhaps, at each and every componant they make, but what they have successfully done IMO is take the strengths and weakness and play off of those WITHIN the system so the end result is really quite exceptional.
UHF recently reviewed the AN DAC/Transport and really liked it but said it was hard at times in passages...for all we know though if you place that transport/Dac with an AN SET amp that hardness may be brought down and with more sensitive speaker than UHF uses that dynamics may be brought up.
Quad and Linn both did this and it makes sense...if people are going to say your stuff is Overrated or just plain bad at least make sure it wasn't the Rega Brio Amp or Nad Turntable or Bose speakers that wrecked your possible customer's view of your products. That's one reason why I was listening to my speakers with SET amp for about an hour and the dealer told me it was not only a tube amp but a SET amp???? But how, it has loads of deep bass prestine highs LOUD levels - nothing like I was expecting TUBES to sound like except non fatigue. You take that amp and run a set of 4ohm 85db Totems and that might be horrible.
Best is subjective...Right now I'm sure you have a best system you've ever heard and in 5 years that might shift to something else. Right now the best SYSTEM I have heard was the AN system at soundhounds. Individual componants may not be of course. And it was far from Audio Note's best system probably only clocking in at $40-50kUS. Their best adds another zero.
-
Cart. ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbangelfish
I have always spent more for a cartridge than for the tt and never regretted it. The cartridge is in many ways the most important piece in the puzzle. You should be able to hear an improvement and as someone else stated, if you decided to upgrade your tt later, the cartridge would be good enough to do so. If my cartridge was still being made, it would cost at least 5 or 6 times what I paid for my tt. This might be extreme but even if I bought everything new, I'd probably spend as much or more for my cartridge as I did for my turntable and tonearm. It seems the only way to get the most out of your turntable. This little formula would probably change if you got into the 10k and above tt's.
Bill
WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE SHELTER 901?
WHAT DO YOU USE?
THANKS,
ZF
-
Frankly, I've been surprised that manufacturers of audio gear haven't started marketing entirely integrated systems in a big way. Especially high end manufacturers. It seems to me that far more could be done to exploit the current 2 channel paradyme by producing amplifiers and preamplifiers with built in active crossovers, dedicated equalization, and bi and tri amplfication for specific loudspeakers. To say the the AN speaker doesn't sound as good with a Sudgeon amplifier as with one of their own means that AN missed an opportunity to market them as an integrated pair.
Audio manufacturers, especially so called high end manufacturers have been remarkably conservative tweaking the same tired worn out designs for over 20 years and calling each new minor variant, a big breakthrough or improvement. AN for example has tweaked 20 year old Snell speaker designs (and not even their best models, the A series.) When it comes to vacuum tube amplifier design, there really is nothing new under the sun and the deisgns are actually all over 40 years old with minor improvements in signal coupling capacitors and power supplies. (The best sounding of them in my experience were the OTL types like Futterman and NY Audio Labs, a Futterman knockoff design.) The best strategy is to buy the ones that are a few years old that have fallen by the wayside and no longer in favor with those who must have the latest and geatest in a particular line. The truth is that in most cases, the newest version isn't much different or better than the older one. In this throw away world, used equipment, even high end used equipment, loses market value very quickly.
The advantages that the larger manufacturers have over the smaller ones are truely great. One is economy of scale. Another is research capabilities. Yet another is extensive quality control. Another is a vast array of in house technical skills. And another is a large established distribution and service network. Add them up and you can produce high end equipment for a fraction of what the little guys charge. Apparantly, they just don't want to. Another thing is that the engineers who do work on this equipment are paid a normal salary. As normal working stiffs they don't get the illusion that because they are also the CEO, CFO, VP of sales and marketing, they are worth hundreds of thousands a year which must be covered by the profits from a relatively small number of units sold.
It's hard to see how all of the crazy high end equipment with crazy prices get sold. Most of the people I know are putting kids through college, paying off mortgages, saving for a vacation and retirement, and would never dream of spending even a thousand dollars for a sound system. There must be an awful lot of rich people out there I've never met.
-
Rolls Royce has less QC issues than andy opf the big three's best efforts and also a vastly superior car...not any more now that a congomorate took them over...first time they ever had a recall becuase the conglomorate cheaped out on the seats(and they melted from the seat warmers). D'ohh.
And as for expertise. Audio Note's chief designer Mr. Kondo was Sony's Chief Designer way back and was dissatisfied with the engineering and quality of the componants.
And if you're the world wide expert on engineering let me listen to the products you've designed - surely someone with your staggerring degrees and the only person who could possibly design goiod gear and the only person that can find it surely you must own a company making this stuff.
But since your opinion on music is limited to classical(ohh and maybe Jazz on occasion) and Any and artists beyond those are talentless hacks who nothing about playing music - you wonder why it's tough to take any other views seriously.
You come to this forum because there is less techie people to discuss issues so you can feel you have something over them...go to Audio Asylum and rant then I can watch all the OTHER basement engineers with the degrees - but no actual product to point to - battle out it with you as to the MANY problems that the Conglomorate speakers have the poor old Peter Snell all by himself obviously didn't have.
You may be right about the A - it was certainly the most expensive of the line. AN has toiled with re-making it as well. They have attempted many big name highly touted speakers from Quad among others - but many don't cut it. And Cost is no object with them.
And as for preferring a particular tube topology...well good for you...the fact that others actually like something different is a fact of life. Darn that Rock...must all be noise to you. Pity, they are saying something with their music just as Mozart was doing. People say this to me about Rap which I loathe...but I can acknowledge the goal some have behind it. Some rockers have a lot of classical training could be classical musicians and prefer Folk/rock/pop etc.
-
A very angry post RGA. I must have hit a nerve. You seem to take anything that even suggests that AN's Qvortrop isn't god seriously. To me they are just another quirky little company, making quirky little equipment, at big bucks prices, owned by a quirky little ex salesman with a quirky spelling name. I'm going to try to hear the AN speakers this spring after the weather warms up. You've aroused my curiousity and I've got an open mind about them even though their advertising seems like just one more pile of hype. Unfortunately, the dealers who carry it are not very close to my home.
"Rolls Royce has less QC issues than andy opf the big three's best efforts and also a vastly superior car...not any more now that a congomorate took them over...first time they ever had a recall becuase the conglomorate cheaped out on the seats(and they melted from the seat warmers). D'ohh."
I know a little about Rolls Royce and I nearly bought one myself a few years ago. Then I realized that it would just be an expensive ornament, a toy to show off. On American roads and I suspect on many Europeans roads today, it is virtually useless as a car. And they DO break down. BTW, the transmissions are made by General Motors and the suspensions are made by Citroen. At least they used to be.
"And as for expertise. Audio Note's chief designer Mr. Kondo was Sony's Chief Designer way back and was dissatisfied with the engineering and quality of the componants."
So Kondo was interested in products for a segment of the Market Sony didn't manufacture for. So he left. Nobody is a one man band. It takes a lot more than one guy to pull of a world class anything today. AN was lucky to get him but as the old saying goes, Sony Corporation misses him like you'd miss a drop of water taken out of a bucket. A month after he left, most people forgot he was ever there. I saw an interesting interview with Akio Mauro Sony's founder shortly before he died. He took the original idea for the pocket transistor radio (it was slightly too big to fit in a normal man's shirt pocket at that time so they had shirts with oversized pockets made up) to Longines, the Swiss watch maker. The execs at Longines told him that the product would never sell and they weren't interested. Today, Sony could buy Longines lock stock and barrel with their spare pocket change. If Sony wanted to enter the high end audio market, they could eat Peter Qvortrop's lunch. They could produce products equal or better than his to sell at a fraction of the price. That just isn't where they are going and Qvortrop should be eternally greatful for it.
"And if you're the world wide expert on engineering let me listen to the products you've designed - surely someone with your staggerring degrees and the only person who could possibly design goiod gear and the only person that can find it surely you must own a company making this stuff."
The sound system I patented never saw the light of day commercially. In 1983 as a member of AES, I tried to market it to about two dozen manufacturers at the AES trade show and convention in New York and none of them were interested. The original best prototype was disassembled 19 years ago and I am just beginning to experiment with a new one for the first time in all these years. However, I don't intend to demo it to you.
"But since your opinion on music is limited to classical(ohh and maybe Jazz on occasion) and Any and artists beyond those are talentless hacks who nothing about playing music - you wonder why it's tough to take any other views seriously."
Aside from your gramatical error making your statement a little unclear, you are right. IMO, I don't take musicians who perform other than classical or jazz seriously. Most all of them really are talentless hacks, their commercial success and fame notwithstanding. It's not open for discussion. That's how I see it.
"You come to this forum because there is less techie people to discuss issues so you can feel you have something over them...go to Audio Asylum and rant then I can watch all the OTHER basement engineers with the degrees - but no actual product to point to - battle out it with you as to the MANY problems that the Conglomorate speakers have the poor old Peter Snell all by himself obviously didn't have."
I came to this forum because I enjoy it. I only stayed at Audio Asylum a few weeks several years ago because their culture was intolerant of dissident views about audio cables. It was like a cult. I wish there were more technically savy people here, not less. But I accept this site for what it is If I didn't, I wouldn't read or post here. As for Peter Snell, I met him shortly before he died. I give him a lot of credit for starting and running a successful small business. But he faced a mountain of problems like any other small manufacturer which strained his resources to the limit. Perhaps the stress contributed to his untimely demise. I don't know.
"You may be right about the A - it was certainly the most expensive of the line. AN has toiled with re-making it as well. They have attempted many big name highly touted speakers from Quad among others - but many don't cut it. And Cost is no object with them."
The type AII and the AIIIi were the only Snell speakers I heard that I liked. I was not even slightly impressed with the others. If you are saying AN can't reverse engineer the type A, it speaks mountains about their technical limitations. BTW, cost is an object with everyone. Even NASA.
"And as for preferring a particular tube topology...well good for you...the fact that others actually like something different is a fact of life."
To each his own. The NY Audio Labs was the best sounding tube amplifier I ever heard. Sounded just as good as a fine solid state amplifier. Without the output transformer, it had all the clarity you could want. It certainly convinced me that neither tubes nor transistors have any actual sound of their own. Of course if you own one of these expensive amplifiers and it needs service, expecially if the bias voltages need adjustment, you are in real trouble. NYAL has the only equipment that can make it possible to adjust it correctly and I don't know if they are even in business since Harvey Rosenberg died. One more danger of buying expensive equipment from a small company.
" Darn that Rock...must all be noise to you."
Pure noise, that's all. A blight on the sensibilites of humanity. Even traffic noise is preferable.
" Pity, they are saying something with their music just as Mozart was doing."
I don't know what you are smoking but it must have affected your mind. You don't have a clue about what you are saying.
"Some rockers have a lot of classical training could be classical musicians and prefer Folk/rock/pop etc."
Maybe. Maybe they see more money in Rock. Maybe they just couldn't cut it as classical musicians either. A third rate classical musician could easily be a first rate rock musician. When all you have to know is 1,4,5 chords, C major, and 4/4 time, you can snooze your way through any of it. NO SKILL REQUIRED.
-
hate to step into a warzone, but...
What the hell, nobody ever said I was too bright. While we are all entitled to our opinions, no matter which side of the fence we are on, these opinions tend to get in our way and close our minds to new things.
Skeptic's technical knowledge of equipment and of music is highly regarded by most of us, just sometimes alittle narrow in focus. I wish he could bring himself to listen to some of what I would consider to be modern classical music. As RGA stated, many rock musicians cut their teeth on classical music and have considerable talent. I believe that many of them were too creative to be content playing the old classics that they grew up on, especially when they found that they had the abiltiy to write something new and of course, make huge sums of money.
I'm quite certain that many of them were or are talented enough to play with an orchestra and probably many did at one time or another. Their choice to write and perform their own music made enormous sums of money for many which they would not have made if they merely played professionally in an orchestra. I still think that they were driven more by creativity than greed but once the money and superstar status starts coming in, it probably becomes frustrating to them in that they are forced to create marketable tunes by recording contracts.
If Skeptic would give some things a listen, he might open up alittle and at least give some credit to some modern composers, but maybe not, it would sound unfamiliar. I enjoy the newness and appreciate the creativity of many modern artists. Sarah McLachlan and Tori Amos have written some very beautiful music on the piano and are accompanied by many orchestral instruments on their albums. Tori Amos plays a Bosendorfer concert grand and thanks them for building the best pianos in the world. (hear that Skep?) I'll bet she can play Chopin as well as Van Cliburn did. I'm not sure which instrument Sarah chooses but she is also extremely talented. Skep, I can't imagine that you would not enjoy at least some of their music. I too grew up on classical music, mostly piano and pipe organ and I still enjoy both. Bach pieces on the pipe organ to me, are very much like rock music (good rock music), loud, fast and difficult to play. He must have been the Ozzy Osbourne of his day, a superstar, and probably not everyone liked him either.
Bill
-
"If Skeptic would give some things a listen, he might open up alittle and at least give some credit to some modern composers, but maybe not, it would sound unfamiliar."
If you're talking about classical composers, I have. I've warmed up to much of Stravinsky. But don't hold your breath waiting for me to acknowledge Schoenberg as a great composer. It won't happen. Ditto, De La Joya and his ilk.
As for other genres of music, as an example I've been holding back on my review of John Coltrane's album "A Love Supreme" which DMK persuaded me to purchase and listen to. I wrote it a while back but haven't posted it yet. Believe me he won't like what I have to say about it. I tried very hard to have an open mind listening to it but it only confirmed my beliefs more stongly. Having heard it well over a dozen times already, I'm waiting for a while to listen to it again once or twice more just in case it subconscously grew on me. It will be a very long and detailed review because I did listen to it very carefully and extensively.
One of my sister's closest childhood friends became a pop and rock music song writer. What a waste of talent. BTW, she didn't need the money. Her father was a wealthy lawyer and her husband is a well to do doctor. Nobody could figure out what went wrong inside her head.
-
Hey Skep
I remember the Coltrane exchange. I'm not familiar with his music so I might be a reclusive shut-in myself. All I can say is that I've heard of him and that many people like him, I probably would not but I really don't know.
I've not heard Schoenberg or De La Hoya that I can remember but I'm guessing I would not like them either. Seems to me Bernstein also composed but was not particularly well received. How far back is Stravinsky? Wrote the Firebird Suite, didn't he? I think I have a copy of that somewhere.
I will give credit to some very recent artists such as Rick Wakeman, Keith Emerson, Tori Amos and Sarah McLachlan or even Billy Joel (he said he was retiring to write classical music, I'm still waiting) who are all pianists and organists with a great deal of talent IMO. They all have truly outstanding keyboard skills and certainly came from classical beginnings. You could say that they all sold out in a way to become rock stars and to make money. By the same token, they wrote some very beautiful music and did become very popular which says to me that there is not a total aversion to music that is written as it was hundreds of years ago by the great classical composers. Even my dad who was a church organist for 50 years would listen to some of their music and give them credit for being talented musicians and composers, maybe you would too. It is surely not all noise and likely some of it would strike you as more musical than some of these other modern composers that you mention.
Bill
-
We have this discussion in my family all of the time. My aunt who debuted at Town Hall when she was 16 must have a recording of every piece of classical piano music ever written. Now she's closing in on all of the jazz paino music ever written. (She'll be 95 this year.) She thinks some of the jazz pianists are greater than most of the classical pianists. I of course don't agree. And I also still don't think that the most complex jazz approaches the most complex classical music in the range of tonal colors, dynamics, or the demands placed on the musicians.
There are no composers IMO today or even in the last century who appoach the great musical geniuses of the 17th 18th and 19th century. Another big arguement in my house revolves around who was the greatest composer or at least who would you listen to if you could only hear the music of just one composer. I choose Beethoven hands down. His music never fails to satisfy. If there is one composer whose music invariably displays power it's his. And the logic of the way it progresses is unchallengable. Listening to a Von Karajan's recording of the Eroica the other day was totally captivating. The other person who lives in my house, "the musician" prefers Brahms. Well, there's no accounting.
Bernstein was an outstanding musicoligist and musician. But he was not a great composer. Even by the standards of American music, he was not at the same level as Copland or Gershwin (IMO as usual.)
My tastes have changed over the years. When I first heard The Rite of Spring, it was so strange to my ears as to be out on the fringe. Recently, I became aware after having heard it for the first time in many years how accustomed I had become to it and how familiar it seemed. Hardly strange sounding any more at all. (A good recording of it will give those AR9s quite a workout.)
Crossover artists are usually unsuccessful. Kiri TeKanawa is a great operatic voice but many of her pop recordings leave a lot to be desired. Admittedly she did not use her operatic voice to record them but she had some great arrangements and wonderful orchestral backup (She made recordngs of Kern, Porter, Gershwin, and Berlin as well as a very nice one with Nelson Riddle's arrangements and orchestra but the EMI engineers who mastered all but the Riddle recording done on London were awful and put their sibilant echo signiture on all of them to one degree or another.) On the other hand, Linda Rondstat tried to record La Boheme. A total catastrophe. Her voice wasn't even close to being up to it. If only Barbara Streisand could learn to sing on key, she would not be so unbearable. Is that asking too much. It's not like I'm asking her to learn how to read music or something.
-
Are you KIDDING???
[QUOTE=skeptic
As for other genres of music, as an example I've been holding back on my review of John Coltrane's album "A Love Supreme" which DMK persuaded me to purchase and listen to. I wrote it a while back but haven't posted it yet. Believe me he won't like what I have to say about it. [/QUOTE]
I can't WAIT to read it! If your review is anything like your posts on non-classical music, I'm sure it'll be hilarious! Hey, all that "persuasion" on my part wouldn't have anything to do with you disparaging in an earlier post without having heard it, would it? Ah, forget that - I told myself I wouldn't bring it up and there I go!
Skeptic, I realize that your comments about music aside from classical are meant to elicit anger. That's fine. But truly, I can't even imagine being less concerned with your opinions than I am now. It's perfectly fine if you don't like "A Love Supreme". I'll be the first to support your right to your opinion. Some people who honestly do understand modern jazz have trouble with it. It's ok if you don't get it. Even if you bash it beyond repair, I won't mind. I only wanted you to hear it so that your opinion might carry a little weight. It's only when you post opinions and pass them off as facts that I have to intercede. I realize that just about everything on this board is opinion but there might be a newbie or lurker out there that might be swayed the wrong way.
But I see you've qualified your opinions recently for the most part. That's critical in your case because I have no doubt that you make excellent points on other things and we may discount them based on your complete lack of knowledge of music beyond classical. Oh, there is one you forgot to qualify -the one about any classical musician could play rock. That's a total laugher! Of all the musicians I know, there are... oh, about two dozen that are primarily rock musicians and that can play a lot of classical music very well. Know how many classical musicians can play a convincing solo over even the most simple blues progression? None. Zero. Zilch. Third rate or first rate (if the belittled Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra players could be called first rate.) they can't do it! If it's so simple and requires no talent, why can't they do it? Must be beneath them. Or it could be that rock requires them to be creative. They didn't learn THAT in music school, did they? :)
Anyway, there are plenty more outrageously humorous parts of your posts, past and present, but there's no point in rehashing all that. As far as the Trane, you should probably put it away for a year or so. Some comprehension might hit you or it might not. But one thing I can say with 98% certainty is that if you don't like this disc (and I had no delusions that you would), there's no point in your pursuing any jazz after 1960 or so. Don't waste your time and I mean that sincerely.
Finally, comparing different genres of music in the areas of complexity, virtuosity, and talent level is ridiculous. There are things that rock musicians can do that classical musicians cannot, and vice versa. Ditto for most other kinds of music. Until you've heard everything out there (something I'm spending my life trying to accomplish), you have no clue what you're talking about and you come off as foolish. Now, how about that review? Oh, also you should be able to get a few bucks for the Coltrane at your local music store. I'm sure it won't sit in their used bin beyond a couple of minutes! Hey, if it helps motivate you to post your review, I find "La Boheme" to be a pretensious, boring, overrated piece of ****e and the mere fact that Ronstadt even attempted it shows her incredible bad taste. But I still don't deny it is music. It may even be GOOD music but I don't care for it or any other piece of opera I've ever heard. Maybe I just don't get it. See the qualification? But you're getting better and you receive brownie points for trying the Trane in spite of your obvious biases against anything modern, the derisive comment about Schoenberg as a case in point.
-
I have an honest question for you
Yourself and many other classical enthusiasts discuss different renditions of classical compositions such as this conductor's version of Beethoven's Fifth as opposed to someone else's. Many of you have umpteen different readings. As someone who owns maybe two versions of my favorites and only one of other things I enjoy, please explain to me why I should own several. Let's take Beethoven since he is your favorite. I own Norrington's complete version and von Karajan's. What am I missing by not owning another?
Could it be that you like a little creativity with your old favorites? Ok, maybe I have an ulterior motive for asking but I'm still curious. But if you enjoy a different conductor's viewpoint on a familiar theme, you might begin to understand why as a jazz nutcase for 30 years that I've gravitated beyond dixie and swing into what I deem as more creative jazz. Beyond that, I have no agenda other than curiousity.
Oh, the Norrington is on CD and the von Karajan is on vinyl. Two guesses which one I find more satisfying! :)
-
First of all stop trying to convince one track minded arrogant people who think only they are right about ALL things in life. He thinks by attacking Streisand, Rondstadt, all rock or basically all music for the last 100 years he thinks himself a more musical intellect. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can really argue that classical and jazz are generally more difficult to actually PLAY as musical intruments. So basically the more difficult it is to play the better?? I guess it is totally insane of me to prefer Vivaldi to Mozart and Beethoven...which isn't to say I don't like some of what they do a great deal.
Rock and roll, Skeptic because you're too dense to figure it out, has something called Lyrics. What is a Lyric? A Lyric is a poem. What is poetry? The highest form of Literary writing which requires knowledge to uncover the point, message or political argument etc of the writer's choosing. Now some of it is crap on that level no doubt just as a lot of Crap was penned from Wordsworth - who was a talentless HACK IMO compared to Colerige, Byron and Shelley but that's an aside.
Basically ROCK is a poem put to words. Hell even Loreena McKennit put "The Lady of Shallot" to music nearly word for word at about 11 minutes. Lots of violins for ya too.
DMK there is really no use to trying to convert narrow minded people to expand their horizons because that would be like converting a Jehovah's Witness to being athiest or agnostic.
I happen to like a huge array of music because each serves a use. John Williams makes music for a lot of films that take those films to a new level. Jaws for example would be nothing without that theme...and even the basic few notes on the piano for the movie Halloween made a low budget low plot indy film in to the highest grossing horror picture(or indy film) hugely popular - and scary. Of course to be an intelligent film critic one can't throw out all the genres of films because they happen to only think silent films were best(after all older is better right?)
Then there is music simply there for a mindless toe tapping beat. As much as Skeptic despises Streisand he would probably conced that Streisand is more talented a singer than oh say Madonna. I concede that Madonna has a limited vocal range - 2 octaves maybe and certainly isn't going to do those vocal gymnastics of Streisand or Celine Dion(the latter has no training either and many feel that with work she has the basis of a classical voice). Back tp the point. I recognize that Streisand or Shirley Bassey or Charlotte Church or Katrina Gauvin can SING better than Madonna - and yet as much as I hate to admit I prefer to LISTEN to Madonna or a Gloria Estefan over these other better singers. Music is not JUST about the talent of singer. Indeed, a lot of LESSER singers sound one of kind or unique. No one else sounds like Tom Petty or Rod Stewart and you can pick off Madonna's voice all in a few bars. None of em are particularly great singers and certainly don't hold up to operatic singers. But have you heard Pavorotti try and sing those duets rocky type songs...now that's a laugh - but then his voice has ALWAYS irritated me.
Basically Rock/Pop has a consitant beat - I call it beat music. I also had to laugh that in the movie Mr. Holland's Opus you see Richard Dreyfuss trying to teach kids music and the students are all totally bored with classical music. Then he plays on the piano some tune and asks the class what it is. The tudents say ohh that is such and such a song from the platters or the Beatles etc. Mr. Holland say ERRRRRRRRRR no Beethoven. Rock/pop music has elements of classical right in it for Heaven sake.
I get into the same kind of discussions on film criticism. You'll have the die hard anti-Hollywood anti-English speaking and of course Anti-Spielberg (the latter the most Anti of all) because if the general public likes it and the MOST money is generated by something then it mus automatically mean it's crap. You can't have a superiority complex if you like all the things the masses like. Which kind of explains the love of Citizen Kane, a good film no question but the best. Well if people stdied their Shakespeare they might realize in fact how unoriginal the film really is. Pauline Kael wasn't fooled thankfully.
Lastly, Beethoven's music incidentally transformed and was integral to one of my favorite films...A Clockwork Orange.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbangelfish
I enjoy the newness and appreciate the creativity of many modern artists. Sarah McLachlan and Tori Amos have written some very beautiful music on the piano and are accompanied by many orchestral instruments on their albums. Tori Amos plays a Bosendorfer concert grand and thanks them for building the best pianos in the world. (hear that Skep?) I'll bet she can play Chopin as well as Van Cliburn did. I'm not sure which instrument Sarah chooses but she is also extremely talented. Skep, I can't imagine that you would not enjoy at least some of their music. I too grew up on classical music, mostly piano and pipe organ and I still enjoy both. Bach pieces on the pipe organ to me, are very much like rock music (good rock music), loud, fast and difficult to play. He must have been the Ozzy Osbourne of his day, a superstar, and probably not everyone liked him either.
Bill
Some people don't want creativity they like to stagnate in the era of witch hunting and limited intruments and political pressures stifling creativity - a complaint and a sore spot for Mozart who was perhaps prohibited from really letting loose.
Sarah McLachlan is a terrific artist but unfortunately sings a catchy tune or two whcih is not mundane and the same old song that was done from 1743 France so forget it. She is classically trained on the piano, she plays the guitar, she writes the music and the lyrics. What the hell else do people want. Heck people get mad at singers LIKE Celine Dion because they say if you don't write your own stuff you're a hack...well geez that makes all those gifted Oboists hacks if they don't write their own stuff because the VOICE IS a musical intrument and no two are the same. And since no two are the same it's pretty stupid to say well the Cello is a BETTER instrument than the Flute. You can say the Oboe is HARDER to play than trumpet but that doesn't mean the trumpet is a totally useless instrument and should be chucked out with all the other lowly brass instruments.(That is EXACTLY what Skeptic's rant is all about).
Heck look at Kenny G. I don't play but according to a Jazz nut and player at my school apparently Kenny G plays 5 notes in varying routines. The thing is he plays the five very well and while it may not be to everyone's taste he sells it as mood music and i understand why women gravitate to the music at a spa or whatever.
I joke but honestly if you want to fall asleep to relaxing music Kenny G will work, along with Enya. This doesn't mean that Kenny G is better than Miles Davis talent wise.
-
"And since no two are the same it's pretty stupid to say well the Cello is a BETTER instrument than the Flute. "
Then let me say something pretty stupid; THE CELLO IS A BETTER INSTRUMENT THAN THE FLUTE. A MUCH BETTER INSTRUMENT. From a cello, you can get the Dvorak cello concerto, the Bach double, and so much more. The cello sings like no other instrument with the possible exception of the violin. With its vast repertoire, even the piano cannot sing like a cello. What do you get from a flute? Vivaldi flute concertos. Mozart flute sonatas. It's like comparing a trickling stream with a vast raging river or an ocean. It's hard to lump Gallway and Rampal in with the same league as Rostropovich or even Cassals. They're music is worlds apart. While it is true that the flute is indespensible to a modern symphony orchestra, the flute is not a musical instrument to be taken too seriously on its own. Even a sax is a much more serious instrument.
-
"As someone who owns maybe two versions of my favorites and only one of other things I enjoy, please explain to me why I should own several."
I don't know that you should. For me though, it's different.
It might interest you to know that I deliberately sprang for the extra $10 to buy the deluxe version of "A Love Supreme" so that I could get more than one point of view of it, even if it was from the same musician. One of the things about music is the way the performer sees it. Sometimes one performer will see something no other performer has done before. And you are always looking out for something more interesting. I also own the Von Karajan redcordings of the Beethoven symphonies but mine are on CD. It's the versions recorded in the early 1960s. I think I read somewhere he recorded 4 different sets. I have another full set of the Beethoven on DG vinyl but I can't remember by who. I've got another full set on cd with Walter and several of those including the 4th, 5th, and 9th on vinyl. I'd bet I've got at least 15 different recordings of the 9th between cds and vinyls. Each has something different to offer although believe it or not, on the whole, the Von Karajan set is my favorite. I am not familiar with the Norrington recordings but wish I at least heard some of them. Is that the one with the London Symphony Players? If it is it got rave reviews. Of course, the best of all worlds is to have your favorite performances on the best sounding recordings. But life is not always so accomodating. Tonight I heard Artur Rubenstein's recording of the Greig piano concerto he recorded in 1961. Who thought when I first owned and heard that recording on vinyl in 1968 I would be listening to it on cd 35 years later. It's still a wonderful recording and performance. I just wish I could find a cd of Martha Argerich playing it. I'm sure it would be a killer too.
Believe it or not, I have access to a vast collection of jazz and pop and yes even rock recordings. It's not that I don't own them. It's just that I don't enjoy them nearly as much. And then there are many I don't much enjoy hearing at all.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMK
Skeptic, I realize that your comments about music aside from classical are meant to elicit anger. That's fine. But truly, I can't even imagine being less concerned with your opinions than I am now. It's perfectly fine if you don't like "A Love Supreme". I'll be the first to support your right to your opinion. Some people who honestly do understand modern jazz have trouble with it. It's ok if you don't get it. Even if you bash it beyond repair, I won't mind. I only wanted you to hear it so that your opinion might carry a little weight. It's only when you post opinions and pass them off as facts that I have to intercede. I realize that just about everything on this board is opinion but there might be a newbie or lurker out there that might be swayed the wrong way.
Well, all I can say is at least he tried! With Trane, you either have to accept it on its own terms or reject it out of hand, because what he's expressing on "A Love Supreme" is about as intimate an insight into the mindset of a person through music as I've ever heard. It's uncompromising, and simultaneously inspiring and disturbing. Even without knowing anything about Trane's personal life, it's like that instrument is a conduit into what his life is all about. It's about as personal an expression as you can get.
I'd already heard plenty of Coltrane's stuff before I put "A Love Supreme" on for the first time, and literally I got chills several times while listening to that album. When music becomes that transcendent, then you know it's got meaning. If someone doesn't connect with the music like that, then it's really their misfortune as far as I'm concerned. This intense bond between musician and listener is why "A Love Supreme" is so frequently cited among the greatest jazz albums ever made, even if you can name hundreds of other albums that have better precision, more logical progressions on the solos, more technical virtuosity, etc.
Also, Elvin Jones' drumming on that album is about as perfect and intuitive a rhythm as I've ever heard. That pretty much cemented his stature with me as the quintessential jazz drummer. I got to see him perform a club gig last year and it was just amazing (easily the most inspired rendition of "It Don't Mean A Thing" that I've ever heard). Gonna see McCoy Tyner as well in a couple of weeks.
-
"Skeptic, I realize that your comments about music aside from classical are meant to elicit anger."
Not so. But I'm not surprised that attacking someone's taste in music can cause anger. Especially people who identify themselves with the music they listen too. Frankly, I would never be angry at anyone who said that they detested classical music. Many of my best friends don't like it. For me it is a privelege and a gift my parents gave me to enjoy one of life's rarer pleasures. Learning to appreciate some of the others like fine wine I had to do on my own.
I've met more than a few jazz and even pop musicians. One of the most delightful evenings I ever spent was with Dick Hyman the other guys in his trio, and their wives at a midnight buffet on the Royal Viking Star in 1989 when he was performing there. He invited me to join them when I told him I remembered his recordings from his old days at Command Records. Anybody ever hear of Enoch Light and the Light Brigade? And as much as I enjoyed him and his performance on the ship, I must say that the half dozen or so recordings of his that I own are not nearly as pleasing. He is supposed to be the jazz pianist's pianist but I just don't get it.
" There are things that rock musicians can do that classical musicians cannot"
One thing rock performers sometimes do at a concert that I've never seen any classical musician do is set fire to their instruments. Based on the way they play, had I been in the audience, I'd have opted for them to do that BEFORE the performance.
|