minimal table

[E-Stat]

There has to be a reason why all really good TT's are belt drive. When I bought my VPI I was using a Technics SP10. The VPI was so much better sounding even my next door neighbor heard the difference and he was not an audiophile.

I concur that the better belt drive tables bettered my Technics SL-110 long ago. There are two new tables by EAR and Clearaudio that take a different approach. With the EAR, it uses a direct drive motor to drive the subplatter which drives the main platter by... magnetic attraction! Look ma no hands, er belts or nuthin' touching that puppy! I heard one at Seacliff a couple of months back.

Scroll down the page to see a number of pics of both table and designer, Tim de Paravincini.

Magnetic EAR table

rw

[jrhymeammo]

Thanx E-Stat, Cyberlight cables look very interesting and unique.

[basite]

you can also get a Clearaudio bluemotion http://www.clearaudio.de/ (-->products-->bluemotion) or a Clearaudio Emotion (-->products-->emotion)
they are both belt drive and look very good.

[jrhymeammo]

you can also get a Clearaudio bluemotion http://www.clearaudio.de/ (-->products-->bluemotion) or a Clearaudio Emotion (-->products-->emotion)
they are both belt drive and look very good.

I've considered that table also but at it's not under $700 new. Specs wise, probably the best TT package under $1500.

[basite]

dunno, i think is saw it for €650 somewhere, that's like $700, maybe $750

[beck]

thanks all, i called vladimir (www.cadencebuilding.com) and boy does he know his stuff---ordered a P2 + goldring cart, then ordered an NAD C272--he's real generous with his time on the phone, talks on the customer's level (mine's pretty low) without condescension....thanks for the tip!

[musicoverall]

thanks all, i called vladimir (www.cadencebuilding.com) and boy does he know his stuff---ordered a P2 + goldring cart, then ordered an NAD C272--he's real generous with his time on the phone, talks on the customer's level (mine's pretty low) without condescension....thanks for the tip!

Yes, Vladimir is one of the most knowledgable audio dealers I've ever met. Being a recording engineer, he really knows sound. The CD's he engineers sound incredible but I wouldn't recommend them unless you have a pretty good background in "free jazz". But he knows his beans. Which Goldring did you get, the 1012? I'm pretty sure that's what he recommends for the P2 and it's a great fit. Nice thing about those arms is that you can someday (if you want) put a pretty expensive cartridge on it and it won't be a waste. I once had a P3 that had a $1000 Benz woodbodied cartridge on it and the thing sounded awesome!

Enjoy your table and new amp!

[beck]

Yes, Vladimir is one of the most knowledgable audio dealers I've ever met. Being a recording engineer, he really knows sound. The CD's he engineers sound incredible but I wouldn't recommend them unless you have a pretty good background in "free jazz". But he knows his beans. Which Goldring did you get, the 1012? I'm pretty sure that's what he recommends for the P2 and it's a great fit. Nice thing about those arms is that you can someday (if you want) put a pretty expensive cartridge on it and it won't be a waste. I once had a P3 that had a $1000 Benz woodbodied cartridge on it and the thing sounded awesome!

Enjoy your table and new amp!

yep, the goldring 1012--do you have any thoughts on a cd player?---i'm thinking about NAD 542, rotel 1072, rega apollo, arcam 73T.....any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks beck

[musicoverall]

yep, the goldring 1012--do you have any thoughts on a cd player?---i'm thinking about NAD 542, rotel 1072, rega apollo, arcam 73T.....any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks beck

I always thought the Goldrings and Regas have a nice synergy to them. Was never much impressed with the Rega cartridges.

CDP's... personally I've had more luck with Rotel than with NAD. The Arcam is a very nice player but I'm not at all familiar with the Rega Apollo. Is that above or below the Planet in price? I absolutely did not like the Planet but their upscale Jupiter was a good one. Some people like the Planet. Go figure. Point being, try 'em all if you get the chance and pick out the one you like best. I don't think you'd go far afield with any of them. You'd probably get a good price on the NAD from Vladimir, though, so that might be a nice incentive.

[beck]

the rega apollo is $995 and absolute sound asks the question, best bargain ever? what i'm hearing on the forums is.....it has iffy build quality, takes 200-400 hours to burn in, takes a half hour to warm up, and beats anything $500 above or below it....

what are your thoughts on the rotel vs the NAD? was it a sound quality vs reliability issue? the arcam is supposed to be detailed but laid back.....

[beck]

also i think the rega apollo sound is a personal taste thing....how do you audition stuff when there's no dealer in our area?

[musicoverall]

the rega apollo is $995 and absolute sound asks the question, best bargain ever? what i'm hearing on the forums is.....it has iffy build quality, takes 200-400 hours to burn in, takes a half hour to warm up, and beats anything $500 above or below it....

what are your thoughts on the rotel vs the NAD? was it a sound quality vs reliability issue? the arcam is supposed to be detailed but laid back.....

First of all, I don't hear night and day differences between CD players. What I hear as significant might not be to someone else. But bear in mind that the differences I DO hear as fairly subtle.

When I looked at NAD vs Rotel which was some years back, the NAD sounded soft, probably on purpose to tame those "digital nasties". The Rotel was leaner and more precise, which meant overly bright on bright recordings. I felt it was more accurately portraying what was on the recording, although it did make a few recordings very hard to listen to whereas the NAD took some of the thrill out of other recordings by glossing over some detail - tradeoffs, y' know! What did it for me is the Rotel threw a wider soundstage.

I would agree that the Arcam is more laid back but instead of a softening of the detail and the HF's as the NAD did, it just set you back a dozen rows or so behind the Rotel. It's more like the sound is more recessed rather than softer, if that makes any sense.

I've not auditioned the NAD or the Rotel recently but again, I don't think you'd go far wrong with any of them. As for an audition, you can still do so in your own home. Find a dealer that will give you a 30 day money back guarantee, buy the unit and spend some time with it. If you don't like it, return it. Perhaps you can find two dealers and buy both in order to A/B them. Good luck! Let us know what you decide on.

[beck]

thank you sir for the in depth answer....i will let you know how it shakes out!

[emorphien]

First of all, I don't hear night and day differences between CD players. What I hear as significant might not be to someone else. But bear in mind that the differences I DO hear as fairly subtle.

When I looked at NAD vs Rotel which was some years back, the NAD sounded soft, probably on purpose to tame those "digital nasties". The Rotel was leaner and more precise, which meant overly bright on bright recordings. I felt it was more accurately portraying what was on the recording, although it did make a few recordings very hard to listen to whereas the NAD took some of the thrill out of other recordings by glossing over some detail - tradeoffs, y' know! What did it for me is the Rotel threw a wider soundstage.

I would agree that the Arcam is more laid back but instead of a softening of the detail and the HF's as the NAD did, it just set you back a dozen rows or so behind the Rotel. It's more like the sound is more recessed rather than softer, if that makes any sense.

I've not auditioned the NAD or the Rotel recently but again, I don't think you'd go far wrong with any of them. As for an audition, you can still do so in your own home. Find a dealer that will give you a 30 day money back guarantee, buy the unit and spend some time with it. If you don't like it, return it. Perhaps you can find two dealers and buy both in order to A/B them. Good luck! Let us know what you decide on.

Which NAD did you try? I've listened to the C521BEE and C542 (and own the 542)

[musicoverall]

Which NAD did you try? I've listened to the C521BEE and C542 (and own the 542)

It was a precursor to the C542 but I don't recall - it may have been the C541 (did they make such a model?) and I'm told the C542 solved the shortcomings of its earlier iteration. Not surprising. I'll never forget my experience with an Acurus preamp years ago. What a horrible sounding unit! A year later they came out with a new model that completely cured what ailed it's predesessor. Sometimes new models are the manufacturers way of tempting us to upgrade for no reason but sometimes they really create something better. Hit or miss.

Enjoy your C542 - I'm told it's quite good but I've never had the pleasure.

[emorphien]

It was a precursor to the C542 but I don't recall - it may have been the C541 (did they make such a model?) and I'm told the C542 solved the shortcomings of its earlier iteration. Not surprising. I'll never forget my experience with an Acurus preamp years ago. What a horrible sounding unit! A year later they came out with a new model that completely cured what ailed it's predesessor. Sometimes new models are the manufacturers way of tempting us to upgrade for no reason but sometimes they really create something better. Hit or miss.

Enjoy your C542 - I'm told it's quite good but I've never had the pleasure.

They did make a 541, which I never heard. I have heard it's a good model, but as you said the 542 makes some considerable improvements over it in many areas.

I'm very very happy with the C542.