Paging E-Stat. STAT!

[topspeed]

OK, let's hear it.

How was Sea Cliff?

[E-Stat]

OK, let's hear it.

How was Sea Cliff?

Travels to Seacliff always leave me amazed, enthused, recharged, and a bit lighter of wallet (once I buy all the new music I hear). Harry's energy level seemed to be in overdrive this trip as well with John and me both there. Early Saturday evening, we had dinner at Harry's favorite sushi restaurant (the whole staff knows him) and then settled in for some power listening back at the ranch. As amazing as the system is, it is his music collection that is simply wonderful.

We listened to vinyl primarily and compared a Kuzma turntable / Air bearing tonearm with Myabi cartridge to an interesting VPI hybrid: the Scoutmaster using TNT motor, SDS speed controller, and the periphery clamp with Dynavector XV1 cartridge. Harry Weisfeld had brought the Scoutmaster over a while back and wondered how it would sound using the massive TNT double motor/flywheel assembly from the HR-X that Harry already had. He said that Weisfeld was dumbfounded with how good the Scoutmaster sounded in that configuration. It did. Anyway, both sounded excellent although the VPI really excelled on the bottom end and seemed to have a more solid image. With the Alon Grand Exotica bass towers, you are well aware of low end! At first, the Kuzma also sounded a bit brash at the top. Was that due to the captive wire on the Kuzma vs. Valhalla on the VPI? Although the Kuzma was a pretty "fresh" demo, Harry asked for me to check all the contacts and clean if necessary. Indeed, the connectors benefitted from a bit of Pro-Gold with some evidence visible on the cloth. That change was immediately audible. The rest of his current system consisted of Basis battery powered phono, Conrad-Johnson ART II preamp, and four ASL Hurricane power amps driving the main towers and the woofers, and Valhalla cabling throughout. We listened to the Lector CDP just a little bit (the Burmesters just sat there in all their gorgeous chrome plated glory). I brought a copy of the Lord of the Rings soundtrack and wanted to take a listen. One reason is that the ASO and Chorus will be presenting a concert of LOTR music in June and I wanted to hear it on this system first. I also heard a Telarc collection of some new ASO stuff including Higdon's City Scape Concerto and Brittain's Sea Song. Jennifer Higdon has become my favorite new composer (and HP gave me a copy of it).

It seemed to be mostly a Classic Records night. He had quite a collection of Tony Hawkins' excellent 45 RPM single sided remasterings of all sorts of tasty pieces: Dorati Firebird on Mercury, Reiner Pictures at an Exhibition on RCA Living Stereo, Munch Ravel Concerto in G on RCA, Schory Music for Bang, Baroom, and Harp, Songs for the Aubergne with soloist Netalia Davrath, and more. It is amazing how dimensional those old recordings can sound with a revived mastering and that system. One of HP's secrets to minimizing wear is that he typically gets three copies of every recording. He mentioned that Hawkins has been to Seacliff and commented that he never heard his recordings like that before. That is easy for me to believe. I just want all those incredible recordings.

Record after record revealed layers of detail I'm not accustomed to. The system is so remarkably open sounding as to defy description. Yes, Virginia a $300k system does sound different than most others! I would not characterize it as sounding like tubes nor solid state although there are some of each used. The Firebird and Ravel in particular were simply holographic in their ability to recreate a large space. There were a couple of bands on the Bang, Baroom, and Harp album that really showed off the amazing transient and resolution capabilities of the system with it's wide range of percussive instruments. Early on, Harry had said that he wanted to crash fairly early but that was not to be. He kept pulling out more records to hear until after midnight. He did play a few pop tunes, like an old America song from the 70's. While it sounded very clear, the soundstage kinda collapsed. I finally heard the Dusty Springfield "Look of Love" cut he is so fond of. Indeed, that recording is so clean and captures the expressive nature of her voice. The high frequencies are to die for.

Now, I just need to put together my Classic Records order and see what the cost of the VPI periphery clamp is. This trip is probably going to cost me about $500 in new stuff to get!

rw

[topspeed]

Sounds like it was fun! I'd just read about the Lector in TAS and it sounds like a interesting piece (loved the galoshes jab). It's funny, don't you think we should always be challenging our perceptions of reality, not just in audio, but in all aspect of life? Our short time here would be so much more interesting!

BTW, I should have told you to have some Unagi for me!

[mtrycraft]

Yes, Virginia a $300k system does sound different than most others! rw

Or not as you had no way of compariong, right. You just hope it does due to cost. Or, it could sound different. Certainly he has different speakers and room.

[E-Stat]

Or not as you had no way of compariong, right. You just hope it does due to cost. Or, it could sound different. Certainly he has different speakers and room.

You simply have no idea. Really you don't.

rw

[hifitommy]

Or not as you had no way of compariong, right. You just hope it does due to cost. Or, it could sound different. Certainly he has different speakers and room.

you are really WAAAAAY out of your league here. just shut the fugue up.

[mtrycraft]

you are really WAAAAAY out of your league here. just shut the fugue up.

Ah, your way or the highway? Are you the top dictator now?

[mtrycraft]

You simply have no idea. Really you don't.

rw

You are too gullible to step back and evaluate rationally.

[hifitommy]

You are too gullible to step back and evaluate rationally.

you just dont have the experience nor expertise to comment here. youre not ignorant of a lot of things, just this subject it seems, dont make yourseof look stupid.

had you been privy to these sessions, you may turn compeletely around. but you werent, nor likely to be. and probably dont want to be. if only you could be part of something this revealing, you could put your intelligence to useful work.

please understand that there are audio systems and recordings that can transport you to the original venue, including its space, tonality, and presence that you have yet to experience. some of these people relating these experiences have been there at the actual recording sessions and some are part of making these recordings come alive.

[mtrycraft]

you just dont have the experience nor expertise to comment here. youre not ignorant of a lot of things, just this subject it seems, dont make yourseof look stupid.

had you been privy to these sessions, you may turn compeletely around. but you werent, nor likely to be. and probably dont want to be. if only you could be part of something this revealing, you could put your intelligence to useful work.

please understand that there are audio systems and recordings that can transport you to the original venue, including its space, tonality, and presence that you have yet to experience. some of these people relating these experiences have been there at the actual recording sessions and some are part of making these recordings come alive.

Revealing? Maybe yes, maybe no different form other systems. Now you are making an unfounded claim based on your biases, again. Do you have anything substantial to support this claim? Or, just the component brand name and price tag?
A stereo setup just cannot transport you to anywhere, it is limited. That was already well know in the 1930s, LOL. Keep on dreaming.
I am sure I would have enjoyed the system. I just would not claim extraordinary events for it without objective evidence. That is all both of you are doing.

[hifitommy]

Revealing? Maybe yes, maybe no different form other systems. Now you are making an unfounded claim based on your biases, again. Do you have anything substantial to support this claim? Or, just the component brand name and price tag?
A stereo setup just cannot transport you to anywhere, it is limited. That was already well know in the 1930s, LOL. Keep on dreaming.
I am sure I would have enjoyed the system. I just would not claim extraordinary events for it without objective evidence. That is all both of you are doing.

you have just exhibited this in public! nothing more need be said. stupid, not ignorant.

[mtrycraft]

you have just exhibited this in public! nothing more need be said. stupid, not ignorant.

You have demonstrated nothing in public, just your biases. Too bad, a bit of more knowledge would have helped you save face.

[WmAx]

A stereo setup just cannot transport you to anywhere, it is limited. That was already well know in the 1930s, LOL. Keep on dreaming.

While obviously a stereo can not transport you anywhere(it's not a car, etc.); if the combination of stimuli(regardless of what or why) invokes a perceptual sense of 'realism' to the subject, then is this not good enough? I have seen many people claim such things. Same as I have seen many make claims of wire sound, etc.. I don't think they are usually lying when it comes to what they percieved; just making ignorant claims as to what is fact. A sound reproduction system's goal is to provide as realistic presentaion as is possible. This is only a perception, since it is never the real event. Personally, if a combination of factors can make me 'percieve' a realistic presentation, that's good enough for me. With myy personal sound system, I'm able to percieve realistic presentations with some select recordings. It's the same with many people who have listened to the system. They could be lying, of course. I'ts only a perception. Am I missing something?

-Chris

[hifitommy]

You have demonstrated nothing in public, just your biases. Too bad, a bit of more knowledge would have helped you save face.

and i have no need to save face. i stand by what i hear, and i hear recordings that are MUCH like being at an actual performance. too bad you dont have a real stereo. this can cme back from 2 channels. surround is nice and i do this passively.

flail around if you must, reality can be reproduced and perceived. there is magic within the reocrdings we buy, you just have to recover it.

flap on if you must. you arent enjoying whats given you. its all there. i feel sorry for you.

[WmAx]

I remembered an old Floyd Toole paper, "Direction and Space, The Final Frontiers".

He specifically states...

quote 1(reference to 30's Bell Labs Research):

"Bell Labs scientists concluded that a great many channels would benecessary to capture and reproduce the directional and spatial complexities of a musicaloundstage – not even attempting to recreate a surrounding sense of envelopment. Being practical, they investigated the possibilities of simplification, and concluded that, while two channels could yield acceptable results for a solitary listener, three channels (left,center and right) would be a desirable minimum to establish the illusion of a stable frontsoundstage for a group of listeners."

quote 2(reference to what is presumably his personal experience):

"In fairness it must be said that, after over forty years of experimentation, the best two-channel stereo recordings reproduced over the right set of loudspeakers in the rightroom can be very satisfying indeed. Sadly, only a fraction of our listening experiencesfall into that category. Clearly stereo does not get us to our long-term objective."

It seems to me, that this paper does not nescarrily dismiss the possibility of stereo sounding realistic. However, it does clearly demonstrate that stereo is inadequate for reliable and versatile(more then very limited one seated position) use in realistic reproduction. Though, Toole does not specify what he means by "very satisfying indeed". I am assuming he is referring to goal of realistic reproduction, since this is the topic of the paper. Perhaps someone shoule email him for further explanation?

-Chris

[E-Stat]

You are too gullible to step back and evaluate rationally.

Heh heh. I guess that is all you can say because it is so far outside your experience.

It really is that good. Don't take my word for it, though. Ask Harry Weisfeld. Ask Bob Carver. Ask Luke Manley. Ask Carl Marchisotto. Ask Tony Hawkins. Ask Arnie Nudell. Ask Jud Barber. Ask Ole Lund Christensen. The list goes on...

rw

[mtrycraft]

I remembered an old Floyd Toole paper, "Direction and Space, The Final Frontiers".

He specifically states...

quote 1(reference to 30's Bell Labs Research):

"Bell Labs scientists concluded that a great many channels would benecessary to capture and reproduce the directional and spatial complexities of a musicaloundstage – not even attempting to recreate a surrounding sense of envelopment. Being practical, they investigated the possibilities of simplification, and concluded that, while two channels could yield acceptable results for a solitary listener, three channels (left,center and right) would be a desirable minimum to establish the illusion of a stable frontsoundstage for a group of listeners."

quote 2(reference to what is presumably his personal experience):

"In fairness it must be said that, after over forty years of experimentation, the best two-channel stereo recordings reproduced over the right set of loudspeakers in the rightroom can be very satisfying indeed. Sadly, only a fraction of our listening experiencesfall into that category. Clearly stereo does not get us to our long-term objective."

It seems to me, that this paper does not nescarrily dismiss the possibility of stereo sounding realistic. However, it does clearly demonstrate that stereo is inadequate for reliable and versatile(more then very limited one seated position) use in realistic reproduction. Though, Toole does not specify what he means by "very satisfying indeed". I am assuming he is referring to goal of realistic reproduction, since this is the topic of the paper. Perhaps someone shoule email him for further explanation?

-Chris

Satisfying is not necessarily realistic. And that is all he stated, satisfying.
You need to listen to Tomlinson Holmans 10.2 and see iwhish is more realistic. No, Toole didn't support you and confirmed the earlier study.

[mtrycraft]

Heh heh. I guess that is all you can say because it is so far outside your experience.

It really is that good. Don't take my word for it, though. Ask Harry Weisfeld. Ask Bob Carver. Ask Luke Manley. Ask Carl Marchisotto. Ask Tony Hawkins. Ask Arnie Nudell. Ask Jud Barber. Ask Ole Lund Christensen. The list goes on...

rw

My experience is irrelevant. Your posts have told us about your gullibility. You have graduated.
I suppose all those peole are not biased either, of course.

[E-Stat]

My experience is irrelevant.

And how. As is you ability to perceive anything that I discussed.

I suppose all those peole are not biased either, of course.

Biased peole? What's a peole?

You have no comprehension of what dozens of industry leaders think of Harry's system. But then you acknowledged that in your first statement.

rw

[hifitommy]

you havent the slightest idea how much a good stereo can do. and no sense in telling you AGAIN.

[WmAx]

Satisfying is not necessarily realistic. And that is all he stated, satisfying.
You need to listen to Tomlinson Holmans 10.2 and see iwhish is more realistic. No, Toole didn't support you and confirmed the earlier study.

As I stated, someone should actually ask Toole what he meant in his statement. His statement is interesting, simply becuase what does he consider satisfying? Not being realistic satisfied him? I dont know; but the subject of the paper was realism. He was not clear as to his opinion here.

On another note, I can tell you that it does not matter how realistic Tomilson Holman's 10.2 system may be; under certain circumstances, with a certain stereo and with specific recordings, stereo does sound realistic too me, compared to live acoustic events as my memory remembered them. Is the 10.2 system going to sound more real then the isolated circumstances/variables when a stereo has sounded realistic too me? How? Is the 10.2 going to sound more realistic then live performances? Remember, it is my perception at subject here. My perception was that stereo unde special conditions sounded realistic. Simple. I could be under the influence of bias, etc.. But like my earlier post stated, if such factors can cause such a perceptual effect, then what is the problem? I'm sure a proper multi channel recordig/playback process will produce realistic effects that are reliable(unlike stereo) and can be geared towards mutliple listeners and over broader seating ranges, unliike stereo.

-Chris

[WmAx]

And how. As is you ability to perceive anything that I discussed.


Biased peole? What's a peole?

You have no comprehension of what dozens of industry leaders think of Harry's system. But then you acknowledged that in your first statement.

rw

E-Stat, did you take any pictures of the stereo during your visit? Can I find any images of this setup somewhere online? I just like to see pics of something when it is discussed in length. :-)

Thanks.

-Chris

[E-Stat]

E-Stat, did you take any pictures of the stereo during your visit?

Here's one of the equipment rack.



I went to the ASO last night with Cooledge (incredible performance of Messiaen's Turangalila) and he said he has been talking with Harry Weisfeld about this VPI hybrid. Evidently, Weisfeld is going to fabricate a new base for the Scoutmaster to better mate with the TNT motor assembly.


rw

[hifitommy]

arcici racks? they look a bit nicer than my costco GORILLA racks.

[WmAx]

Thank you E-Stat. But where are the photos of the speakers and listening chair? :-)

-Chris

Here's one of the equipment rack.



I went to the ASO last night with Cooledge (incredible performance of Messiaen's Turangalila) and he said he has been talking with Harry Weisfeld about this VPI hybrid. Evidently, Weisfeld is going to fabricate a new base for the Scoutmaster to better mate with the TNT motor assembly.


rw