.

.

Goose, it's called Pink Triangle because the company owner and designer is gay and wanted his brand to reflect this. Being straight and slightly naive, I didn't have a clue what Pink Triangle meant for ages after I bought the deck. Some bigoted, narrow minded dealers wouldn't stock his products because of this which was an awful shame because the sound quality is second to absolutely none, the build is exemplary and the looks are drop dead - the glass top plate is wonderful. Mine is light ash and looks better than the one in Oliver's post.

And Oliver, the Roksan Xerxes is another excellent deck - far above a Linn Sondek IMHO.

Tony Fisher

[QUOTE=oliverstoned]Actually, Pink triangle is very good, and is Linn's concurrent.
The Anniversary SE model is very good.

There is no SE version of the Pink Triangle 'Anniversary'!

Regarding Linn 'Sondek'.Pink Triangle brought out a upgrade kit for the Linn called the ''P-LINK''(PINK LINK)...
Which included a repacement top plate with new DC motor mounted at 7 o'clock position instead of the usual 10 o'clock.....Also PT ouboard power supply....In short too the piss out of the Linn.Ivor Tiffenburn (LINN MD) tried taking PT to court but did'nt work.

There was certainly no love lost between Ivor Tiefenbrun and Arthur Khoubesserian of Pink Triangle! I never heard the Pink Link but I bet it drove Ivor mad. I suspect it was done partly as a piss take and partly to demonstrate the fairly obvious deficiencies of the LP12.

Linn wouldn't allow any dealer who sold their products to stock PT's stuff as well under pain of losing the Linn franchise. Were they scared of direct comparison?

I am one of very few who have heard a direct comparison since I inherited a Linn LP12 from my father and I bought a PT Anniversary for myself. The PT was MILES better - and I mean MILES!!! Switching from the Linn to the PT was like removing a curtain from in front of the speakers. Yet still the LInn gets rave reviews - God knows how. I wonder if the reviewers have actually listened to it.

Tony

Oliver, I had the Linn set up by the Sound Organisation in York - one of the top Linn dealers. If they can't make it sound right, it won't ever sound right. It didn't, even on their choice of support. The support was not the problem, it was the deck. The guy who did the demo (who has since left their employment) now admits that, although he pushed and praised the LP12 at the time, he didn't actually like the deck!

The PT had identical support and sounded SO superior.

Tony

oliverstoned wrote: Yes, but that's not the same suspension system. Anyway, that's not for nothing that Linn LP12 is a legend. It's very musical, maybe little less neutral than PT, but VERY musical.

Oliver:

It is not a legend.The legendary status was brought on by Dealership & audio press through the years,as Tony pointed out the Ex-Linn salesman has admitted there were not good,i too have heard this from ex-linn trained dealers from Morrgate Acoustics & Audio centre in Sheffield,UK.,it goes like this:Ivor Tiffenburn was an excellent buisness man in respect that he had the ability to grasp the market & dealership in such a way as to sell his deck to every Tom,Dick & harry.Linn products themselves are total rubbish & extremely overated.During the 80's we had a boom in the UK in audio circles called the Cottage industry where many a company appeared with their offering & many of those offering were far better sounding than the Linn,but it was the the influence that killed them & that only.Before the cottage boom there was'nt very much in the way of good turntables in the '70's hence the perfect time for Linn to introduce the 'Sondek'...But can i just point out that The initial design was copied from the Thorens 'TD150' by Hamish Roberton who approached  Castle precision engineering to manufacture components for the  Ariston 'RD11',to cut a long story short there was a lot of falling out & stealing of design approach,Castle though manufactured the shall we say stolen designed components  for the early Linn before manufacturing them,themselves at Floors road,Glasgow later on.BTW:I have an extensivly modified Thorens 'TD150',one of many decks & it floors the Linn hands down,which is not hard.

LINN WERE A CON.THE 'LP12' WAS A CARBON COPY OF THE ARISTON 'RD11'

Believe it.

A THORENS 'TD150' IN NEW SURROUND' (STUDY) Introduced in 1960's

ARISTON 'RD11' BEING STRIPPED FOR RE-BUILD

LINN 'SONDECK'LP12...THE INFERIOR COPY.

Yeah Barbarian, totally correct.

Before the LP12 there was really only the Garrard 401 idler drive, Audio Technica and Technics direct drives, the Pioneer PL12D (my first deck - cheap but real hi-fi), the Sugden and some ancient Thorens decks. None sounded great. Compared to them, the LP12 did sound good because it had the basic formula of spring suspension and belt drive. However, you can do some amazing things with Thorens decks if you have the engineering skills and they can be vastly improved. A guy in my hall of residence upgraded his Garrard 401 to an LP12 with SME 3009 arm and Shure V15 and I remember thinking that I had to have one because it urinated on my PL12D from a great height

The next real rivals were the Systemdek and the JBE slate (anyone remember that?), a deck whose only real fault was that it was direct drive, not belt. The JBE was the first deck to use heavy, non-resonant materials and was innovative though not as good sounding as the Systemdek, which I bought in 1983(?) after comparing it to an LP12 (the dealer made me!). I still have my Systemdek and it still sounds very good with a Mission 774 arm.

Then came a plethora of nearly great decks - the RD11 being one.

Then, in the 90s came the real super decks, all of which eat the Linn for breakfast. The Wilson Benesch is awesome, the SME 10 wonderful, the Nottingham Analogue Hyperspace and Annalog brilliant and the Roksan Xerxes excellent. Some (the Voyd, the Source and the top SME) I ain't had the pleasure of hearing.

The Mitchell and Oracle decks are also worth a look and have real merit (especially lookswise).

But I chose the PT Anniversary because it suits my taste. That doesn't mean it will suit everyone's but I've had no complaints yet. You pays your money...........!

Tony:

I remember the JBE Slate turntable,it was not a good sounding deck at all & that strange alloy patterned platter looked the pants,Slate or marble even Granite is not a good idea for turntable construction,well most i've heard:JBE,Michell 'Marble ref' etc sound poor.

http://members.lycos.co.uk/vinylengine/index.htm">

JBE

http://www.michell-engineering.co.uk/g/michell_electronic8.jpg">

From a theory point of view, the use of rigid, heavy material like slate isn't a bad idea as it takes resonances above the audible range. However, the idea was probably spoiled by using direct drive on the JBE which is a joke for top end turntables. I haven't heard the Michell marble but I'll take your word for its deficiencies. The poor sound may not be due to the marble (or slate), though; there's plenty of other factors which could turn a good idea into "pants" sound.

Tony

oliverstoned wrote: Actually , the Linn is inspired by the Acoustic research AR, like the others deck you quoted. The pb with Linn is that it's very delicate: -It doesn't work with all arms and cartridges: the paradox is that it will not work with an excellent SME V for example. -It can be put out of order VERY easily, even if you handle it with great care, and it will not work at all!

The Linn was'nt inspired by the AR-XA or anything.I've explained that the Linn was a copy not an inspiration.

The problem with Linn is it's crap.I don't know what you mean about delicate...The whole reason for a suspended sub chassis is to isolate the ARM/Bearing from outside vibrations,with the motor being mounted on the top plate isolated from that too,but you still go on about isolating the deck etc...Oliver it's all old hat & very out of date boring deck.The Thorens 'TD150' is exactly the same principle as the Linn but not have no overblown crap theories about setting one of those up.Don't you see it's all part of the old Linn marketing sh*t.By the way your not suppose to touch a Linn not mix any other companies arm,a dealer is suppose to do a regular set up service by Linn law,Did'nt you know about that?Yes it is bollox as is the deck.Get real olly

You'll be a good one if you can fit a SME on a latish Linn as it's impossible without choppingaway the corner brace at the back of the armboard as it fouls a SME mounted.

Oliver my friend i'm no longer playing tennis with your silly mumbo jumbo

oliverstoned wrote: I suppose you also consider Rega planar 3 as a crap among budget deck?

I consider a Rega a toy.The Engineering is absolutly appauling

oliverstoned wrote: A toy because of its simplicity? Only musicality matters, and its very musical.

About as musical as a box of bog rolls.

I bought this crap Frog micromega CD player today that sounds better than a Rega

Er, you're having a go at the wrong person, mate! I don't like Micromega CD players AT ALL! And Shangling? Never heard one.

When I said an SME V on a Rega "worked", it meant that there were no significant problems with the use of the arm. What it showed was that the SME did not sound appreciably better than the Rega RB300 on a Planar 3. Whilst accepting that the RB300 is an excellent BUDGET arm, on a revealing deck the SME V wipes the floor with it (and any other arm, for that matter). On the Planar 3, it didn't. This is because the Rega is somewhat coloured and not as transparent as top flight decks.

That doesn't mean it's crap. It means it's excellent at the price. But that price is cheapish.

And the Linn Karma "excellent"? Coloured as hell! Unrevealing! My old Ortofon F15 E was more transparent and my old Elite MCP 555 made it sound like a 50s gramophone (until my son pulled the stylus off). I owned a full Linn system, Oliver. I was relieved when I managed to sell it, too, because it performed way below what my father paid for it. He believed Linn's  (and the dealer's) hype and regretted it when he had owned it a few months.

You are obviously young, Oliver. Firstly, you resort to insults when people disagree with you. Secondly, you can't admit you're wrong on anything. And finally, I am beginning to question whether you've actually heard a lot of the stuff you talk about, because if you had, you wouldn't make such bombastic and misinformed comments about it.

What "info" did you get on the PT Anni to change your opinion?

Did you LISTEN to it? Cos that's the ONLY way to judge hi-fi!!!!

Tony