Harmonihyllan

Hardware and software, modifications and DIY

Moderator: Staff

User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6523
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

No, I don't find it particularly sensitive to adjustments.

It does require a fair bit of time when initially screwing all the pieces together. It should then sit level on the floor and with equal pressure on all four spikes. I find this is easiest done with Skeets underneath the spikes, which can be rotated by hand to evaluate the pressure against the floor. Then, if the floor owners allows it, the Skeets can be removed for a slightly improved performance.

The only thing you have to do after the initial installation is to tighten the columns at ever increasing intervals; after one week, after one month, after six months, each year. This is very simple and done by hand, from the bottom and up.
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

If that audio rack is ever distributed in the United States, I'll be sure to check it out :!: Apparently there could be a possibility Thomas will (eventually) carry that audio rack in his shop 8) .
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

lejonklou wrote:No, I don't find it particularly sensitive to adjustments.

It does require a fair bit of time when initially screwing all the pieces together. It should then sit level on the floor and with equal pressure on all four spikes. I find this is easiest done with Skeets underneath the spikes, which can be rotated by hand to evaluate the pressure against the floor. Then, if the floor owners allows it, the Skeets can be removed for a slightly improved performance.

The only thing you have to do after the initial installation is to tighten the columns at ever increasing intervals; after one week, after one month, after six months, each year. This is very simple and done by hand, from the bottom and up.
By the way, thanks for the explanation Lejonklou :!: I appreciate your experience with these matters :!:
Tony Tune-age
Linnofil
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 343
Joined: 2007-02-05 22:22
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Post by Linnofil »

anthony wrote:Many thanks Linnofil for your kind offer, I will investigate flights!
Charlie1 wrote:Yes, thank you Linnofil for your kind offer.
Just let me know in advance! No urgent calls from Gothenburg City Airport... :D That will also leave me some time to inform the shop owner (rack designer) at Tonlaget that VIP customers are arriving!
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Linnofil wrote:Just let me know in advance! No urgent calls from Gothenburg City Airport... :D That will also leave me some time to inform the shop owner (rack designer) at Tonlaget that VIP customers are arriving!
Sorry for any misunderstanding - I'm afraid I won't be able to visit in the near future. Wouldn't be very fair on my wife and no overseas holiday this year, but I wanted to thank you for the offer.
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Nice to read your findings about harmonihyllan. I have heard it myself and know it's really good.

Have you done more tests with the bottom shelf? How bad is it? Is the difference less with Tor?
Is it very critical were on the shelf the equipment is placed? I have a LK size CDP (32cm) and a HiCap which are 21cm width, Is it crazy to put these on the same shelf you think? I don't care much for the CDP but the HiCap is powering my preamp.

Have you tried more than 4 shelves rack? Is the performance the same if you have a 5 or 6 shelf rack?
I would need 6 shelves and that is a dilemma, as a 6 shelf rack maybe isn't as good as the standard 4 shelf rack. And two 3 shelf racks has 2 bottom shelves. :(

Anders told me that 5 shelf rack is quite common and probably as good as the standard 4 (which he uses), but he were more doubtful about a 6 shelf rack. He also told me that the difference between the bottom shelf and the others are less with Tor than with Oden. He said that the difference with Oden are quite big. Ofcourse I trust Anders but it would be interesting to hear about others, maybe more specific findings.
the players of instruments shall be there..
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6523
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Efraim roots wrote:Have you done more tests with the bottom shelf? How bad is it? Is the difference less with Tor?
The bottom shelf is worse than all the shelves above it. I used to have Oden at the bottom and now have Tor, so I have made some comparisons. This is what I've found:

Oden as bottom shelf is worse than Oden higher up.
Tor as bottom shelf is worse than Tor higher up.
Tor as bottom shelf is better than Oden higher up.

My impression is that the entire rack becomes more stable with Tor as bottom shelf, so I recommend that option. The resulting bottom shelf is between Oden and Tor in performance.
Is it very critical where on the shelf the equipment is placed? I have a LK size CDP (32cm) and a HiCap which are 21cm width, Is it crazy to put these on the same shelf you think?
These things will vary with what kind of enclosure it is and how it's placed. I can definitely hear a difference when I move Lejonklou electronics around on the shelves.
Have you tried more than 4 shelves rack? Is the performance the same if you have a 5 or 6 shelf rack?
No, I haven't, but I've discussed it with the constructor. And these are the facts:

All tuning and optimisation is done on 4 shelf racks.
Adding a 5th level is fine but not quite as good. A top Mimer shelf on a 5 level rack performs a tiny bit worse than the top Mimer shelf on a 4 level rack.
Adding a 6th level brings a bit more degradation. It will still sound great, but not as good as a 4 shelf Harmonihyllan.
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

lejonklou wrote:The bottom shelf is worse than all the shelves above it. I used to have Oden at the bottom and now have Tor, so I have made some comparisons. This is what I've found:

Oden as bottom shelf is worse than Oden higher up.
Tor as bottom shelf is worse than Tor higher up.
Tor as bottom shelf is better than Oden higher up.
That's useful information Lejonklou, thanks. I won't need more than four shelves, and may only need three shelves.
Tony Tune-age
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

lejonklou wrote:No, I haven't, but I've discussed it with the constructor. And these are the facts:

All tuning and optimisation is done on 4 shelf racks.
Adding a 5th level is fine but not quite as good. A top Mimer shelf on a 5 level rack performs a tiny bit worse than the top Mimer shelf on a 4 level rack.
Adding a 6th level brings a bit more degradation. It will still sound great, but not as good as a 4 shelf Harmonihyllan.
Is there (or plans for) less than 4 shelves - perhaps a shorter unit? I'm thinking of the LP12 specifically and it's preference for a lightweight table. Maybe a Mimer table with just two shelves? One shelf :D
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6523
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Harmonihyllan doesn't sound any better with less than 4 shelves. You can order one with less, but it won't sound better.

There is a misunderstanding regarding the LP12's "preference for a lightweight table". This is a very old statement from long before the Trampolin and a general rule for what type of furniture works best. When it comes to specific audio furniture, it doesn't necessarily hold true.

I've compared LP12 on IKEA Lack (truly a lightweight table), Quadraspire Q4 (much heavier) and Harmonihyllan (the heaviest) and their performance rank in just that order. LP12 on Mimer is fantastic!
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Thanks Fredrik - I didn't realise. Probably reading too much into the design of older tables such as AudioTech and Archadee (can never remember the proper spelling!) which are still highly rated in tune dem. As ever - things are not so simple. Cheers.
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

lejonklou wrote:Harmonihyllan doesn't sound any better with less than 4 shelves. You can order one with less, but it won't sound better.
However, if only three shelves are needed - it would be less expensive than four shelves... 8)
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
Linntek
Active member
Active member
Posts: 140
Joined: 2007-12-15 11:42
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Post by Linntek »

Since shelves etc. apparently have impact on the SQ I can't help wonder what Vibrapod's and things like that could do. Does anyone tried anything - I recall someone used trambolin feet under power amps.

Edit: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/vibrapodse.html
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

Linntek wrote:Since shelves etc. apparently have impact on the SQ I can't help wonder what Vibrapod's and things like that could do. Does anyone tried anything - I recall someone used trambolin feet under power amps.

Edit: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/vibrapodse.html
Actually, I have experimented with both the Vibrapods and Vibracones over an extended period of time, with very interesting reults. I started with the Vibrapods under the four feet of each component (as suggested by the comany), then tried using only three in the traditional format. And using just three, (one in front and two near the back) worked better than using four under the feet.

The same experiment was conducted with the Vibracones. Again, using three sounded better than using four. However, using both Vibrapods and Vibracones together sounded better than either product individually.

The turntable power supply did not sound very good with any combination of these products, no matter how they were arranged. However, the preamplifier, phono preamplifier and FM tuner did improve sonically. The improvements weren't as significant as a well designed audio rack, but did have some similar sonic traits.

As it turns out, not all audio components sounded better using the Vibrapods and Vibracones. In the end, it will depend on the listener if audio components using these devices sound better or just different. Vibrapods and Vibracones are extremely inexpensive products and are very easy to use.

In addition, I have experimented with similar but more expensive products. None of the more expensive products were that much better sounding, if at all. And not all audio components sounded better using these expensive products either.

For me, a great sounding audio rack - although more expensive is a sure way to make my audio components perform closer to their designed capability 8) .
Last edited by Tony Tune-age on 2010-05-04 20:10, edited 1 time in total.
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6523
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Tony Tune-age wrote:However, if only three shelves are needed - it would be less expensive than four shelves... 8)
Yes, certainly! But it will also become rather low in height, something I personally don't like when using a turntable. In addition, Anders says that most probably it sounds little better with 4 shelves than with 2 or 3.

Linntek: Isolation feet have never worked for me. Not under the LP12 and not under any electronics. I think a main problem is that it simply becomes unstable.

But if you do try them, please report!
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

lejonklou wrote:
Tony Tune-age wrote:However, if only three shelves are needed - it would be less expensive than four shelves... 8)
Yes, certainly! But it will also become rather low in height, something I personally don't like when using a turntable. In addition, Anders says that most probably it sounds little better with 4 shelves than with 2 or 3.
Currently, my Sondek is on an independent turntable stand and the remaining components are on an audio rack. So, using either three or four shelves might not be much of an issue for my system. However, if the Sondek would sound better on a Mimer audio rack...I could use four or maybe five shelves... 8) .
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

Linntek wrote:Since shelves etc. apparently have impact on the SQ I can't help wonder what Vibrapod's and things like that could do. Does anyone tried anything - I recall someone used trambolin feet under power amps.

Edit: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/vibrapodse.html
Forgot to mention previously, I've never tried using the Vibrapods or Vibracones under the Sondek LP12 turntable. Since the Linn Trampolin (all three versions) already have adjustable rubber feet, I didn't bother experimenting with those type of products under the turntable.
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

After some delays due to getting a quality black finish on the metal parts, I received my Harmoni Mimer/Tor rack the last week of July. Since I went away on vacation the first week of August I really didn’t have time to listen to it much until recently. A couple of brief A/Bs before I left and then it sat there a couple of weeks before I could get back to it. But having had a bit more time to listen over the last week I thought I’d give my first impressions.

First off, the rack as I have built it so far consists of four Mimer shelves with Birch wooden bottom and damping shelves and the metal shelves and uprights in anodized black as (photos to follow). There is an additional Tor shelf that is currently unassembled but will end up on the bottom. I haven’t installed it so far as I want to do some other tests first. As I have time I will install the Tor as a top shelf so I can compare it to the sound of the Mimer shelves. I will also install it as an Oden top shelf so I can get a feel for how that sounds as well.

As my system is currently configured I have my fully-loaded LP12 on an Archidee stand with the Harmony rack housing, from top to bottom, KK/1/D, Radikal, Majik DS/D and an Alesis MasterLink CD/HD recorder. For the moment my Pekin rests on my old Quadraspire Midi rack which is destined to go away once the setup is finalized.

So on to the listening tests. On my first, brief A/B tests I immediately felt that the LP12 sounded noticeably better with the Radikal on the Mimer shelf than it had with it on a single QS midi shelf on spikes and Skeets (on the floor below the LP12). Before someone brings up the comment that the Radikal is said to sound worse underneath the LP12 I should mention that I put the Radikal out in front of the LP12/Archidee before making these comparisons. (I also did a very quick A/B between in front of the Archidee and beneath it and found that the difference it made was quite small – worth doing but small. I believe this is due to the LP12 being over 18” above the Radikal in this setup – with a normal rack placing the Radikal right below the LP12 the difference could well be greater.) I also found that the KK sounded more musical on the top Mimer than on the top QS shelf but the difference was not as big as with the Radikal – no surprise as Fredrik and others have reported this.

This week I took the time to do a few more comparisons and listen more closely to what the actual improvements were. For this comparison I moved my old QS Midi rack in front of the Mimer to make it easier to shift the components. Both the QS and Mimer racks were on spikes sitting in Skeets on a hardwood floor. The QS rack had a top shelf of glass that was isolated from the rest of the rack by a second set of spikes. This is what I found was the most musical setup in my system when the KK was on the top of the QS rack. I tried the KK on both glass and wood QS shelves and both coupled and decoupled. The decoupling made a definite musical improvement and the glass was slightly better than the wood although they were quite close (this flies in the face of the feeling from Quadraspire that wood shelves are better). The rest of the QS rack is wood shelves – I have never tried the glass anywhere but on the top. I have also not tried wood vs. glass with the Radikal but I did find that my old Ikemi also sounded better on the top glass shelf than a top wood one. So the comparisons were between the top glass shelf on the QS Midi and either the top (KK) or one below the top (Radikal) on the Mimer rack. The QS rack also had my Pekin on it (although it was unplugged) and some other stuff so both racks did have equipment on them. Finally, I did tighten up the Mimer rack just before doing these comparisons (the QS was already tight). While only a few of the Mimer posts were able to be tightened up, and those only a little bit, I did notice a slight improvement in the sound from a quick before and after – somewhat like going from just very slightly out of focus to in focus.

My first comparisons were with the KK using a piece of jazz music that I had heard once or twice before but am not really familiar with by Thelonious Monk. It is a live cut that starts with some clapping and a piano intro with drums, bass and sax joining in after a few bars. On moving the KK from the Mimer to the QS I noticed immediately, even on the clapping, that I had lost something but I wasn’t sure exactly what right away. Going back to the Mimer brought the music back and made the differences more obvious. A couple more A/Bs confirmed what was going on. The biggest problem I found with the QS was with the timing or flow of the music. On the piece I was listening to the piano intro has some ingenious and subtle changes in timing where Monk will drag out the melody just a touch on one phrase and speed up the next phrase slightly. He does this subtle playing around with the timing throughout the piano intro to quite stunning effect. I was amazed to find that on the QS Midi those subtle timing changes were just gone! Even when I was listening specifically for them they just weren’t there on the QS. Move the KK back on the Mimer and they were back. Not only were they back but they were very enjoyable, making you want to tap your feet and move to the music. In other words they were an integral part of what Monk was doing and made you aware of what a wonderful musician he was yet these timing changes were just gone on the QS. There were other differences in the ability to hear what the sax, bass and drums were doing and some strange “phasey” quality to some of the cymbals that was there on the QS but not on the Mimer, but the big difference with the KK was in how much of the flow of the music was just missing on the QS compared to the Mimer.

Having done that comparison on the KK I went on to compare the Radikal on both racks. Having heard the differences I had with the KK I was, of course, listening intently to the timing as I did the comparison. I was surprised when I moved the Radikal to the QS that I did not have the total loss of timing I had experienced with the KK. The timing definitely wasn’t as good but I could still hear it. On the Radikal/QS it was apparent that Monk was making subtle changes in the timing but they sounded sloppy. You could get an idea of what he was trying to do it just sounded like he wasn’t very good at it. Going back to the Mimer he was once again that superb musician who was a joy to listen to. But once I got past the timing I noticed other things I felt were at least as important. With the Radikal on the QS there were a number of high notes on the piano that just sounded nasty. They were bright and harsh like the high notes on the piano weren’t tuned properly or the microphone was overloading, or both. On the Mimer the Radikal allowed the system to play those notes in a fully enjoyable fashion. There was certainly a lot of energy in the notes but it sounded natural and in keeping with the rest of the playing and the system was handling it with ease. Back on the QS with the Radikal and the high piano notes would make me cringe, it sounded much like stylus mistracking. As the other instruments came in the improvement of the Mimer was confirmed, cymbals han their natural bite and sheen but not the unnatural brightness on some strokes of the QS, the sax sounded like it was being much better played and had a more natural sense of body and the bass line came through more clearly with more body and a sense of timing that fit better with what the others were doing.

So in sum the Mimer definitely made worthwhile improvements in the ability of the KK and Radikal to convey the musical intent of the performers. The KK didn’t have as big an improvement but it still went from uninvolving on the QS to fully moving on the Mimer. The Radikal, which had a noticeably bigger improvement when placed on the Mimer rack, went from being highly enjoyable on the Mimer to almost unlistenable, and certainly not very enjoyable, on the QS. These types of differences are what I first heard, but hadn’t listened enough to quantify, when I did my earlier comparisons a few weeks back using music from Jack Johnson and Steely Dan. Based on my listening so far I would definitely have to say that a Mimer shelf is certainly worthwhile for both the KK and the Radikal. While I wouldn’t say that the improvement on the KK was as big as the audio board or Dynamik upgrades it was still certainly worthwhile and, once heard, hard to live without. On the Dynamik there is no question of the worth of the improvement. There is a vastly bigger improvement in the musical quality and the sound of the reproduction afforded by the Mimer compared to the QS than the very small improvement I heard from the Radikal in Klimax metalwork. Considering the price difference between the two Radikals is far more than the cost of a Mimer shelf there is no question where the upgrade should be.

I have to say that as I was putting the parts of the rack together I was wondering how this assemblage of parts could really make a superior sounding rack. Having now had some time to listen to the results I have to say that my hat is off to Anders. He has, through much obvious work and careful listening, come up with a shelving system that really delivers the musical goods. Once put together I (and equally importantly SWMBO) find the Mimer rack to be quite attractive as well. (I will post some photos when I have a chance.)

I almost forgot about the LP12. While I didn’t compare the LP12 on the Mimer vs. the Archidee in the latest listening sessions, I did do a couple of A/Bs with Debbie before my vacation. I suppose the fact that the LP12 is still on the Archidee is probably telling enough, but I must say that the LP12 on the Mimer did sound quite good. I was actually surprised at how good it sounded considering how heavy the Mimer rack is. Debbie and I both felt that the Archidee sounded more musical and allowed us to hear what the musicians were doing a bit better. But we both felt that the Mimer also sounded quite good yet somehow a with a different presentation. We both also felt that the Mimer would certainly be a worthwhile place to put your LP12 if you didn’t have something as good as the Archidee and that a lesser LP12 stand probably wouldn’t be as good as the Mimer. As I said at the beginning these are only my initial findings. Over the coming weeks (months?) I plan to compare the Mimer to other turntable stands to see just where it ranks (since Fredrik has found the QS wall shelf inferior to the Mimer, which makes sense to me, it remains to find out whether the Mimer will outperform the AudioTech and QS floor stands). I also plan on doing other comparisons with different racks and, as mentioned, with the Odin and Tor shelves, as well as with other components (like the Majik DS which I haven’t done any comparisons with yet). So additional reports will follow. But regardless of the additional tests I am quite pleased and find this one really great piece of Hi-Fi furniture.
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

I should also mention that I have been authorized by Harmonihyllan to sell the Harmoni products in the US. Obviously those reading my appraisal may wish to figure in any bias they feel I might have towards I product I will be selling.

I am able to accept orders for Harmoni racks and obviously feel they are worthwhile products. There is a fair bit of information about the Harmoni products on my website www.nokturneaudio.com

While I am selling these racks and plan to offer them through interested dealers, I do not yet have a price list together as there are some things still to be worked out so anyone interested in getting one should contact me directly. You can PM me here or send me an email at info@nokturneaudio.com

Once all the fine points are worked out I will make additional information available on the website.
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

Here is a photo of the black Mimer rack as it is currently assembled. A Tor shelf will be added to the bottom once I'm finished with more listening tests.

Image
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

ThomasOK wrote:Here is a photo of the black Mimer rack as it is currently assembled. A Tor shelf will be added to the bottom once I'm finished with more listening tests.

Image
Wow, that is a very nice audio rack indeed :!:
Tony Tune-age
matthias
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 2007-12-25 16:47
Location: Germany

Post by matthias »

ThomasOK wrote: I almost forgot about the LP12. While I didn’t compare the LP12 on the Mimer vs. the Archidee in the latest listening sessions, I suppose the fact that the LP12 is still on the Archidee is probably telling enough, but I must say that the LP12 on the Mimer did sound quite good. Debbie and I both felt that the Archidee sounded more musical and allowed us to hear what the musicians were doing a bit better. We both also felt that the Mimer would certainly be a worthwhile place to put your LP12 if you didn’t have something as good as the Archidee and that a lesser LP12 stand probably wouldn’t be as good as the Mimer.
Thomas,

what about a "rebuilt" of the Archidee. It would surely be a success and you would do a favor for all the LP12 owners around the world....

matthias
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

matthias wrote:
ThomasOK wrote: I almost forgot about the LP12. While I didn’t compare the LP12 on the Mimer vs. the Archidee in the latest listening sessions, I suppose the fact that the LP12 is still on the Archidee is probably telling enough, but I must say that the LP12 on the Mimer did sound quite good. Debbie and I both felt that the Archidee sounded more musical and allowed us to hear what the musicians were doing a bit better. We both also felt that the Mimer would certainly be a worthwhile place to put your LP12 if you didn’t have something as good as the Archidee and that a lesser LP12 stand probably wouldn’t be as good as the Mimer.
Thomas,

what about a "rebuilt" of the Archidee. It would surely be a success and you would do a favor for all the LP12 owners around the world....

matthias
I have actually thought about this for some time. Right now it is not possible as my funds are tied up in making a go of distributing Lejonklou and Harmoni products in the US (with the possibility of the RubiKon later this year as well). Assuming things go well with these lines I will likely investigate what is involved in building something similar to the Archidee.
User avatar
Tony Tune-age
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1579
Joined: 2009-12-19 19:07
Location: United States

Post by Tony Tune-age »

ThomasOK wrote:
matthias wrote:
ThomasOK wrote: I almost forgot about the LP12. While I didn’t compare the LP12 on the Mimer vs. the Archidee in the latest listening sessions, I suppose the fact that the LP12 is still on the Archidee is probably telling enough, but I must say that the LP12 on the Mimer did sound quite good. Debbie and I both felt that the Archidee sounded more musical and allowed us to hear what the musicians were doing a bit better. We both also felt that the Mimer would certainly be a worthwhile place to put your LP12 if you didn’t have something as good as the Archidee and that a lesser LP12 stand probably wouldn’t be as good as the Mimer.
Thomas,

what about a "rebuilt" of the Archidee. It would surely be a success and you would do a favor for all the LP12 owners around the world....

matthias
I have actually thought about this for some time. Right now it is not possible as my funds are tied up in making a go of distributing Lejonklou and Harmoni products in the US (with the possibility of the RubiKon later this year as well). Assuming things go well with these lines I will likely investigate what is involved in building something similar to the Archidee.
I'd be interested in such a product, when the time comes of course 8) .
Tony Tune-age
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

A small followup to the above report. Before heading out of town for the holiday weekend I was able to do a couple more comparisons. The setup was as above except that I swapped out the Q4 Midi glass top shelf for a standard wood one. What I found didn't change my preferences but it was interesting.

For the most part the musical descriptions of the differences I heard above still held but with some small differences. The KK still couldn't time to save its life on the Q4 but in addition the wood shelf added a little deadness to the sound making it even a bit harder to follow the tune. This reinforced my previous findings that the KK was more musical on the glass than on the wood shelf. But with the Radikal the reverse was true - it was obvious that the Radikal preferred the wood Q4 shelf to the glass shelf. There were still most of the musical problems I noted above: the sloppiness of the time and all the instruments sounded as if they were being played less well with a diminished natural flow and presence. But the nastiness of the high piano notes and the cymbals was dulled down by the wood shelf removing the overt nastiness I heard with the glass shelf.

In summation there were differences between the wood and glass Q4 shelves presentation with different components preferring one over the other, but whichever material you used on the Q4 Midi the Mimer remained musically superior with essentially the same level of improvement (substantial) compared to the Quadraspire.
Post Reply