A Keel "Klone"

vicdiaz · Post by **vicdiaz** » 2009-07-24 00:53

Just found this!

http://www.greenstreetaudio.com/

Hope Ivor doesn't sue him!

Moomintroll · Post by **Moomintroll** » 2009-07-24 11:05

Interesting. I wondered how long it would take for something like this to appear. I'm of the opinion that this might not hurt Linn too much at all - I would have thought that the vast majority of people wanting a Keel had already bought a real one and anyone looking to upgrade an LP12 would go Radikal, first, rather than Keel. I'd heard that a large portion of the cost of a Keel was the finishing done by SME - this clearly won't be to that standard?

'troll

ThomasOK · Post by **ThomasOK** » 2009-07-24 17:11

Personally, I hope Ivor does sue him. Trying to make money of someone else's hard work by making a cheap knockoff of their design is unethical and lazy (some may feel that is The American Way, but I disagree).

Of course he can sell it for less, he has no R&D costs to cover as he just copied someone else's design, as he chose not to include the arm mounting collar he has reduced material costs by at least a third and also substantially reduces machining time and complexity, I'd be willing to bet he doesn't have SME's quality of finishing, and as stated he has cut the dealer and distributor profit out of it. (And no, we don't get Linn components or upgrades for half of retail.) He also saves himself the cost of the kind of quality packaging Linn uses and the manual, screwdrivers, ground wire and hardware included by Linn (I hope more machining is done than what is shown in the photo as I see no place for the ground wires to attach!). Considering all that it should be cheaper yet!

Of course, as far as the build goes it is cheaper. Close inspection of the photos shows that the three machined lands where the bearing attaches are missing which will mean poorer connection of the bearing to the subchassis. As has been mentioned the arm collar is also missing which will mean a poorer connection between the tonearm and the subchassis despite his claims of "virtually the same rigidity". Virtually the same is a fancy way of saying "not as good, but the proper way was more work than we wanted to do".

And by cutting out the dealer he has assured that the purchasers will either have to pay more to have it installed and setup properly in their LP12 or they will have the joy of doing it themselves and having an inferior setup. As a dealer we include the installation of the Keel in the price when we sell one. The customer gets a complete re-setup of the LP12 which would otherwise be at least three hours of labor charge. I can tell you that getting a proper setup with a Keel is no trivial matter (despite what he would have you believe). The Keel is much less forgiving of anything in the suspension not being perfect. It is a rare LP12 that doesn't need to have a spring or grommet or two changed out to get it to bounce properly. And EVERY LP12 I have put a Keel into has needed to have the suspension bolts straightened to get optimal suspension function. These setup steps are certainly beyond the ability of your typical LP12 owning music lover.

Overall this product brings to mind two sayings: "You get what you pay for." and "Caveat emptor."

Linntek · Post by **Linntek** » 2009-07-24 20:27

Just a question of time.
Please allow me to quote Mr. Lejonklou

"But Linn price their products after performance, not development or production costs (that's a direct quote from the MD). And this surely makes them more vulnerable to competition."

I'm sure there has been some developing cost but I think they are overrated. As for production cost I'm not sure they are that much more than the Cirkus sub and an armboard. I agree with you 100% that it is bad attitude just to copy other products (I fight that too in my company), but it is a real world we're living in.
I fact I think a reasonable price for the Keel would be around $875. If that was the case a Keel would be fitted to half the LP12's out there - including mine. For the Linn price the Keel won't have a chance.
To be honest - if the "copy" gets close to the Keel i could be tempted some day. And Linn would NOT loose a Keel costumer!!!
Could I be blamed for buying it ??
I'm not buying stuff just because there is a Linn logo on it, I buy it because i will get most music for my money, and I don't have one of those tree's in my garden.
Face it - with linn's pricing, this will happend.

I have always thought that the pressed steel sub and MDF board (and the three tiny screws) was a funny/weak construction (the Cirkus might indicate that), but I guess'ed they knew what they were doing. When the Keel came to life I wondered why it could take so long to figure that one out.

I'm getting warm now :-)
The production cost of the DS's does not at all have any relation with the sale price. In fact I believe the Sneaky DS is more expensive to make than the Majik DS - just speculating....

Now spank me !!

vicdiaz · Post by **vicdiaz** » 2009-07-25 02:35

ThomasOK wrote:Personally, I hope Ivor does sue him. Trying to make money of someone else's hard work by making a cheap knockoff of their design is unethical and lazy (some may feel that is The American Way, but I disagree).

Of course he can sell it for less, he has no R&D costs to cover as he just copied someone else's design, as he chose not to include the arm mounting collar he has reduced material costs by at least a third and also substantially reduces machining time and complexity, I'd be willing to bet he doesn't have SME's quality of finishing, and as stated he has cut the dealer and distributor profit out of it. (And no, we don't get Linn components or upgrades for half of retail.) He also saves himself the cost of the kind of quality packaging Linn uses and the manual, screwdrivers, ground wire and hardware included by Linn (I hope more machining is done than what is shown in the photo as I see no place for the ground wires to attach!). Considering all that it should be cheaper yet!

Of course, as far as the build goes it is cheaper. Close inspection of the photos shows that the three machined lands where the bearing attaches are missing which will mean poorer connection of the bearing to the subchassis. As has been mentioned the arm collar is also missing which will mean a poorer connection between the tonearm and the subchassis despite his claims of "virtually the same rigidity". Virtually the same is a fancy way of saying "not as good, but the proper way was more work than we wanted to do".

And by cutting out the dealer he has assured that the purchasers will either have to pay more to have it installed and setup properly in their LP12 or they will have the joy of doing it themselves and having an inferior setup. As a dealer we include the installation of the Keel in the price when we sell one. The customer gets a complete re-setup of the LP12 which would otherwise be at least three hours of labor charge. I can tell you that getting a proper setup with a Keel is no trivial matter (despite what he would have you believe). The Keel is much less forgiving of anything in the suspension not being perfect. It is a rare LP12 that doesn't need to have a spring or grommet or two changed out to get it to bounce properly. And EVERY LP12 I have put a Keel into has needed to have the suspension bolts straightened to get optimal suspension function. These setup steps are certainly beyond the ability of your typical LP12 owning music lover.

Overall this product brings to mind two sayings: "You get what you pay for." and "Caveat emptor."

Thomas:

Sorry for getting you pissed of by by comment regarding Ivor's sue. It was just a sacarstic way of saying 'the guy's looking for it". :mrgreen:

BTW, I'm not planning on spending a cent on it.

Charlie1 · Post by **Charlie1** » 2009-07-25 17:43

The only point I'd like to add is how I feel about my system having spent the money and the Keel in particular. I don't think I'll ever feel as positive or enthusiastic about the Keel as any other LP12 upgrade, incl the more expensive Ekos SE. I should clarify that the Keel would still be my top priority upgrade after the Radikal, but I'm talking about something else here - the way I feel about components.

I think we all have our own individual concept of value and it taints the way we feel towards our purchases. I've read quite a lot of positive, rational, well-reasoned comment on the Keel and it makes perfect sense, but no matter what I read, the Keel pricing always leaves a slight bitter aftertaste that just won't go away.

The Keel is the complete opposite to the Kikkin which I am now very fond of simply because of what it does for the amount I spent on it. I'm even more fond of it than my KK upgrade, even though I bought the KK 2nd hand for less than half the retail price.

Linntek wrote:When the Keel came to life I wondered why it could take so long to figure that one out.

Yes, I wonder that too. Maybe it's cos the LP12 took a back seat in terms of development for a long while and before then, when vinyl was still very popular, perhaps a Keel wasn't technically possible?

vicdiaz · Post by **vicdiaz** » 2009-07-25 20:29

Charlie1 wrote:
Linntek wrote:When the Keel came to life I wondered why it could take so long to figure that one out.
Yes, I wonder that too. Maybe it's cos the LP12 took a back seat in terms of development for a long while and before then, when vinyl was still very popular, perhaps a Keel wasn't technically possible?

Me too, since Castle Engineering facilities have been available prior to Linn ever existing and most of the LP12 machined parts (if not all) are machined there.

I'm sure it is not the first turntable that has a solid aluminum subchassis, so there must be a secret hidden somewhere... :twisted:

ThomasOK · Post by **ThomasOK** » 2009-07-28 19:49

Vic, YOU did not tick me off - knowing your style, I recognized your comment as tongue-in-cheek. The person who ticked me off is the guy who is making and selling them as he boldly claims to have just copied Linn's design (although, as I mentioned it is a less than perfect copy).

Nor were my comments meant to justify the pricing Linn have put on the Keel - that has already been pretty well hashed out on the threads dealing directly with the Keel. I just meant to show that, considering the crudity of the "clone", the non-existent R&D costs, the lack of accessories and the lack of dealer support, it is not surprising he could sell it at that price - to me it is still surprising that he can't sell it even cheaper.

I am indeed sympathetic to those who feel that the Keel is not the best value for money product Linn have made, at least in terms of apparent material costs if not in sonic performance. I honestly don't know how the Keel breaks down in terms of cost vs. profit for Linn and I doubt I ever will - if Linn were planning on showing us the breakdown to justify the cost we would likely have seen it by now. But considering what other companies charge for substantially musical inferior behemoths masquerading as turntables, I can't be too harsh on Linn. They are still giving us the most musical LP playback machine available at a fraction of the price a number of others charge for inferior reproduction.

To be honest, if I wanted to question Linn pricing I would more likely look at the Klimax DS vs. Akurate DS pricing rather than that of the Keel.

As to why it took so long to come up with the Keel in the first place, my best guess is that there were a few significant factors in why it came out so recently. First, there was the fiasco of the UdiDisk which was so buggy in the early days that Linn had to devote most of their time just fixing them. Second, the inability to continue production of the CD12 meant Linn had to design a replacement reference digital player. As we all know this resulted in the DS series which required substantial engineering resources to complete. Third, these two factors, especially the first one, also coincided with the slowing of turntable sales in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Those are the factors which I feel caused LP12 research to be put on the back burner. I believe the factors that brought it back to the front burner were basically the completion of the UniDisk and DS projects, the resurgence in popularity of vinyl records and turntables and the return of Ivor to the helm of the company with the refocusing on "core competencies".

Whether I am right or not on the reasons I am just glad it happened. The increase in the musical performance of my favorite source is just staggering since the advent of the Keel, Ekos SE, Trampolin2, Radikal and Urika.

Tony Tune-age · Post by **Tony Tune-age** » 2009-12-22 02:25

Not long after Linn came out with the Keel, I saw clones from other companies being offered. At that point, I started looking into the actual differences between the Keel and clones.

The clones don't have a built in tonearm collar, like the Keel. This will reduce the manufacturing cost to some extent. But it also means another part will have to be fitted to the armboard, besides the tonearm. So instead of having a seamless one piece system, it now has two parts which will need proper adjusting. As it turns out, there are other differences which might impact both cost and sound.

Ultimately, the Keel does improve the sonic performance of a Sondek, and I'm sure the clones can improve the sound also. It will be a matter of degree.

In my experience, the cost of audio components have always been hard to evaluate. But good stereo components do have high price tags, regardless of manufacturer.

In the end, I had the Linn Keel installed by a very good Sondek technician, and I'm happy with my choice. In fact, all of my LP12 upgrades are made by Linn.

I've researched several turntable companies, and many have products which cost more than a fully loaded Sondek. So, I can't complain too much about cost - no matter which route I take.

In the end, I would like to see more affordable high-end audio components. However, that may never happen...

Post by **lejonklou** » 2009-12-26 21:40

Tony Tune-age wrote:In the end, I would like to see more affordable high-end audio components. However, that may never happen...

I wouldn't count that out, Tony!

Tony Tune-age · Post by **Tony Tune-age** » 2010-02-22 18:45

Well, that would certainly be a welcomed change in the audio world 8) .

Linntek · Post by **Linntek** » 2010-02-22 19:19

http://www.audioflat.co.uk/

Tony Tune-age · Post by **Tony Tune-age** » 2010-02-22 20:33

Linntek, very interesting indeed. I haven't seen this product before.

Linntek · Post by **Linntek** » 2010-02-24 09:49

Just to recap what's out there (in random order)

Keel
Cirkus
Pre Cirkus
Greenstreet
Rubikon
Sole
Cetech
Charm (Funk Firm)

Charlie1 · Post by **Charlie1** » 2010-02-24 16:34

Linntek wrote:Charm (Funk Firm)

What an awful name - is it for a girls LP12?

Linntek · Post by **Linntek** » 2010-02-24 17:23

How about Cirkus ....

Charlie1 · Post by **Charlie1** » 2010-02-24 17:45

oh yeah - fair point :D

ThomasOK · Post by **ThomasOK** » 2010-02-24 20:21

I ran for the door,
Ringmaster shouted
"All the fun of the Cirkus!"

Tony Tune-age · Post by **Tony Tune-age** » 2010-02-24 20:34

That's a good album "Lizard" by King Crimson 8) .

Robert Lake · Post by **Robert Lake** » 2012-02-28 14:55

Has anyone listened to the sub-chassis namned Sole from Analogue Innovation?
http://www.analogueinnovation.com/index.htm

Prices are not too high for 80% of what a Keel does.

Post by **lejonklou** » 2012-02-28 16:11

Robert Lake wrote:Has anyone listened to the sub-chassis namned Sole from Analogue Innovation?
Prices are not too high for 80% of what a Keel does.

I haven't heard it, but judged by how the Plattamat performed, I'd be surprised if the Sole is an improvement over a Cirkus.

flatpopely · Post by **flatpopely** » 2012-02-29 01:30

Robert Lake wrote:Has anyone listened to the sub-chassis namned Sole from Analogue Innovation?
http://www.analogueinnovation.com/index.htm

Prices are not too high for 80% of what a Keel does.

I'm obviously a competitor to the sole but who claims it's 80% of a Keel?

If it is then I might as well shut up shop.

Azazello · Post by **Azazello** » 2012-03-02 23:23

Four posts deleted.

This is not a place for manufacturers to argue about their products, and this:

"Never mind little boys, you just carry on merrily with your beliefs."

is not by far an acceptable tone on this forum.

/Az

Post by **lejonklou** » 2012-03-03 02:30

Interesting.

I was following this debate, and my standpoint is that if you want to improve the LP12 turntable, you have to being by understanding it. To me, that means you need to listen to all the progress that Linn has already made through the years. You can't expect success if you use an 80's-specification turntable, add some second party modifications and then try to improve upon the fundamentals, such as the subchassis, bearing, platter or top plate.

Once you're familiar with all the parts and what they do, you need to use the Tune Method to evaluate every step of the process. This is time consuming. And even more time consuming is to put your work in relation to what has already been accomplished by the upgrades Linn offer. It simply has to make sense.

If a replacement for the standard felt mat (which in itself has been improved several times through the decades) is advertised as an upgrade, but performs worse when judged with the Tune Method, I will loose faith in the other products manufactured by the same company. Until I'm proven wrong, of course - progress isn't always logical or incremental. But most of the time, it is. Hence my scepticism.

My independent moderator Azazello is harsh but fair. I didn't know he was going to moderate this heated discussion, but I support his decisions, because I know his principles are sound. Therefore I won't be surprised or annoyed if he removes this comment as well - I have had several comments removed in the past.

flatpopely · Post by **flatpopely** » 2012-03-03 02:40

We use the Tune Dem as our guide. It's not always the most 'hi fi' sound.

We use macro and micro hearing to listen to the overall sound and zone in on a particular instrument.

Just having 'more bass' etc. doesn't do it for us.

A Keel "Klone"

A Keel "Klone"

Keel & Clones

Re: Keel & Clones

Analogue Innovations

Re: Analogue Innovations

Re: Analogue Innovations

Re: Analogue Innovations

Tune Dem