advertisement


Linn LP12 vs Roksan TMS3

K

Kovit

pfm Member
Hi Folks,
Anyone has an experience making audition/owned both Roksan TMS3 - Artimiz II - Shiraz - with Roksans Power Supply and Phono stage combination and Linn LP12 - Radikal - Keel - Naim Aro - Prefix - Hicap/Supercap - Armageddon - Ortofon SPU Royal N/Linn Kandid ?

What is the difference between both turntables in term of sound quality?

Thank you very much

Regards
Kovit
 
There are threads on other forums, but they date back a while. It may be that a lot of understandably happy Xerxes and TMS owners followed Touraj by getting a Vertere, so the numbers who have heard both in the last few years may well be as low as @John suggests.

I hope I am wrong of course, because I’d be very interested in how those decks compare to a modern LP12.
 
On looks alone the TMS wins. When I had my Xerxes/Artemiz/Shiraz in the late eighties/early nineties I used to ogle the TMS in its polished black on simply aesthetic grounds, although I assumed also that it was a shade or two above the Xerxes in performance. This followed an LP12 with Valhalla etc.(basic) with Tiktok and Karma. Apart from initial dealer cock-up in installation and a dodge p/supply, I never looked back to the LP12 once the Xerxes was sorted. An Orbe/SME V and Lyra Clavis DC followed and I never looked back on the Roksan.

Funny how vicarious the so-called upgrade path can be.....;)
 
Mike Reed said:
On looks alone the TMS wins. When I had my Xerxes/Artemiz/Shiraz in the late eighties/early nineties I used to ogle the TMS in its polished black on simply aesthetic grounds, although I assumed also that it was a shade or two above the Xerxes in performance. This followed an LP12 with Valhalla etc.(basic) with Tiktok and Karma. Apart from initial dealer cock-up in installation and a dodge p/supply, I never looked back to the LP12 once the Xerxes was sorted. An Orbe/SME V and Lyra Clavis DC followed and I never looked back on the Roksan.

Funny how vicarious the so-called upgrade path can be.....;)
Click to expand...

I think it's worth gently mentioning that looks should be among the last considerations when buying a deck - certainly if my little voyage from an SM20/3 to a Rega P8 over the past five years or so are anything to go by.
 
Naim Aro, Armageddon, Prefix can be used with TMS3 instead of Artimiz II - with Roksans Power Supply and Phono stage combination?
 
Tim Jones said:
I think it's worth gently mentioning that looks should be among the last considerations when buying a deck - certainly if my little voyage from an SM20/3 to a Rega P8 over the past five years or so are anything to go by.
Click to expand...
Aesthetics are really important for some of us. Of course the performance has to up to the mark, too. I don’t like putting up with ugly hi-fi no matter how great it sounds. For instance, currently I’m looking for an early 90s Yamaha battleship CDP to match my amplifier of said make. The incumbent (& only working CDP) is an aesthetic disaster. I like Yamahas restrained & elegant fascia design of the time; & the amplifier works well with LS3/5as.
 
I also have an early 80s Rega 3/RB300 with a beautiful cherry trim. It’s had the motor & feet upgraded & sounds fantastic. It will only be replaced if I get a P9! :)
 
Tim Jones said:
I think it's worth gently mentioning that looks should be among the last considerations when buying a deck
Click to expand...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, Tim. Looks tend to form just ONE consideration in buying anything, as Durmbo alludes. I wanted the 'tricorn' shaped TW Acustic Raven AC to replace my Orbe but ended up with the fugly N.A. Dais by a set of odd circumstances and the cost of arm-boards. No regrets, but as in most other purchases (cars etc.) aesthetics play an important part of choice, and not simply the last consideration.

Seriously, the old (or even new) fruit box is mundane at best (plenty like it with wooden plinths) but the TMS had aesthetic flair, setting it apart. Surely they're not still making it.....?
 
Last edited:
Durmbo said:
Aesthetics are really important for some of us. Of course the performance has to up to the mark, too. I don’t like putting up with ugly hi-fi no matter how great it sounds. For instance, currently I’m looking for an early 90s Yamaha battleship CDP to match my amplifier of said make. The incumbent (& only working CDP) is an aesthetic disaster. I like Yamahas restrained & elegant fascia design of the time; & the amplifier works well with LS3/5as.
Click to expand...

You’d hate the look of the early Croft amplifiers then in their tin hobby boxes but it made great hi-Fi affordable to many more audiophiles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top