I'm puzzled by the great reviews the budget Pro-ject models garners, particularly from WHFSAV. The decks in question are the RPM1.3, the Debut III and particularly the new Essential.
Basically, the specifications from Pro-ject reveal that they have higher than average wow and flutter, coming in at .15% for the 1.3, .12% for the Debut III and a whopping .25% for the Essential, which, coupled with its plus or minus 1.5% speed accuracy, says "keep away" on technical grounds alone.
WHFSAV to my knowledge does technically test a product. However, with turntables, speed consistency and accuracy is paramount, because you can clearly hear fluctuations once the level becomes to high. Therefore, testing wow and flutter would seem essential, as would publishing the results, since they give an excellent idea how good the turntable is. Put bluntly, a turntable with poor speed accuracy is to be avoided.
I don't doubt WHFSAV do thorough, extended reviews. However, if the reviewers did not hear any wow and flutter - and at .25% you'd think it would be audible - then either they decided to leave this out of the review, or the figures are better than Pro-ject claim. The first case is unlikely so I assume it must be the second, in which case it is yet another argument for testing speed accuracy of turntables to indicate to consumers that the figures are better than Pro-ject themselves supply.
Perhaps your star ratings could reflect this, too. It seems odd that a turntable with the apparent deficiencies of the Essential should get such a high rating, unless your own tests can prove it is considerably better than the figures quoted by the manufacturers.
Now, in fact, the situation is not as dire for prospective Pro-ject customers since the company provides a solution in their speedbox SE which improves the situation quite markedly. However, it does add £100 to the price of the turntable. Surely this is worth noting in the review and in the ratings, since the one of the leading budget turntables suddenly becomes a lot less budget and more mid-price?
Basically, the specifications from Pro-ject reveal that they have higher than average wow and flutter, coming in at .15% for the 1.3, .12% for the Debut III and a whopping .25% for the Essential, which, coupled with its plus or minus 1.5% speed accuracy, says "keep away" on technical grounds alone.
WHFSAV to my knowledge does technically test a product. However, with turntables, speed consistency and accuracy is paramount, because you can clearly hear fluctuations once the level becomes to high. Therefore, testing wow and flutter would seem essential, as would publishing the results, since they give an excellent idea how good the turntable is. Put bluntly, a turntable with poor speed accuracy is to be avoided.
I don't doubt WHFSAV do thorough, extended reviews. However, if the reviewers did not hear any wow and flutter - and at .25% you'd think it would be audible - then either they decided to leave this out of the review, or the figures are better than Pro-ject claim. The first case is unlikely so I assume it must be the second, in which case it is yet another argument for testing speed accuracy of turntables to indicate to consumers that the figures are better than Pro-ject themselves supply.
Perhaps your star ratings could reflect this, too. It seems odd that a turntable with the apparent deficiencies of the Essential should get such a high rating, unless your own tests can prove it is considerably better than the figures quoted by the manufacturers.
Now, in fact, the situation is not as dire for prospective Pro-ject customers since the company provides a solution in their speedbox SE which improves the situation quite markedly. However, it does add £100 to the price of the turntable. Surely this is worth noting in the review and in the ratings, since the one of the leading budget turntables suddenly becomes a lot less budget and more mid-price?