2. analog
  3. 169429-486

3 New UBER Decks - Is this Turntable's SwanSong? 🦢

Michael Fremer has recently reviewed three new turntables designed to be the 'Last Word', 'Cost no Object' STATEMENTS!!!!........Do I recall hearing this claim before??
I love Mikey and have followed (and trusted) him for decades.
He has been the longest and foremost published 'champion' of the superiority of vinyl (uber alles) in the world.
I am thus ecstatic that he has been able to listen and compare these decks in his own room, with his own equipment virtually side-by-side
It's almost a 'given' that he will be the ONLY person on earth given that privilege....

So what Mikey HEARS.....is indisputable

Given his 'character' and desire for accuracy and honesty.....years ago, Mikey started including some 'objective' measurements in his turntable reviews.
These measurements were done utilising the Dr Feikert PlatterSpeed App which has since been discontinued.
As the App only worked with the Mac iOS of many variations ago.....Mikey has kept an old iPhone which can still operate the App.
The PlatterSpeed App had a few technical limitations.....
Foremost amongst these, was its dependence on a 7" record with an embedded 3150 Hz Frequency track to produce a test-tone which the App could process through its algorithm to produce the graphs and all the corresponding numbers.
To stamp hundreds of 7" discs with perfectly 'centred' HOLES is a nigh impossibility.
It's almost impossible to do it with a 12" disc!!!

This means that ALL the figures produced in their Chart Info are dubious and mostly UNREPEATABLE!!!!
I have Chart Infos for the same turntable/arm combination but with the 7" disc moved slightly producing different figures.
I even have Chart Infos produced with the same turntable but different arms ALL with different figures (the arms are in different positions surrounding my TURNTABLE).

So what is my point......?
The GRAPH produced with the PlatterSpeed App is accurate and USEABLE when looking at the 'Green' Lowpass-Filtered Frequency.
If the hole was PERFECTLY centred.....this 'Green' line would be perfectly STRAIGHT......but only if the turntable was maintaining its speed PERFECTLY.
The wobbles in the 'Green' line are due to the hole's eccentricity as well as any speed aberrations.
So the best performing turntables are those with the most constant and even wobbles approaching as closely as possible a STRAIGHT LINE.

Now the SAT Direct Drive Motor is actually the same as Technics developed for their latest SL-1000R except with some bespoke modifications.
It appears that SAT have corrupted what is a very good DD Motor unit....🥴

Mikey says that the OMA-K3 produced the best PlatterApp figures of any turntable he has tested 👏
Does this mean that the OMA-K3 is the most accurate turntable of these three decks.....or maybe of ALL turntables?

Mikey can't (and won't) test and review products from the past which are no longer produced because that's not his job!
But wouldn't it be great if someone WOULD review products from the past against the modern equivalent?
Classic turntables with reputations....gravitas...like the legendary EMT 927 and Micro Seiki SX-5000 and SX-8000.
And what about the NOW lauded Japanese DD Turntables from the '80s...the 'Golden Age' of Analogue?
  • Technics SP-10Mk3
  • Kenwood L-07D
  • Pioneer P3
  • Victor TT-101
  • Yamaha GT-2000
Because we know that Direct Drive is now 'Flavour of the Month' for the new Uber Decks due to their superior speed accuracy....a 'Flavour' that started with the legendary Rockport Sirius III.
But what about Belt-Drive units like my 20 year-old Raven?
So much for science and technology.......

We can do things today that were only dreamt of even 10 years ago
Except learn from history, harvest experience, expertise and craftsmanship......

Here endeth the Sermon for today 🤗


halcro

Showing 7 responses by dover

dover
2,295 posts
 

Another poster wrote:  every DD I have heard sounds thin, lacking body, are grainy or have a grey wash through the sound, possibly due to error correction servos.

Seemingly these DDs were not good examples of the technology ie made to a price, as the majority of  cutting lathes were/are DIRECT DRIVE.

If you are going to bash DD you have to throw out the DD cutting lathes and drive them with a rubber band.

What you fail to understand is that most cutting lathes have a 70-80lb flywheel and significantly more drive power than most domestic direct drives. - even the Kenwood, Technics & Victor. The dynamics of a cutting lathe and its requirements are quite different to the dynamics of replaying a record.

And you appear unable to comprehend that critiquing specific examples of direct drive does not mean that direct drive is in of itself a bad thing.

 

dover
2,295 posts
 
I met Michael Fremer in the 80’s - he’s a lovely guy, but the reality is he is now 74 years old by my reckoning.
The chances that he can set up a top end turntable accurately is remote.
The chances that his hearing is up to par is not high.

I always remember a comment in Hifi News in the early 80’s - if you have been listening to an amplifier with a narrow dip at 3k for a period of time, then any accurate (flat) amplifier will sound bright, because your brain has adjusted to the imperfections - it compensates.

What I am saying is that Fremers comments are conditioned by hs own historical imperfect equipment. Unless you have been listening to the exact same equipment for the same amount of time, then his comments are irrelevent in absolute terms - all they are are impressions from someone of whom you have no idea what they are hearing.

Unfortunately, due to reliance on advertising revenue, audio reviews have become like car magazines - advertorials - where only the positives are discussed, and no at length comparisions as in the hey days of TAS.

You only find out about the flaws when the upgrade comes out the following year.
dover
2,295 posts
 
@antinn 


Some of these uber tables have impressive amounts of engineering, but they have yet to correct the spindle hole centering issue

The wow and flutter induced by eccentric records would far exceed the minor deviations in speed of a decent turntable, and most records are eccentric to some degree. Therefore what relevance does .001 or .0001 speed variation really have ?

In my view what you want is stability, and every direct drive I have heard thus far including the SP10mk3, LO7D, Denon DP100M has been slaughtered by my Final Audio thread drive VTT1 - the DD's sound thin, lacking body, are grainy or have a grey wash through the sound, and the Final has been more resolving of low level detail.

In case you think I'm biased, no, my Final Audio VTT1 weighs 300lbs, the AC motor is driven from a sinewave and cosine wave generator, power amplifier, Oracle MIT interconnect and speaker cable and if I could find a single box turntable that sounded better I'd be very happy. By the way the 26kg platter can be brought up to full speed in less than one platter rotation depending on how much torque I dial up on the controller.

My gut feel with historical top end DD's is that error correction servos, like digital, are doing the damage.

I know one well respected top end TT designer who has provided design services for a DD for another top end company and his solution was to provide a soft error recovery spread over multiple revolutions simlar to the Victor 101 error correction system.
dover
2,295 posts
 
@halcro 
I do not "not read reviews" or "ignore interesting writings" - I am saying you should take them as guides only, not gospel.
I am not being harsh on Mikey, I'm 61 - I know my hearing is good - 18khz at my last hearing test, and reasonably flat, in other words no sign of hearing damage - but I know that my set up skills take a lot longer than 20 years ago and I need natural light to do it accurately. I dont expect to be the same at Mikey's age.
Yes, if you follow someones writings you get a grasp of their preferences, but you still dont know what they are hearing. 
I tend to check the reference systems as well to triangulate their opinions. For example, if a reviewer is using gear that I've heard and dislike, then I put less weight on their opinion as it relates to potential purchase decisions for my own system.
I enjoy Fremers writing and I know from my own knowledge of the gear he uses that I am familiar with that he is pretty reliable.
Art Dudley I enjoy reading, but cant stand Devore Orangutangs, SPU's and vintage arms that sound thick and turgid.
HP was great up until he lost interest around the time his boyfriend did a runner, the fire at Seacliff, and the advent of digital.
Robert Greene was a great reviewer.
And yes I enjoy Arthur  Salvatores writing.
Martin Colloms excellent, Ken Kesler overrated - he gets enthused about anything.
dover
2,295 posts
 

@halcro


It’s all smoke and mirrors and fanciful postulation from the uneducated. It is not possible to measure wow & flutter using a test record.

If you use a rotary function generator to measure the turntable performance directly off the platter, the results will be more accurate than any test record.

For an explanation from someone who actually has a degree in physics and acoustical engineering - Bruce Thigpen of Eminent Technology.

Here is Bruces explanation from his Eminent Technology website.

Bruce has many patents and inventions including his unique air bearing tonearm, rotary subwoofer, vacuum platter as implenmented by SOTA, and many others.


Bruce Thigpen -

Reviewers have incorrectly attributed wow and flutter to the turntable. Since the advent of the belt drive turntable, wow and flutter has been purely a function of tonearm geometry, the phono cartridge compliance with the elastomeric damping, and surface irregularities in the LP. In our own lab we have measured many high quality turntables using a rotary function generator directly connected to the platters of the turntables.

The measured results are usually an order of magnitude better than the results using a tonearm and test record (conventional wow and flutter method). Further proof exists if you take two tonearms, one straight line and one pivoted and mount them both on the same turntable. The straight line tonearm will give a wow and flutter reading with the same cartridge/test record of about 2/3 to 1⁄2that of the pivoted arm (.03% < .07% to .05%). This is because the straight line tonearm has a geometry advantage and lateral motion does not result in stylus longitudinal motion along the groove of the record.

Another proof is to take two different cartridges, one high compliance and one low compliance, and take measurements with both using the same turntable and tonearm. The reading of wow and flutter will be different. All wow and flutter readings are higher than the rotational consistency of the turntable.


dover
2,295 posts
 
@halcro

Maybe that’s the reason each different tonearm produces a different result on the same turntable....?

Very much so. I have had a lot of arms, including the ET2 on my Final Audio VTT1 TT over the years, with the same group of cartridges.

Here is a gem from JCarr on coherency -

jcarr358 posts
09-15-2021 5:23am


While cartridges are important, their tracking ability, tonal balance, naturalness, dynamics, pitch definition etc. all can be hugely affected by the choice of tonearm (and phono stage, and setup).
Musical timing in my view is not only affected by TT speed stability, but also arm/cartridge/phono considerations. From my own ears, Bruce’s assertions with regard to his linear tracker and wow and flutter are on the money.
dover
2,295 posts
 
@richardkrebs

That said, within its limitations, the platter speed app does give a reasonable snap shot of what the platter is doing and is thus useful in differentiating between TT’s, as I have been trying to demonstrate.
I dont agree - too many variables.
My nephew has a double PHD in Maths and Physics, specialises in predictive modelling, and even with the firepower at his disposal ( heads up a team for one the worlds largest banks ) I doubt that any conclusions could be drawn even if you had a database of 1000’s of tests - by conclusions I mean anything statistically and scientifically relevant.

We are measuring well in excess of 1 million directly read samples per revolution.

GP Monaco made similar claims, and then they came out with a Mark 1.5, then a Mark 2 and so on. Of course there are now electrical components capable of switching at a trillionth of a second, so a million every 1.8 seconds might impress the pundits, but what does it mean really - your TT almost as good as digital ??
More to discover