A 60 year old turntable design is still going strong!


Way before my time but an interesting take on a classic table!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOlhiZ902hY
128x128yogiboy

Showing 2 responses by iopscrl

Interesting that the AR TT has come up.  MF included a very favorable mention of the AR TT in his most recent column in SP.  Prices will probably rise going forward.

The AT TT has to be one of the most influential TT designs sold over the past 60 years.  Very inexpensive, built to a reasonable standard,  and it still outperforms many tables with much higher prices of entry.

What many don't realize is that AR was not the first manufacturer to use spring suspension isolation combined with a T Bar subchassis for location of the platter bearing and tonearm.

The London Scott TT from the mid-late 50's used a very similar suspension design, but also used a very complex worm gear drive to control speed and platter rotation.

The Weathers TT and integral tonearm were highly regarded in the late 50s.  It also used a spring suspension and a lightweight clock motor for power.  It differed by using rim drive through a very soft rubber tire mounted on the motor spindle, and then driving the platter through contact with the inner edge surface.

Mr. Villchur was no doubt aware of these TT when he designed the AR.  His focus on isolation let him to decouple the motor from the platter through use of belt drive, which simplified the drive mechanism.  He included an integral tone arm that could track lightly and made the package very affordable.  

Many point to the tonearm as the weak link.  In some ways it is.  It seems simple, even crude.  But it is capable of excellent performance when carefully adjusted.  The horizontal bearing was simple, well engineered and worked as need.  Vertical bearings were delrin needle points that screwed into the arm yolk and could be adjusted for tension.  I can tell you from experience that adjusting these bearings "just so" is crucial for best performance.  Adjustment of these bearings is what located the arm in the vertical plane.  A minor deviation from dead center would have audible consequences.  Get it right, and you have an arm of surprisingly good performance.  It is capable of accurate tracking at 1g, without inner groove distortion.   Cartridge alignment can be difficult because the entire arm tube has to be adjusted to set alignment, but that is easy enough if you know what to do and have patience.   The real problem is most people (and techs) did not know or care enough to carefully adjust the bearings !   Simple, surprising, and true.

How good and influential was the AR TT ?   It directly led to the Thorens TD150, which led to the LINN LP12, VPI and many other decks that are remarkable similar to the basic AR design.  Differences are in parts quality and execution- not design changes.
If the design was as inherently flawed as implied above, it becomes hard to reconcile this opinion with the actual history of the TT series.  It was in continuous production for 15yrs+ and sold in record numbers.  This tt was praised for its great sound, and excellent tracking ability.  A surprising number of original tables have survived.  If this design was as bad as implied most owners would have thrown it away, and contemporary users would have recorded issues with performance or record wear.  In fact it was continuous praised in the press, and by owners who voted with their wallets. When carefully adjusted, the arm will track a high compliance cartridge at 1g.  Cleanly.  Without inner groove distortion.  While maintaining a solid and unwavering central image from lead in groove to dead wax.  I know what mistracking sound like, I know what inner groove distortion sounds like.  I know what a wavering central image sounds like.  The AR TT and arm can be improved- I never said it could not.  But the basic design can deliver excellent performance when carefully adjusted.