Hi Ct0517,
I tried to send this before but it seemed to fail. If I therefore repeat my self here I can only apologize.
My experience with the AT616's beneath a nude Technics SP10 Mk2 found improved performance, particularly in the areas of timbre and detail retrieval. This means that you will more clearly be able to distinguish instruments (such as a viola and violin and a wider range of percussive instruments). It also means that the retrieval of inner detail with instruments such as various guitars, double bass and piano are much improved.
My earlier experience with the nude Technics included using Syposium couplers on a Symposium Ultra platform and using a wide variety of footers and cones on distinct platforms. These were all fairly pleasing. However, using the AT616's was a marked improvement on these options.
I hope this helps and good luck |
Jcarr,
you forgot something: a ladder !
by placing a ladder (which reaches high enough over the shielding) in front of the TT you will be able to climb onto it and maintain the TT from above.
But seriously: air isolation is one of the best measurements if designed and implemented properly.
I am wondering why most people are positioning their TT(s) near one of the sidewalls of their listening room using very long cables and also giving their speaker systems the opportunity shooting into the room free
and fast. Why not designing a LS system and positioning it two meters in front of the rear wall in such a way that most of the waves are not entering the space one meter behind and in between the speakers. reflections should be dispersed by corner, rear wall and ceiling measurements too.
We are always speaking about one unit - a TT or an arm pod. But we never look at the whole system - the listening room.
best & fun only |
Dear Dgob, When you say that you found "improved performance" when you mounted your nude SP10 on AT616s, may I correctly assume that you refer for comparison to the same tt when mounted on Symposium products? Or what? Thanks. |
Hi Lewm,
Yes, I'm referring to the same tt on the Symposium and other products. For me it was a clear improvement: despite my initial (and over enthusiastically voiced!) suspicions concerning air-borne interference with a pneumatic approach. |
Nandric, If one wishes to drive any of the full-range Sound Lab spkrs with a tube amplifier, particularly with an OTL tube amplifier, there is work to be done with the network that feeds the panel. I and others have made some modifications that help a lot. The stock OEM speaker is probably fabulous right out of the box with a first rank solid-state amplifier, but its impedance curve is treacherous for an OTL. |
Dear Lewm: Congratulations on your birthday and by those Majestic's.
I know very well the Majestic's ( my friend and tonearm co-designer Guillermo own it. ) and are first rate speakers and as I posted two-three times the Sondlabs are almost the only elostrostatics I can live with.
I agree with Nandric about tube amps and especially OTL's. I heard the Majestic's with several amp options and the manufacturer recommended JC-1's are perhaps the better IMHO and obviously you don't have to " touch " the speakers to match tube units.
You know very well my take on that critical match between output impedance amplifier with the electrical impedance curve in the speakers where low very low output impedance is IMHO a must to have if you want neutral/accurate response.
Anyway, very good move/play.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul, It's a bit of a secret, but I am on to a way of modifying the input of the Sound Lab so as to render it quite nice for my OTLs and anyone else's tube amps, as well. This is a collaboration among several Sound Lab users who prefer OTLs and/or tubes. To take a page from your book, I can't say any more than that right now, but I am listening to a primitive form of the final solution, and it is already a big improvement. I agree, the OEM Sound Lab is built for high power solid state amps, but it does not have to be that way.
OTLs are fine when driving a high impedance load. "Damping Factor", a term that SS amplifier makers love to bandy about, is a non-issue with ESLs. An ESL speaker does not develop a back EMF that needs to be opposed by a very low output impedance amplifier. In any case, Z at very low frequencies is very very high with an ESL. High enough to constipate many solid stage amps and to be ideal for OTLs. |
I know some guys here in Holland who are wrestling with OTL
amps for 40 years. One can call such behaviour 'persistance', 'induration' or 'obsession' but during those 40 years they made many 'solutions' for the
impendance problem . The strange thing however is that they
try to solve this problem in the speaker. Some even produced speakers with 500-600 ohm impendance. Thanks to some guy called Bruce Rozenblat the problem is reduced to,say, 4 ohm. So it seems to be very easy to predict what Lew
'secret work' is about. He is tweaking some filter to put in front of his Majestic in order to protect the life of the (innocent) thing as well as his wallet.
Regards, |
As for the Majestic, I will put the big Berning OTL amp on it. The Berning amp is an OTL on steroids. Forget the SS amp with their damping factor talk. High damping factor gives dry sound. Very difficult to execute proper acceptable damping factor. |
Dear Audpulse: I know that Berning a perhaps one of the two-three tube amps I could live for a while if I need it.
You are right that the Majestic's could sound " dry " with some SS amplifiers, I heard that symptom with that speakers driving by Halcro amps but the JC1's are way different with these speakers.
The whole picture is not only about damping factor but wider than that.
Anyway, Lewm think he has the right answer and that's is the important subject and what's matters.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Tutntables, armpods/towers,
Speakers, amplilfiers? |
Turntable + tonearm/armpod + amp.+ speakers= System. Ie
a holistic approach.
Regards, |
Looks to me more convincing than the AT footers below the cover because this cover is very questionable as support.
Dear Nikola Looks can be very deceiving hearing is believing. You have at least 4 virtual friends on this forum from the UK, Mexico, US and Canada affirming the sound of a Nude SP10 MKII on AT 616 footers. My mother always told me to choose your friends wisely. Cheers Chris |
I plan to mount my amps on separate arm pods. I will require 3 per monoblock, of course. |
Stands, cables, cartridge clips, headshells, acoustic treatment/sound proofing, fuses...
Regards? |
Lewm, why not use monopods for your amps, with 1 foot - then we can start a thread on the best sounding elastic to balance them. |
Hi Chris,
I believe you may have found the cheapest machine shop in the world?
$48 for four solid stainless steel legs including machining them to their points?
Simply amazing......cheaper than concrete perhaps?
The only thing that bothers me about them is their stability?
If you hold the turntable firmly with two hands......are you able to twist it back and forwards?
If so...... I suspect there could easily be movement of the deck when the motor is operational?
It will be interesting to hear your thoughts on the differences to the AT footers? |
Dear Audpulse, With all respect, the Berning ZOTLs are fine amplifiers, but they are not OTL amplifiers in the normal sense of that acronym. This has all been argued ad nauseam, and I am with you, if you were to say it does not matter. What matters is they are very good sounding amplifiers designed by one of the true geniuses in audio.
Halcro, Is the SP10 as stable as you recommend to Chris that it needs to be, when mounted on AT616 feet? How would that be unless there was some sort of physical anchoring between the SP10 chassis and the tops of the feet? (You are not the only one who knows how to use a question mark?) |
|
Dear Chris, Your mother is a wise lady. You should not mess
with doubtful persons. One of them is a traitor. He ordered
a plinth from, will you believe this , Moldova. Former Romania or so. But the price is nearly as cheap as your steel footers ($110; ebay.com) and probable more stable. I intend to put those Still-points underneath to get, say,
Albert Porter (cheap) plinth version for my SP 10 mk II.
Regards, |
Hi Nikola - I can do better than that. I have a 7 layer Canadian baltic birch sp10 plinth sitting idle. I can send it to you to try if you like. But you would have to pay for the shipping. Its over 50 lbs. Let me know if interested.
Hi Henry - will post the SS footers info on the Nude TT thread - I see its front page again.
Cheers |
Yes but Henry what's your answer to my valid question? |
How big a Problem Is this Airborne Feedback ? I am referring to 95 + db levels at the listening position. Or is it really structure related so a wall mounted TT would work best? Two statements made on this thread.
Halcro
Air-borne feedback is very rarely a problem despite what you believe.
JCarr
Even better would be to add an acoustic shield around the turntable so that it doesn't get affected by the sound pressure from the speakers.
Are these not differing viewpoints? Hi Johnathan Carr - is your statement based on your real experience with shields or theory ? Hi Henry I know you have yelled at your cartridge at a loud decibel and not heard anything back through the speakers ? Do I really need to attempt this as well ? I rotate different speakers into my room - Dipole, Dynamic cones. Gear placement for one type does not mean the best placement for the other especially if dealing with a smaller room. I have opinions but would like to hear others real experience. I am planning some modifications to the room. This discussion would be very helpful to me. Cheers Chris |
Hi Chris,
I get more feedback when I yell at the dog than I do from the cartridge :^) |
On a serious level.......it is often difficult to isolate 'structure-borne' feedback form 'air-borne' as the 'air-borne' feedback can be absorbed into the equipment rack or floorboards and thus mutate into 'structure-borne' feedback affecting your system.
If the feedback increases as your volume increases.....this can identify the problem. |
Halcro,
What does it mean if the feedback increases as volume increases. If airborne feedback is the ONLY problem, one would figure the effects to increase. Personally, I am not convinced that airborne feedback affecting my rack, and then feeding 'structural feedback' through an isolation system (designed to combat structural feedback) to my turntable is a more insidious problem than the same airborne feedback affecting the record, tonearm, or dustcover itself.
In testing now... |
my thoughts on airborne feedback. i believe it to be real, but difficult to identify. what i did to minimize it was to minimize the surface areas that could absorb airborne vibrations/waves. i did this by building a "nude" rack. i eliminated side panels and shelves and rest my equipment on the frame itself. i also incorporate alto extremo feet to absorb and isolate.
for the equipment, such as tables, that would not fit onto a nude rack, i made isolation platforms for them, filled with dense steel shot. that way, any airborne waves would have a hard time moving the heavy weight.
i have to update the pics in my gallery (actually, i thought that i had done that!!).
don |
I thought that this J. Carr is the smartest guy among us.
But he is as crazy as the rest of us:'Surrounding the turntable ( but not contacting it) would be a double -wall acoustic shild '(08-24-11). How about asking the Russians
for the permission to install our TT in the Mir?
Regards, |
Chris, I can offer an experience to help answer your question.
My turntable is placed on a 60" shelf, fitted within an alcove on a side wall of the listening room. The shelf is 18" deep and the walls forming the sides of the alcove extend a few inches beyond the shelf. For some time I had the tt at the far right end of the shelf. This placed the arm/cartridge close to the corner of the alcove. One day I was dusting the table/arm (using a camel hair brush) while I had a CD playing. I happened to lean over the platter while some fairly strong bass was being played. I was amazed with the amount of bass energy heard with my head close to that corner.
Realizing the probable harm from my cartridge working in that environment, I relocated the tt to the left end of the shelf. This resulted in the arm/cartridge being slightly left of center along the shelf and away from the corners. When I then played an LP with only average bass content (probably a jazz quartet) I heard improved overall clarity.
This shelf is 3/4" ply and attached to the walls on three sides and has an added brace along the fourth side. It appears to be rigid but if I place my fingers lightly on the surface while playing music with much bass energy I can feel some structure-borne vibrations. For this reason, I use a 2" deep sand box between my tt and the shelf.
So, for whatever degree of structure-borne vibrations that reach my arm/cartridge, and they would logically be greater at the mid-point of the shelf than the corner (less bracing), the change to reduce air-borne vibrations resulted in an overall sonic improvement. |
In my current home, room and speaker interactions are a source of some real problems. When the gain is turned up i believe this excites the built material of the walls ,ceiling ,suspended floor causing many problems.
With my sources 13 feet away from the closes speaker i decouple my stand from the floor the best i can for now and then decouple the turntable from the stand, it's a job still under construction.
Our previous home listening room was so much friendlier and a real joy to listen music in, concrete slab on grade timber framed home with open vault ceilings.
The living / listening room simply had excellent acoustics.
One experiment listening for feedback problems in our previous home by placing an lp on the platter then resting the stylus on a stationary lp ,turning the gain up full i would be hesitant to try in our new home yet.
This may sound all bad however using a Placette active preamp with a Hell of a nice headphone section and Sony R-10 headphones immediately solved all my room related problems, I think.
|
I believe that Pryso and In_shore are correct in the fact that the air-borne sound pressure levels, affect the room's fabric to different degrees depending on their materials and structural means of support.
This transforms into 'structure-borne' feedback affecting the turntable depending on it's construction and isolation.
'Sprung' decks, because of this, are more susceptible to this feedback than 'mass-loaded' ones. |
Hi Halcro/Pryso/In_shore,
I have for a long time thought that new equipment needs time for the room to settle into it. This is most obvious with changes in speaker systems but seems applicable to equipment more generally. However, this is all dependent on my challengable tools of assessment: my untrained/self-trained ears!
What you've all said does provide food for thought. |
Observations of Direct Sound Pressure on a Tonearm The recent posts have been great, informative and enlightening for me. Thanks guys. TBone - looking forward to your results as well
Sorry for the long post. I was curious, so I tried to create a direct air borne problem before it became a structure feedback problem just to see if possible. Two TTs together on the side wall directly opposite the firing of one of my speakers. Everything u wouldnt want to do to get direct airborne feedback with a TT I did. The first TT is no more than 6 feet away from the drivers of my speaker. Before I tell u what happened let me say I have played around quite a bit already with this air pressure phenomenon but from the other end. I have experimented with my air bearing arms to see how the air pressure affects them as it comes out of the air bearing. I learned what their maximum PSI threshold is. Go past this point and they start to resonate from not being able to handle the PSI. Keep just under it and you have magic happening. Anyway above this threshold they resonate and cant hold the cartridge/stylus in the groove properly anymore. A loss of detail happens. Your $$$$$ TT rig starts sounding like a $$ rig. No surprise right ? So I thought what the hell, this is going to be more fun than yelling at the cartridge so I let loose on them hoping to make the tonearms/cartridges show some signs of sonic deterioration. I played big music at well over 100 db. What happened? Well first thing is not what I could hear but feel because my listening chair was vibrating. I then went over to one of the speakers and felt the sound anchor stand holding up the 110 lb speaker. The heavy metal SA stand was resonating. They are spiked to the basement concrete slab. My room is closed 12 X 24 FT. with speakers in nearfield firing down the length. The side walls were also resonating. But what about the music ? Nothing NADA the music and tonearms were fine as far as I could hear. So in my case with this little experiment I heard no direct sound pressure effect on the tonearms. If you dont believe me. Ask this Audiogon member if he is worried about Direct Sound Pressure from the Speakers ? So based on this I agree with what Henry said. The airborne feedback is changing (mutating) into structure feedback. Its going into the walls, the floor, the racks the gear. Everywhere. Structure Feedback is the audiophiles version of VIRUS movies. Go ahead put up a shield - its going there too - now u will have something resonating next to your precious $$$$$ tonearm - does this make sense ? I dont know I didnt try it but I'm also not going to Home Depot to buy plexiglass or something else to surround the TT either. I've heard enough. Structure feedback is there but until you discover it no matter how small a problem it may be and correct it as Pryso's experience tells, you may not even realize its there. This has to be one of the leading causes of why gear may sound good at the dealer, but then people bring it home and it sounds different ? This experiment was good for me because it gave me a better idea on the limits of what my room are. My racks isolate ok to well above 100 db so below that where I actually listen I am fine for now. Could they be better - definitely - maybe I will ask Don to build me a nicer rack ? But I think I need a new listening chair first? Thoughts ? |
Forgot to mention I have some very serious structure feedback issues at the TT in the other location - old building, suspended floors. Am looking at buying a TT shelf or building one for there. I sympathize with those of you with suspended floors. |
Dear Chris, This remind me about this Jew who was complaining about his shoes:'they are killing me'. His answer about the cause was that they are too small. But when asked why he buys too small shoes his answer was: 'it feels so good when I put them off'. BTW I think that you have some other 'structural problems'. 'the other location' imply that you can use the 'other one' without 'structure feedback issue'.
Regards, |
Hi Nikola
As long as I stayed in my chair it was very nice but loud - the vibrating chair added to the effect :^) . But sustained levels would not let me enjoy this hobby for very long. It did however start feeling like a shoebox at those levels when I got up to check the gear, walls, etc...
Yes the other building has many problems. Adding vinyl there exposed many of them. It will be a challenge.
Cheers |
Addendum. Dear Chris, you made an important discovery without knowing what you discovered. Otherwise you would at least pronunce: Heureka. There is no way to value anything without comparison. Even 'better' assumes some, not to mention 'the best'. Alas your method is to expensive: two or more 'locations' are not attainable for the most of us. So I have a proposition which is even cheaper than Halcro's concrete arm pod. Buy the cheapest MM cart you can find ( I have some from East Germany) and
use it by every listing session for one hour and then switch to whatever other cart you own. You will be suprised with the result. BTW such results seems to be the 'basics' in psychology.
Regards, |
Chris, maybe it is just me but this seems to be a bit confusing. You said you tried two tts on the side wall, "directly opposite the firing of one of my speakers". Does this mean one speaker is toed-in to such a degree that it is aimed at one of your tts?
Now perhaps a few points were suggested in my earlier comments that were not made clearly.
First, it is not always easy to differentiate between airborne and structure borne vibrations. After I moved my tt, it was then located in a position with less structural bracing (likely bad), yet it sounded cleaner. So in my case I must infer the minimizing of airborne interference was a net gain over the increase in structure vibrations.
Second, I think a lot can be understood about equipment location from the study of speaker interface with the room. It seems to be understood that where three planes intersect (any corner) you will find the greatest build up of bass nodes. (Insert assumption that bass frequencies have more energy, thus are more detrimental than higher frequencies.) While the corner of my alcove may not have been as severe as a room corner with longer walls, my experience (two shorter walls and a large shelf = three planes) still supports this point. Less of a problem with bass node build up may be realized where two planes meet -- two walls, a wall and floor or ceiling. Further reduction occurs with only one plane (along a wall and up from the floor) while the least airborne interference may be away from all walls and the floor, while admitting this may be the least practical.
I believe this also relates to Jim Smith's recommendations in "Get Better Sound" when he promotes side wall equipment locations over front wall between the speakers.
Conclusion: try locating your tt/arm/cartridge where there will be the least bass node build up. |
Pryso,
Jim Smith went around my listening room with a mic measuring bass energy and concluded that my rack was in a good location on a side wall behind the first reflection point and not near a corner. I believe his recommendation that the rack not be placed between the speakers has more to do with the mass of the equipment and rack effecting the imaging and soundstaging of the system. Soundstage depth and center-image density and clarity are improved when there is open space between and behind the speakers. At least this is the case in my system and I would think in most others. |
Hi Pryso I agree with what Jim Smith and yourself say. I also keep my TTs on racks 6 from the side long wall wall in the 12 x 24 ft room.
Speaker Angle This picture is the regular placement. The only positioning change I needed to do for this experiment was to rotate the midrange/tweeter module and angle the woofer box a few inches inches to point at the TTs directly. The front of the woofer is 9 feet from the front wall. The SP10 TT at the rear is actually 7 feet from the back wall looks deceiving. The Lenco is only 5 feet from the speaker woofer not 6. Armpod Recommendation For those of you that use a metal (brass, SS, bronze, other ) armpod have you tried a few drops of oil in the tonearm mount screw holes before you mount your tonearm ? Id really like to get your impressions on what this does to the sound for you. I am using some oil in the armpod and the SP10 SS legs. Cheers |
Interesting thread. Reading comments about resonant energy in stands/shelving etc. I was reminded of this "seismic" stand product from Townshend I just read about and which looks very intriguing to me (I love the TT too but that's another topic). Check it out (below the Rock 7 TT) http://ear-usa.com/townshendsinks.htm |
The base as an island, I am not sure?
The fundamental objective of turn-table design is to maintain an optimal geometrical relationship between the stylus and the groove in such a matter to allow, as Halcro so eloquently said it (paraphrasing), the cartridge to transmit perfect information by moving up and down frictionlessly to allow for correct VTA as the groove modulates.
This in turn consist of two factors the geometry and the maintenance thereof. Geometry is the initial location (for the lack of a better term) of the tone-arm pivot point, stylus contact point and center of rotation of the disk, such to achieve Baerwald or Stevenson setup (or whichever one you believe to be best) and including optimal azimuth and VTA. Maintenance is the ability to prevent outside factors such as vibration and noise to change the optimal geometry.
Now to separate and isolate the arm pod from the platter, in perfect world, seems to address the maintenance issue. If the arm pod is isolated, any vibration from the motor or bearings will not be transmitted to the tone-arm or stylus.
This raises the question how is the arm pod accurately located in relation to the platter? Many of the systems in this thread show the arm pods simply placed alongside the platters with no means of accurately locating relative to each other (this is an appearance based on the photos) clearly these tone-arms are properly setup, but how accurately (initial geometry) and what prevents them from moving over time?
Ultimately, the arm pods must sit on a surface that is shared with the platter. The platter is isolated from this surface by pneumatic footer or other method, which no doubt prevents the platter vibrations from transmitting through the surface back to the tone-arm. But now since the platter location is no longer rigidly held relative to the tone-arm pivot, other environmental factors, such heavy footsteps on the floor or ambient noise, can cause these distances to change momentarily (vibration) or permanently (until readjustment). Is the arm pod as an island truly ideal?
A rigid location of the platter vs. the tone-arm pivot ensures optimal geometry, and high mass plinth minimizes the impact of vibrations and noise from the platter. Then isolate this assembly from the room. Is this approach not superior? |
Hi Nick sr,
I have little interest/knowledge of scientific possibility (trying Hif Tuning fuses gives one example of why this is more fraught with options than seems scientifically likely!). However, wouldn't the answer to your ultimate question be: 'that depends on the stability and inertness of the plynth - on which the armpod rests and from which the tt is decoupled?' |
Dgob, that'd be my view (and hence my reference to the seismic stand from Townshend). All of this (legitimate) concern with resonance has to deal with an originating source for the same(either airborne or transmitted via stands or gear, or as a function of playback itself--say in the case of a warped lp, or one that is not damped/clamped). Dealing with the resonances always comes down to the necessity of keeping the cartridge (the stylus, actually) "absolutely" stable. Read the accompanying text for the Rock 7 TT in the Townshend link previously given.
That said, the assumption is that the arm, pivot assembly, etc, are capable of minimizing the effect of any resonance that had been decoupled by the stability of good plinth design, that is, whatever resonances are "left over". Those "left over" resonances are either airborne (and some here suggest that those are minimal to non-existent in their effect, but I suspect that depends on the gear involved) or are generated by the physical effects of playback (again, warps, off-centers, and unclamped/damped lps).
One of the observations made by Townshend is that (at least) to date, the bulk, if you'll pardon the pun, of high-end TT design has dealt with resonances by increasing the mass of the plinth, and in some cases of the integrated plinth stand (say as in the case of the Caliburne/Continuum). You look at most of the really expensive TT gear and the one thing that is inescapable is that it is massive. Another way to deal with the issue of defeating vibration is to shorten the chain of resonant materials/connections (equivalent to fretting the string on a guitar)--a shorter tonearm for example (which involves other problems, one of which is the fact that it requires a different level of energy to set it vibrating).
But Townshend has been dealing with the issue in an entirely different way and that is by damping the headshell. In terms of resonance control, I think a simple illustration should suffice. Imagine a piece of 3/8" or 1/2" steel tubing that is four feet long and has one end clamped into a vise. With your finger you can take the free end of that tubing and push or pull it down a fraction of an inch and let it go and it will resonate. That free end of the tubing is behaving like a tonearm hanging out there over the record supported only by the most sensitive of supports, the stylus. But if you clamp down the free end of that tubing and apply the same force with your finger on the center of that tubing, the tubing will not move. It will take a substantially greater amount of force to move the tubing and the vibration and an order of magnitude greater amount of force to keep it vibrating.
Methinks Townshend is on to something, and he's been doing it for awhile. |
Nick_sr,
The approach you describe is a common one and has been in use by different manufacturers for decades.
This thread is simply proposing a differing approach albeit one which still maintains the geometrical relationship between tonearm and turntable.
No-one here believes movement in that relationship, should be tolerated? |
Halcro, I am not opposed to your approach, in fact I find it attractive. Your idea of the concrete arm-pod seems like a fun DYI project that I have considered for use on SL-1200 table. But that got me to analysing this approach and the big hurdle I see is locating the arm-pod.
Really my question is how can you guarantee this geometric relationship when considering using a Baerwald type set-up. With this type of setup we are taking about degrees of precision in fractions of milimeters. I have trouble seeing how simply placing, with out any means of mechanical fine adjustment, an arm-pod on flat surface(albeit very diligently and carefully)can provide such a degree of precision. Can you explain the approach you use?
One Idea I came up with would be to have mounting locations machined into the base used. But in doing so you then be coupling the arm-pod and turn-table to the mounting surface, and you would essentially be back at square one. |
Nick sr,
I imagined that the turntable produces vibrations when it rotates. These mechanical rotations are not the same as the indentations on the record and would be transmitted to a coupled tonearm (no matter how small the transmission). To isolate the tt is to isolate it from external vibrations but not its own self produced ones: here you can consider the difference that we get from isolating CDp's say with rollerblocks or the like!
To decouple the tonearm from the tt would therefore be to remove these additional vibrations. The issue about mating with the vibrations on the record would then (once the decoupled tonearm and armpod are equally isolated) become a question of the quality of bearings and trackng force accuracy and of the ability of that tonearm to match the movement of the indentations that are on the record's surface.
This is just me trying to understand what I hear in a (possibly) completely 'unscientific' way. |
Nick_sr,
Btw, I don't think what I have tried to say necessarily disagrees with your points, particularly about residue vibrations and the like. As I said, I have simply sought to understand what I am hearing in a (possibly) completely 'unscientific' way. Uncertainty therefore remains about the why's. What is not in doubt is the what's: i.e, very, very high quality and believable play back. |
Hi Nick_sr,
The Copernican view of the armpod and tonearm as the centre of the turntable system, is predicated on the fact that the armpod is an 'immovable' object.
How that is achieved is open to debate.
I prefer to see mass (and plenty of it) concentrated on 3 spikes which would be equivalent to tons per sq in 'digging' into the supporting shelf.
You would be surprised how difficult this is to move without lifting the pod off one or more spikes. And that is how the correct Spindle to Pivot distance is accomplished......by tiny lifts and nudges of the armpod.
Until you try it you won't believe how easy it is and how accurately it can be achieved.
As you correctly say........isolating the tonearm from any motor noise or platter vibration is a huge benefit and can only be achieved in this way for Direct Drive and Idler design TT. Belt-drives can have (and often do) their motors isolated from the platter and plinth via a separate module.
The degree of stability and ease of set-up is something that differs with each solution and is something you quite rightly point out. |
Dear friends: Several yeras ago when I bring to Agon my first naked TT fashion subject and latter the isolated armpod for that naked TT I remember that almost all the people that argue against were persons that argue against it with out having any single experience on that naket/TT-tonearm isolated fashion.
Almost all the more fierce persons were the ones that not only never had any experiences but that never will try that " experience " even that they can did/do it.
I almost don't like to post or give my opinion only based on speculations and theory.
In this thread is happening the same that happened when I start on the whole subject, more than half of the posts were posted for people questioning the subject that have no single idea on what is its real quality performance and even that people like Chris posted that through the time his armpod stay in place other people continue argueing about.
The TT naked/tonearm isolated overall " fashion " certainly is not perfect as the plinthed one is not either. The main sunbject here IMHO is where the trade-offs of either/each " solution " arrive in favor of better music sound reproduction at home.
Almost all the persons that like the naked/isolated " road " likes because our ears and audio/music experiences over a lot of years tell us that this " fashionable " version in our systems gives us a better quality performance level than the stock plinthable version and this is the main subject: we already made comparisons with and with out and there is no single opinion where to a person prefered the plinth version: means all these something to you people that are questioning our version with out have/live any experience in your own system about?
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
