Dear Halcro, this statement of yours in principle, I am against any turntable which sits on 'springs' as this almost certainly invites the turntable to 'move'.....possibly laterally as well as vertically?
All belt drives which have a solid foundation at least have a chance of extracting some reasonable information from the grooves. is a very dangerous one. It is neither backed up by physic laws nor by technical knowledge. Engineers involved in electron-microscoping or vibration-isolating would rather tell you that it is vice versa .... The "solid foundation" of an "unsuspended" turntable is a plain illusion. An - well applied !! - isolation from building resonance by means of a suitable spring (rarely done in analog tts) is the only way to achieve undisturbed extraction of the encoded groove. Problem here is, that most spring-systems in turntables are so unsuited to the task. Put your AC3 on a Minus-K which upper payload meets the mass of your full mounted AC3 and your jaw will drop to your very knees. You will immediately hear, that so far you heard only 80% of your AC3s potential. Promised. I will buy the MInus-K + shipping from you if you do not hear what I promised. Cheers, D. |
Dear Halcro, Your opininon re 'springs' imply that those
expensive AT footers under DDTT make no sense?
Regards, |
Are these some inventions in TT design or not?
everyone may judge on a personal bases:
➢ Nested Platter Design using  new proprietary formula for Magnesium Alloy. 30kg Mass of platter assembly 330mm Diameter. ➢ New MILSPEC Alloy used for highly damped platter ballast. ➢ New Fully Sealed Self Lubricating Highly Damped Rigid Bearing Design with Inverted 30mm Bearing shaft of special alloy running in ultra hard steel bushings. ➢ Vacuum Rotary Feedthrough for main bearing with low friction polymer seal. ➢ Massive Highly damped Magnesium Alloy Chassis with internal ribbing Shape Optimised for new bearing platter assembly using www.advea.com Reshape(tm) software. ➢ New Motor Technology Linear 3Phase AC - 24Volt DC Brushless design with integral optical encoder for motion control. Proprietary DSP software designed for ultra-low cogging and torque ripple with speed stability of 0.006%. High Torque 600 oz/inch capability continuous. ➢ 33, 45, 78 with wide range adjustment and absolute lock. ➢ Motor is Belt Drive using Pyrathane precision oring. ➢ New Vacuum Pump design with Stealth Mode Operation. Designed for continuous operation but quiet enough to house in room and in rack. ➢ New proprietary design Pulse Removal and Echo Filter System (PREFS) to remove platter to record vibration signature of continuous vacuum pump systems. ➢ New Decoupled Armboard design using Magnetic StabilisationÂ
best @ fun only |
Dear Peterayer, as for the Wave Kinetics NVS - yes, I have seen the pictures and have read the description given by the manufacturer.
Being one of the very few serious DD turntables in recent years, it will no doubt get some following in the audiophile community.
We can expect to see many owners of Technics SP-10 mk2/3 kind of "move up" to the NVS if budget permits.
Will it live up to it's "promises".
We'll see whether we will still talk about it in 2-5 years.
Cheers,
D. |
Dear Thuchan, all those features you've listed are fine and involve a few materials or applications seldom seen in tt design, but there is nothing that is actually new in the sense that it was never done before.
There were even - if not in finished products widely available - variations of magnetic de-coupled arm boards.
The technical specs of the Continuum read down quite impressive and there certainly are a lot of consequent applied technical features.
Nevertheless it is another very good turntable - but nothing that outperforms the great tts of 1982 when set-up on an vibration isolation platform and equipped with dampened platters.
But do get me right here: the Continuum had a hell of a lot more of guts, money, prime material and insight put into it's design then most any of the other designers of the day had put into their babies.
In any case the two Continuum tts are my first bet of becoming a classic in the future.
Style, execution, technical features, prime materials - a great package.
Sad story, but prime materials and great effort in execution rarely ever pay off in today's analog market.
Better go for great cosmetic and high WAF.
CHeers,
D. |
Hi Thuchan,
I agree with you about Mark Doehmann and Continuum.
A serious turntable indeed...........and not a spring in sight :^)
Cheers
Henry |
Dear Nandric, Dear Halcro, Your opininon re 'springs' imply that those
expensive AT footers under DDTT make no sense? I think that even the worst turntables seem to magically produce 'music' from the grooves.......even those on springs when there is no structure-borne feedback to upset them into vertical and lateral movement. A really good turntable is revealed when it is under 'stress'........full orchestral climaxes at maximum volume with top cartridges and arms. Just like a family saloon will impress while leisurely pottering around the city but comes undone negotiating tight bends at speed? I have voiced my reservations about 'squashy' supports under the 'nude' turntables and Chris is currently experimenting with different ones so we shall see? Cheers |
Dear Daniel,
I believe that the Minus K stands are designed to prevent any movement whatsoever?
From what I can understand...they are 'tuned' to the weight of the equipment placed upon them and when loaded.......I don't believe that you can make the turntable wobble or move? Is this correct?
Regards
Henry |
Deartonearm,
I think Continuum was on the right track looking to collaborate with Minus-K. I don't know what person decided to give it up and put the rest of the money in new ventures rather than supporting the Continuum family.
it is really a sad story, on their web site they warn potential customers not buying their products except at their dealerships and when you open the dealership page - nothing! The message is: Don't buy somewhere else but at us it is also very difficult...
best @ fun only |
Designing a good turntable needs a lot of brain, knowledge, understanding and precision. But this is no guarantee for commercial success. Here we meet the territory of the "I like it" Fangroup. Here the starting begins from a total different level, here is the master idea from the first Design... PRAT "Oh groovy baby... yeah..." (Austin Powers) Each his own... |
I agree with Dertonarm's comment about putting Halcro's AC-3 on a Minus-K isolation platform. My SME 10 is not an AC-3, but I recently bought a Townshend Seismic Sink and placed it under my TT. My jaw did not drop to the floor, but the improvement was astonishing. |
Daniel& Henry, It looks as if you are contradicting each other but 'springs' and a isolation platform may be not contradictory at all. To prevent people to buy wrong
footers (as I already deed) you should be more explicit.
I like to know what kind of support is adequate for an DDTT?
Regards, |
Hi Nandric,
There is one solution that works pretty well for DD TTs that came out of the wilds of Maine and from the mind of Andy...floating on air. However, it seems to better loved in Texas than it was on the rainy Northwest coast here in the US...something to do about the elimination of cartridge bottlenecks downstream.
As for those above-mentioned wonderful 1982 solutions...the minus-Ks will be coming along by mid-November to be here in time for the arrival of the Dietrich-Bavarian fully modified big Micro SX-8000 and RX-3000 turntables; of course, I will be patiently waiting for the new Bavarian tonearm to share time with the FR-66s early next year. |
Not to bad Unoear. I am curious to hear about your experiences. I am in contact with Minus-K for a long time but we failed coming together because of the weight problem - 250 pds. It seems they now have solved the issue. Let's see.
best @ fun only |
Dear Halcro,
maybe the weak side of the Continuums are their isolation issues. Neither the magnetive leverage of the Caliburn nor the feet of the Criterion are benchmark solutions. Therefore I had to implement my own isolation.
For all my TTs I have special isolation solutions, not only the stands but also additional special platforms (HRS, Micro-Seiki Air, Copulare Corals) provide a vey stable, balanced and quiet environment. It took quite some efforts to find appropriate measurements. But believe me it is worth a try, also to separate motors, body and tonearm stands.
best @ fun only |
Hi Thuchan,
Yes, my weight requirements for the Minus-K platforms were not as demanding as your needs. I only required 100 lb. and 125 lb. platforms for my tables; however, I do see where they do have a 250 lb. solution now available in their platform mix. Good luck in working out a fix for your isolation requirements, I am sure that you will find what you are looking for... I will post my observations when it all constellates in November.
BTW, thank you for your direct and indirect help kicking me off on this new adventure...indirectly when I run into spousal resistance, I always quietly show her the extent of your growing audio virus :-). |
Hi Syntax,
I do enjoy your tall sense of humor :-)!
Yes, bandwidth is always a consideration in obtaining great design and implantation!
Thanks again for your kind encouragement regarding maximizing the reduction of distortions along the signal path of the audio chain.
|
Halcro,
Whilst I do not like sprung turntables I agree with Dertonam you cant write them off. The key mistake most suspended tt's with belt drive have is that they have the motor drive on a different chassis from the suspended plinth on which they mount the platter/bearing/arm. If the motor is mounted on the floating plinth along with the arm/platter then it is possible to get speed stability - ie rigid coupling of the motor/platter/arm/cartridge loop is the key.
For isolation my non suspended high mass turntable is mounted on a wall hung shelf which lowered the noise floor and cleaned up the bottom end considerably over floor racks with various isolation devices. My floor is a sprung wooden floor, so you may not get that difference with a concrete floor. |
Dear Halcro: +++++ " agree that the perfect turntable has not yet appeared.....or at least I have not heard it? " +++++
perfect TT?, it does not exist and never will. What could appear time to time are TTs that already shorten the " perfect long road " like the Onedof or the Wave Kinetics or the Continnum: you can choose.
Many of you speak about speed stability and speed accuracy along TT isolation as main factors to improve in TTs design but IMHO someway or the other ( even with after market solutions for the isolation subject. ) all those subject are already " done " and today normally are truly solved and IMHO none of these subjects preclude to have and hear top quality performance from the LPs, at least these subjects has almost no influence to bad performances.
Of course that always exist the possibilities to improve about but IMHO what the overall TT design needs are designs that can change " dramatic " the today top level quality performance: the needs not only to perform at the top with what is in the market but " something " that outperforms by a wide margin/dramatically the today TT performance status.
There are alternatives to do that because there are some TT design areas that needs a lot more effort.
Two of these areas to improve are: power supply and TT build materials that are on designers's hands to decide about.
Power supply design ccould " sounds " something plain and simple for any designer but it is not you need very specific skills to design the " perfect " power supply for your TT.
I can't remember if was with the Brickman or Raven TT designs where I read that changing the stock TT ac power suply design for a battery powered unit the TT performance " enhanced ": this could be if you have a " wrong " power suply design because when the ps design is right on target a battery powered one can't beat it.
This example is the same for electronics audio devices designs. We know this because during our Phonolinepreamp design the first prototypes were battery powered till our ac design beat it.
The other area about TT build material is no more simple and in some ways very complex due to many factors involve and its relationship when we talk about build materials. Till today there are " designs " but no one I know already addressed succesfuly the build material subject and for what I " see " around there is no single road or a trend with that subject.
I'm not on TT design ( yet ) but one thing is for sure I have the main solution to that TT build materials that could change " dramatically " the word TT and I found out almost by " accident " through our tonearm design project. As a fact we already tested and is way promising.
If I was a TT designer I will put my main " research " and tests mainly on these two TT design main " characteristics " ( ps and build materials. ) that if the designer has success will can to begin to write a " new " TT design history.
Till then IMHO what we will see in the near future are more new TT designs that could be better in this or that performance area but with out change in " dramatic " way that TT quality performance.
I hope I'm wrong and tomorrow appear the " perfect " one because this is what our beloved analog hobby needs for " wake up " of its long long lethargy.
I'm not diminish in any way any single TT designer, all of them deserve my respect.
Btw, Henry you need to listen the SME 30/2 that IMHO is a top performer and till today I never read of any customer with any single compliant about speed stability or isolation or almost any other kind of compliant. Here you can read a review of the original 30 model and you can read there how SME handle the Dover concern about this type of TT designs:
http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Model-302-The-Absolute-Sound-1457.shtml
and always can read from SME directly:
http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Model-302-1314.shtml
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dover,
I agree wholeheartedly with you about wall hung shelves for mounting turntables.
They eliminate most of the structure-borne feedback problems which can damage the performance of even the best designed turntables.
I believe even Dertonarm agrees with us on this?
If you read the last page of the latest TAS in an interview with Peter Ledermann of Soundsmith.......he was asked for his most important tips for good audio.
A sturdy wall shelf.... was his answer.
And yes.......a concrete slab on the ground (not suspended).....is far better than a suspended wood floor in resisting structure-borne sound transmission. |
Dear Raul,
Thank you for those Links......interesting.
OK.....in the face of some good arguments and experienced listeners I have opened my mind to the possibility of good turntables of the suspended variety?
I really need to hear the top line SME 30/2 sometime? |
Dear Raul,
The SME 30/2 a top performer... aua. You are not joking I guess.
Hmm? Ok, I have heard it in a very good Kondo chain in it`s motherland with a mounted SME V. Okay if it is a top performer the Walker is the Giant. Both is not true in my very honest opinion.
Hope this is not the benchmark you draw your comparisons on TTs. But I am afraid you do. Hmmm...
best @ fun only |
Dear Thuchan: I can tell you why the SME 30 is a top performer. Please let us know why it is not, if you are complaining about then you have specific reasons to did that. Thank's in advance for your answer.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
One of the simplest and cost effective approaches I have seen yet.
http://www.bottlehead.com/smf/index.php?topic=1399.0
Brad |
Dear Raul,
if you are thinking the SME 30/2 is a top performer I am wondering why you are not going for it. Maybe we see the table in your system soon?
It is not about me. You need to become happy with this table. If you are as many others are this is fine. I respect and understand your benchmark position on TTs now better.
I usually try not repeating myself - especially on listening assessments.
best @ fun only |
Thuchan,
Like Raul, I, too, am interested in reading why you don't think the SME 30/2 is a good turntable. Could you please explain what aspects of its performance you don't like and why?
Have you heard the SME 30/12 also? |
Hi Brad,
Thanks for the link.
Whilst it looks quite simple........it requires some quite refined DIY skills for the home handyman?
The many connections of metal to wood provide severe hinderances to rigidity however.
Solidity, mass and rigidity are the three requirements 'sine qua non' for a remote armpod IMHO.
Cheers |
Halcro, I was looking at this easy idea for those to try a remote armpod out which has been promoted here as opposed to your concrete idea. I can see having more sucess with this than the concrete.
Beyond Chris and Corby I don't think there has been any other DIY approaches so far.
Maybe you don't see it but I don't think that Gent would have mounted the tonearm if it wasn't solid or rigid and he solved the mass problem with the addition of lead. It's not the perfect armpod but it did allow him to try his additional tonearm with only a couple hours of work probably with basic hand tools. If a router is in your toolbox the job would be easier and could be implemeted a little better.
Brad |
Brad,
It is almost impossible to achieve a 'moment' connection between wood and metal (especially the way shown in that armpod).
Without this 'moment' connection.....movement between the wood and metal is a given....ergo....no rigidity here.
If one were to grab the top of this pod with one hand and the bottom with the other and twist back and forwards.......you would appreciate the movement induced. |
Ecir38,
Thanks for those photo's. I tried something very similar with my Mambo but ended up trying a slightly different solution with the full arm tower attachment to gain weight. I'm not really certain why he didn't simply stick with the Acoustic Signature aluminium top-plate in his application though!
Interestingly, the main problem I found with the AS tt was the motor having to sit on the same platform as the deck. I believe that Raul overcomes this problem by decoupling his AS from the platform with pneumatic footers. The improvement this affords seems both obvious and interesting in our current wider context. |
Halcro, your a tough cookie when an idea is presented that is not yours.
That idea wouldn't pass that test for sure but I was looking at a temp approach for others to test your nude project. I'll let them be the judge if it would be rigid enough to mount a tonearm.
"I have found that a tin of asparagus can form the ideal height for the temporary mounting of an arm :^)"
After seeing that I don't understand why you would feel the need to debunk the idea.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1294870073&openfrom&442&4#442
http://picasaweb.google.com/hfeiner/NUDETURNTABLEPROJECT?authkey=Gv1sRgCLeeoJToqbeJOg&pli=1#slideshow/5511069514869967442
Brad |
Dear Thuchan: This is what we appreciate you answer because you are making serious statement against the SME 30/2 and it obvious for us that that statement coming from you must have strong and specific reasons on its quality performance level against other like the ones you own:
++++ " Please let us know why it is not, if you are complaining about then you have specific reasons to did that. Thank's in advance for your answer. " +++++
as you can read I'm not the only person that are waiting for your answer, Peterayer and certainly other SME owners are waiting for.
Again, thank you in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dgob: Yes that makes a rewarded difference. The TTs and the motor are atop those pneumatic footers.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Peterayer,
I have listened to the SME 30/2 in a very good Kondo chain in the UK together with a good friend and a dealer. We stayed there for one day (!) and compared many many records we all knew quite well, also having played on my own TTs with the same Kondo M7 phono preamp.
My impression was that it is a fine turntable as the Walker is too but it is not one of the Top 5 I ever listened to. And we all three auditioning at that day agreed on this impression. This is why I told Raul when he is telling me the 30/2 is the King of Turntables in his opinion, so it is his benchmark table. I am just saying in my opinion it is not but it will be a fine turntable in many good chains and therefore it may not make sense to elobarate in detail what is missing because you need to compare with TTs Raul and maybe you did not listen to so far (don`t get me wrong I am not blaming you nor Raul for this). I hope you can live with my statement and pls. enjoy your wonderful system.
I have not listened to the SME 30/12
best @ fun only
|
Dear Henry
Re: your thoughts on suspended tables designs is not true. In the 1980s through into the 90s I was quite content with a Sota Star Sapphire more so then anything before and after.
As the new decade approached my perception at this time was that buying new would have to be better. At least this is what the audio press was pushing of course.
This past decade saw a SME 20 including some TNT tweaked variants to a TW Acoustics AC from a couple or three years ago all ending with a dark sound I couldnt get rid of.
For the used going price of a sota sappire i'm thinking of a re-visit.
Pods,....for the sake of comparing your turntable solutions with experimenting with damping, rigidity and stability, put your Victor 101 in a well designed plinth with attached arm boards and attached adjustable feet, keep it all in the loop.
There are some clever ideas from some high profile members here on Audiogon that go beyond just mass loading with whatever seems heavy-ist.
Finally, some of you challenging the likes of Jonathan Carr , Dover and Lewn to name a few, on this subject of going plinth-less with pods as opposed to a solid grounded plinth really makes me wonder what you as a collective group of believers know what they do not. |
Some time ago I did also listen to SME 20 with Graham Phantom Arm and my Takeda Miyabi Cartridge.
I am also interested in some sentences why this turntable is good or not ... :-)
We all know, Turntable matters. But this "matter" has a lot of views, most rate something, because they like it or not, or the table does "something" or not, listeners who insist on a feet whipping presentation loaded with PRaT have normally a different view to such items than those who are mad about neutral reproduction. We all know, each his own.
Most turntables produce sonic masking and different equalizing colorations. This is based from construction. The better ones do not highlight some frequency areas and change the kind of performance based on that. Based on that (brain, which is rare) most are confused when they hear a Turntable which does nothing, only spinning the record with the right speed and adds nothing into the reproduction process. A good Turntable has no sound. When a Turntable "sounds", then this is based on mediocre knowledge about what-is responsible-for-what.. Sounding is for example, when a turntable accelerates everything, even Schubert Chamber Orchestra will have some "drive", no matter what you do, the sonic fingerprint is always present, no matter what kind of music you listen to. Those who gave up, prefer after a while only one kind of music ('...my System runs best with Blues, Jazz is horrible..')..
So, the question:
How much better should a turntable "sound" when it delivers a perfect 'normal', right performance?
And, why it is this the way it is? And is the sound also good, when the table itself is not in the 30k+ area?
Or, when it has no 3-4 motors ... we should ask Turntable manufacturers why they did this or that...
*Ahem*. Or no. Better not.. :-) |
Brad and Henry, I have found that small size cans of mandarin orange slices in water make excellent footers for my Lenco in slate plinth. I use 3 cans, tiptoes on the bottom of each can and a spacer on the top of each can so that the turntable makes contact through the top of the can rather than its rigid elevated lip. In theory, the assymetric distribution of the orange slices in the water help the absorption of energy entering the can from below due to floor-borne vibrations and the dissipation of any tiny amount of energy that might enter via the tt motor, altho the slate takes care of most of that, IMO. Cost = $2 per can or less plus some tiptoes that were lying around.
Henry, "Rigidity" a part of your holy trinity of armpod design, is good but not an unalloyed virtue since rigidity assures transmission of vibrations up from the shelf into the tonearm. |
Dear Thuchan: Please don't put words/statements in my " mouth " that I never said. I never stated that is my " benchmark " for TT or that is my " King of TT in my opinion ".
This is what I posted:
++++ " Henry you need to listen the SME 30/2 that IMHO is a top performer and till today I never read of any customer with any single compliant about speed stability or isolation or almost any other kind of compliant. " +++++
so instead to posting that kind of false statements give us the specifics reasons why the SME30 is not a top performer ( along other TTs. ).
I know for sure that you have no specific answers because today you are a different Thuchan that the one that you was motnhs/years ago when you stated: " hey I'm not part of that german group ".
Obviously today you are full and deep contaminated and as you say: if that works for you fine.
+++++ " if you are thinking the SME 30/2 is a top performer I am wondering why you are not going for it. " +++++
the main reason is because when I bought my two AS and the RX5000 I need it to mount 10 tonearms to test my cartridges and try to match it with the better tonearm where the cartridge performs the better. The SME 20/30 can't give the " facilities " to achieve that target.
For your last post it is obvious that you don't know almost nothing on the SME design characteristics and operation.
Where your RX8000/SX8000 and mine RX5000 needs a damping/antivibration plattform to " seat it " the SME needs nothing at all, the SME self TT isolation works as you or any of your TT can even " dream ". You can dance ( and I mean it ) a top the rack where the SME 30 is seated with out no single disturbance to the LP playback that you can detect over the speakers.
The MSs are one of the worst TTs on this main TT target design characteristics.
This great isolation job that SME attain remember me one old Denon DP-100 TT demostration/show where the Denon dealer " put " one of his employees a top the metal top TT plinth during playback with no disturb about. This kind of isolation is what a cartridge ask for and that those MS just can't do it it does not matters what you do or did about.
The SME 30 has one of the best power supply designs ( if not the best. ) out there nothing like that so poor MS PS design. I know very well the MS PS design that I have to re-design ( not change parts that does not help when you have a wrong design. ) in my unit and the 1500 and 8000 are the same, maybe the SZ could be better but I don't know.
The SME30 speed stability and speed accuracy is well beyond on what your MS can shows, these ones are far away from there.
The best for the last:
the SME 20/30 designs certainly does not belongs to the heavy weight/mass TT approach that IMHO is a wrong approach just from start, I mean here that TT ( vintage/today ) designers from this school already trespass the limits where heavy weight/mass works in favor of the design ( mainly to help with speed stability. ) where after those limits that additional mass/weight not only does/can not help but goes in detriment/degradation of the whole quality performance level.
The more disturbing on this heavy weight/mass school is that you can ask to any designer why he decided that the platter or plinth be of 100 kg and he does not have a specific and scientific answer and if you ask him why 100 kg and not 60kg. or 120kg: he does not know!, just choosed with almost no " engeneering " there.
I ask in this thread about to that TT that will have a 110lbs in the platter and no answer at all.
That BD TT on the heavy mass/weight school are very good looking " boys " for audio childrens/rockies that say: " hey, it weights 200 kgs. and cost 70K dollars, this has to be a great top TT performer. " with out to think that does 200 kgs. generate energy rotational energy that generate vibrations tiny ones that the cartridge take it. As more heavy as worst the problem and as worst the distorions that degrade the cartridge signal.
All these guys that " die for " this kind of TT not only does not ask their self about but where goes all that rotational energy generated by the TT? could be damped in effective way? how comes? how much? and before could be dampened/dissipated where goes, because on playback there are cycles to go and perform?
Obviously the SME people as several other TT designers ( Sota, Project, rega, Linn, etc, etc. ) know very well this " heavy " problem that : voila! has no solution because is out of the mass/weight limits on TT designs ( Alek on the Onedof pointed about: he knows. ).
A TT is a cartridge slave and must be designed to fulfil the cartridge needs and between this needs is what the cartridge can " hear/sense " that you or me can't.
Thuchan, do you think that the Victor, Denon, Technics, Exclusive, Kenwood, Monaco, TTs sounds so good only because are DD ones?, certainly not: a common denominator to all of them is that are " anemic " designs where is more easy to disippate/damp the TT energies/self vibrations.
Do you know what stress level " suffer " a heavy weight TT bearing against an " anemic " design? and do you know what this means?
The " sad " thing here is to see the Wave Kinetics DD that is taking that high mass/weight road, I hope that design be inside the mass/weight limits.
Yes, these " anemic " designs are IMHO more neutral and with lower distortions than the heavy ones. That you like it the heavy ones does not means are better because are not: it only fit your distortion level targets, that maybe you even don't know for sure.
I agree with Syntax statement:
++++ " most are confused when they hear a Turntable which does nothing, only spinning the record with the right speed and adds nothing into the reproduction process. A good Turntable has no sound " +++++
well, IMHO the SME 30 belongs to that " school " where those MS and other heavy ones did/do not.
I'm totally sure that we will see additional TT designs for audio childrens/roockies in the future till those designers: LEARN what a cartridge needs over their own pocket$$$$
Anyway, this is part a bad part of the AHEE.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Lew, I have been fighting for a solution with my slate plinth in the footers area to combat floor-borne vibrations. There just aren't any in the market that provide the proper height, decoupling, height adjustment, or a way to mount them. I recently discovered these that meet all of the above and will probably buy some in the near future to give a go.
http://www.simphys.com/Pages/isolation%20products.html
A wall shelf would probalby solve the problem but still would like to try these so the plinth alone could do it's job. One of those minuk-k, vibraplane or similiar would be the ultimate.
Brad |
Dear Raul,
understand your fascination of the SME which only gives me an idea what you regard as Top-Performers, nothing else. But your words on my MS is exactely why it does not makes sense to compare. You do not know my Micro Seiki implementaion. You do not know that I use a better PS, that I use an air based Micro Seiki platform underneath, and another vibration control mechanism as well, that I am using a very precise speed variability & control system etc. But nevertheless you blow bubbles in the air.
It makes no sense as others have told you before to look (or even not look) at the images of one`s system and start interpretation like you do again.
best @ fun only |
Wow - there are a lot of discussion points here - my points :
Sota - used to import these and my Sota Star Vacuum is still one of my favourite decks. It was far more speed stable than the Linn, Roksan etc. We use to rebuild the power supplies for the motors, knocking out the on board regulation of the papst motor and replacing it with better regulators. The improvement was massive, speed accuracy, organic wholeness of sound, but SOME CUSTOMERS DID NOT LIKE THE MODS BECAUSE THEY LOST THEIR WOBBLY BOTTOM END.
Raul - speaking from personal experience on my Final Audio ( 40kg platter ) I recently installed a wall hung shelf. Whilst the deck was in pieces, I cannot lift the tt in 1 piece ) I pulled the inverted bearing apart to check, clean and relube. The tt is 30+ years old and believe me I have seen more bearing wear on a 2-3 year old Rega, Linn, Roksan, Pink Triangle etc. There is virtually no wear, the oil is clean as a whistle. I use Motul V300 Power Racing oil which is very unctuous. I have seen it prevent a racing porsche which boiled the oil from seizing. The Final had Sine/Cosine wave generation for the AC motor along with infinitely adjustable speed AND adjustable torque 30 years ago.
I think the sad thing in audio is that the megabuck decks in many cases have been built to look different and the engineering is no better than decks costing a 1/3 their price. I think you nailed the importance of power supplies - I cringe when when I see puny power supplies on megabuck decks. Pure marketing rules these days.
Another great example is the L07D - look at the plinth design - many top end decks go nowhere towards approaching the level of detail in this plinth.
Notwithstanding that we cannot ignore the high frequency purity of a low mass tt - the best example in terms of high frequency extension for me was the Pink Triangle - woeful performance on speed accuracy but high frequency purity and extension to die for.
I prefer non suspended decks for speed stability - but the context is "within a reasonable budget". The Rega P9 is a great example of a low mass non suspended deck at a modest price.
The SME I still recommend to many friends and colleagues on the basis that it is a very good deck, a complete solution - tt/arm - and SME have been around forever. It is a lifetime purchase and an easy solution for a non audiophile who wants excellence.
Arm pods ( ugh ) - Halcro, why not use a decent engineers vice as a temporary solution for experiments. You can then have a nude rigidly mounted arm.
|
Dear Thuchan: Useles to continue arguing with you on a subject that you just don't understand or you don't want it.
Last: where goes all that MS rotational energy with its generated vibrations/distortions? where to hide? under platform underneath? where and how?
When you have the precise answers to those questions then you not only could understand where are you seated right now but you will have the opportunity to look how to attain a real improvement on what you have today.
Enough.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Dover: I agree with you and about your Final TT I posted somewhere how the designer was so advanced on the PS design that even today many TT can't approach it.
What you said about that Sota TT mods that does not likes to some audiophiles is one of the main PROBLEMS in audio: almost no one likes accuracy/neutrality, what we like because some way or the other we are accustom to are distortions different kind of distortions and when we heard audio items with a good neutrality level we just don't like it: like Thuchan with the SME 30.
I'm supporting neutrality in this forum for the last 3-4 years and other than Syntax almost no one want to speaks about: they prefer to " go on " when IMHO the CANCER on our hobby are: DISTORTIONS/COLORATIONS and the like that came in different kind and ways and for different reasons but IMHO this Cancer has a cure a solution and this cure/solution is to look for accuracy/neutrality avoiding all kind of distortions in any single link in the audio system chain.
We have to learn how we can achieve that level of accuracy and neutrality with out lose the MUSIC emotion/feelings.
I'm in the road and still far away to achieve the target but day by day learning I'm nearest to that target.
That's why I take the job to build my phonolinepream, my tonearm and in the near future a cartridge and a TT. Why took I this kind of job?: because almost no audio device manufacturer took/take it.
I don't have any commercial targets my only one target and compromise is to honor MUSIC at home and we can't do it adding distortions and unaccuracies elsewhere the audio systems.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Dear Ecir (Brad, I think), Thanks for that URL but which feet on that page are you using? There are at least 6 or 7 different products shown. (This kind of troubles me because it makes me wonder whether the manufacturer has a real "philosophy" or does he just want to have something for everyone to buy, no matter what are the buyers preconceived notions.) For my Lenco, I needed rather tall feet, because I have an aftermarket bearing that sticks down well below the underside of the slate plinth, and tall feet are needed for proper clearance. Since I am allergic to spending on megabuck footers, interconnects, spkr cables, AC cords, discs, weights, etc, etc, I seized upon the idea of canned goods as footers.
Dear Raul, I think I understand what you are saying as regards your preference for lighter platters, which is that high mass objects might have trouble letting go of energy that is delivered into them, and heavy platters might therefore continue to accumulate vibrational energy that can leak into the LP and cartridge, rather than to dissipate it internally. This is a reasonable theoretical consideration, but what evidence do we have that it is operative in the world of turntable platters? Moreover, if the platter is made of layers of dissimilar materials, and/or a proper platter mat is employed, I believe the issue could be ameliorated. Please correct me if I have misstated your thesis. I am not a "big-platter" guy myself, as you know.
We can all agree without rancor that power supplies for turntable motors are a critical determinant of the performance, regardless of the drive system. I have demonstrated this for myself in my system many times.
Finally, I don't understand why it is necessary for your and Thuchan's interchange to be so caustic (not to mention the back and forth between you and Dertonearm). You are both good and sincere guys and this is all fun and games, as Thuchan likes to remind us. I've never heard an SME, but I have heard from others that it is either fantastic or dry and analytical sounding. |
Dear Lewm: Layering different materials does not means disappear and does not means even that goes lower but only different kind of vibrations/energy or frequency resonances. Yes you understand very well my point.
The Thuchan dialogue came in that tone because he is posting things I did not said and maybe because or I can't explain very clear my opinion or he understand nothing about.In his last post IMHO he shows that he are not understanding or are not reading the main subjects.
I think that when two people have different knowledge level on a subject these kind of discussion/misunderstood happen always. I can't remember when was the last time that I discuss with you in a " hot " manner.
Anyway, all these is part of the " fun/floklore ".
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Lew, I'm looking at the the V2D series ball contact, have not purchase them yet. Open the pdf and eBay listing to get a better look. Their description is contradicting in some areas to me so a call to them will be done before purchasing. I like the concept and the price isn't out the box.
Brad |
Brad, Halcro, your a tough cookie when an idea is presented that is not yours.
Sorry you feel that way. I thought this Forum was an exchange of ideas and information? I studied structural engineering for 5 years as part of the Architecture course and for 40 years worked on a daily basis with some of the best structural engineers in the country including Arup Assoc who did the Sydney Opera House. Structural design involves physics, mechanics, material proerties, geometry, maths, trigonometry and even algebra. Advanced structural design is not often 'intuitive' and can rarely be interpreted by lay people. When you present a design which I see has obvious structural flaws.....I am attempting to prevent those who might see this solution as viable....from making a mistake? Nothing more....nothing less. And the added lead ballast to the lower section of the pod actually does little to increase the mass of the pod at the arm connection point. But I won't rain on your parade by explaining the reasons :-) And c'mon......the asparagus tin jibe? But just for interest's sake.....there is more structural integrity in an unopened asparagus tin than in that armpod. Lew, rigidity (aka-stability) does not assure transmission of vibrations from the shelf into the pod. A constrained layer pod can be rigid and stable yet repel vibrations. However I think it best to decouple vibration from the shelf via the footers or spikes under the pod. |
Henry, Agreed. Dissimilar materials. Spikes only work as diodes if one takes care to place them over vibrational nodes in the shelf material. These can be identified by tapping the shelf whilst moving a stethoscope bell across it so as to find places where the tapping sound is least well transmitted, i.e., a node, a point where the shelf is not in motion. I have done this, and it's really quite obvious when you have found the sweet spot. Otherwise, spikes will move energy in both directions albeit with different efficiency depending upon direction. |
Halcro, Geez I pushed a button there and shouldn't have, I apoligize.
All good points. I'll say it again, the idea wasn't presented as a do all end all pod and thought you took it to the extreme for what it was. Other than that I apreciate your input.
Brad |
Dear all, I must admit that - for the very first time in any thread on Audiogon I have participated in - it is much more fun just standing by and watching ....
from a distance,
D. |
