Brinkmann Bardo


I just replaced a Clearaudio Avantgarde Magnum with a Brinkmann Bardo. Both had the Phantom tonearm II.

Wondering if anyone else has bought this table and what their thoughts are?

My initial impressions are that it grabs your attention and does not let you wander off in thoughts as you listen to music. Maybe a little less open then the Clearaudio, but more grounded and solid as a result.
I definitely like it more than the Balance, which I found to be too "damped" and a bit boring to listen too.

I also felt that changing the arm to the Graham resulted in a more profound change and improvement to the character of the system than the table swap.
dbjain

Showing 10 responses by hiho

Dbjain: "My initial impressions are that it grabs your attention and does not let you wander off in thoughts as you listen to music."

Excellent description as that's my impression with many direct-drive turntables regardless of brand. It has an intensity in the sound that motivates active listening, and when it's good it's more involving and when it's bad it can be fatiguing. I guess, just like anything in life, it's a matter of finding a balance in the result when implementing a technology. Such sonic description is the opposite of my impression with one particular low torque belt-drive turntable with a medium mass platter that I had to assist the start up with my finger; it was lazy sounding.

The Bardo sure looks well engineered and well built. I also like its compact size and modern look. From my experience with coreless motor, it can be one sweet machine...

_____

The Bardo is, in spirit, also close to the Sony BSL(brush/slot-less) coreless motor from the classic PS-X70 era and the subplatter has optical imprint just like Sony's magnetic imprint on the platter's inner rim. The coils' position on the Bardo is different from other DD motors though. All in all, I am happy to see a modern turntable manufacturer giving direct-drive a chance but I am somewhat irked by them having to market it as "magnetic drive." I don't care what fancy words you use, if the platter and motor share the same bearing, it is direct-drive!

_____

My point is that Brinkmann intentionally taking on a different approach from the direct drive tradition. Whether they are successful in sonic terms is a different issue. You are bother by the slow start up so I simply direct you to their reasoning behind it. I like turntables of all kinds including tables with fast start up; I like novelty and if any brand trying to do something different from the norm I appreciate it, sonically successful or not. That's all.

____

Thank you for your explanation on the Dual EDS motor, Wjsamx. It's fascinating. I have a Dual motor like that as parts but unfortunately it has scraping noise and I don't have the complete power supply. I would love to be able to make it work and have a listen. After reading your post, even more so.

On Brinkmann's technical white paper, which provides interesting reading, in discussing the drive mechanism, it does mention the arrangement of the stator:

The motor’s stator consists of four specially designed field coils, which are mounted concentrically with high precision around the platter bearing. Based on listening and tuning sessions, we decided to forgo the typical 90-degree mounting angle in favour of a non-standard 22.5-degree raster, which, due to the magnetic fields overlapping, further reduced cogging. The motor’s rotor also acts as the sub-platter and carries a magnetic ring with 8 poles on its underside.

The drive mechanism, based around Hall sensors and an encoder disk, is designed in such a way that there is just enough power to bring the 10 kg heavy platter up to 33 ! e rpm in about 12 seconds. Conversely, only a minimal amount of energy is actually necessary to keep the rotational speed at a constant. While the drive mechanism is indeed direct, power is actually transferred without any contact.This soft coupling via a low power magnetic field translates into a silent drive, which reduces cogging further. One of the main attributes behind the sound quality of the “Oasis” has to do with our proprietary motor control. It works proportionally, i.e. it transfers just enough energy to the motor for it to remain at constant speed. Conversely, due to our ultra low-friction bearing, only a small amount of energy is actually necessary to keep the motor at constant speed. Previously available regulators typically work disproportional and rather abruptly: they speed up and slow down the motor very rapidly when necessary.

During the development phase of the “Oasis” turntable, we spent many long hours auditioning several different regulator designs; it became quite evident that utilizing our concept of proportional regulation always resulted in better sound: typical “harder” motor control concepts produced a sound significantly lower in quality, with less color and drive.

I do believe the Brinkmann motor is quite different from Technics. Many Japanese manufacturers switched to coreless motors in the late 70's to early 80's such as Sony BSL motor, Pioneer in the later SHR motors, Kenwood in their KD-770D and KD-990, almost all JVC QL series tables. Technics, however, stayed with core motor through that era. Reportedly coreless motors sacrifice torque for smooth rotation and less cogging. I am not an engineer so these are all based on visual observations of the physical motors that I have open apart.

.
Lewn: "There is nothing new under the sun. The Bardo looks to be a great turntable. What does it cost?"

According this site, the retail is $7,990.00 USD so each coil is about 2 grands. :)

_____

The slow start up time of the Bardo was technically intentional by the designer to combat cogging so it's rather unfair to criticize it for what it wants to do; it's a design feature. Here is the reason explained in their, again, white paper, if people bother to read it:

Studios (radio stations in particular) demand quick start-up times – turntables typically have to reach theircorrect speed within half a revolution. For LPs this means 0-33 1/3 rpm within 0.9 seconds. Such acceleration figures can only be achieved through use of high-torque motors and correspondingly tight coupling between the drive and platter. It isn’t a surprise then that for decades idler wheel drive designs were the de facto standard in studio applications.

But idler wheel turntables also had seriously high maintenance costs in order to be up and running 24/7 and to avoid rumble and other sound degrading issues caused by worn out idler wheels to affect the sound negatively. Thus out of necessity, in the late 1960s manufacturers of studio turntables began to look for low(er) cost maintenance alternatives. They came up with direct drive, whereby the platter was placed directly on the motor’s shaft, ie the stator was mounted around the bushing and the shaft was used as the rotor and voila, the goal was achieved; at least in theory.

But start-up times of less than 1 second necessitated high torque motors, which designers achieved by using motors with 32 and more poles. The penalty they paid were heavy cogging effects accompanied by high wow & flutter numbers. The cure was found in quartz locked motors and phase locked regulators; which corrected for any deviations from their preset with an iron fist.

On paper at least, these “corrected” direct drive turntables boasted hitherto unimaginable low wow & flutter numbers down to 0,001%. But the rigorous iron fist regulation prevented the platter from spinning smoothly; instead, the regulation caused the platter to oscillate continuously between speeding up and slowing down. These start/stop motions translated into an unpleasantly rough and hard sound; odd as wow & flutter numbers in the 0,001% range are deemed inaudible.

Once the direct drive technology had gained a foothold in pro audio applications, the benefits of mass production (ie. trickle down effect) made sure that very soon even $100 turntables were equipped with direct drive and advertised as having less than 0.01% wow & flutter. This is precisely where direct drive got its bad rap sheet.

Under closer scrutiny however, this assumption were based on some misunderstandings. For one, in home audio application use, turntables are not really required to reach 33 1/3 rpm in less than a second, thus 32 pole motors and phase locked regulators are not really necessary either.

I have a Kenwood KD-770D that has rather slow start up (approx. 6 seconds) and lower torque, in similar spirit to the Bardo, compare to my other direct-drive tables and it also has the smoothest silky sound and is speed stable that I really have no complaint. Direct-drive does not have to have fast start up but if you can't live without that feature then the Bardo is not a table for you. For me, I certainly appreciate Brinkmann taking on a different approach. I also like its simplicity and rugged construction.
_____
Downunder: "I certainly do not hear any of the so called negatives Brinkman have brought up in my two DD tables I currently have- just the opposite, then again I am not comparing to any $100 DD's either which I agree with Brinkman on."

It's all about YOUR turntables, all the other turntables under or at $100 are so beneath you, so not high end, regardless of what technology they use. The innovative Dual EDS motor or the Lenco tables were (or still are) all under $100 used at one point. Hey, if it's not about something you own, you obvious have no interest so what do you care.

_____
Downunder: "Hiho Chill mate"

Fair enough. Let's get back to talking about turntables and other fun stuff.

I am sure the P3 is wonderful as I have owned several Pioneer models before. And one thing I noticed is that Pioneer bearings are always excellent quality, especially their Stable Hanging Rotor (SHR) motors, compare to many competing designs (Sony's BSL motors uses plastic to hold the bearing well!!). Not to mention very reliable electronically. Their PL-L1000 linear tracking table is one clever design, same motor in their higher models, but the whole thing is mounted on a piece of suspended plastic!! I always thought if they could go for the whole nine yard and mount that onto something more solid and substantial, it could be a killer. That's why I gutted the motor out and made a plinth for it. It was then I realized many quality inexpensive direct-drive turntables with great motors and potentials being stifled by their awful plastic plinth and flimsy tonearms. I guess they reserved all that for their flagship products like the P3, so I have no doubt the P3 is an amazing product and it looks super cool, especially when in Robocop nude.
_____
Dbjain: "I definitely like it more than the Balance, which I found to be too "damped" and a bit boring to listen too."

You are very good at describing sound. I only heard the Balance at shows but some (not all) of these heavy platter tables have a sonic signature that's leaden and over "damped and boring." It's mostly in bass overhang and a kind of constipated quality that's hard to describe. I prefer a Bruce Lee kind of sonic presentation not Arnold Schwarzenegger, if that makes sense. Jump factor, you know.

I usually don't like to dwell on sonic descriptions but I remember hearing a Shindo 301 once at a store and it has a solidity, body, and earthy quality that makes many low torque belt-drive tables sound like the musician is missing a testicle.

Glad you are enjoying the Bardo.

______