Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot II

Thanks for the compliments all, you know what they say, "practice makes perfect!" As an aside, I deliberately showcased my amateur/slap-dash efforts in order to entice those with no experience to give the Lenco Challenge a go and join in the fun and report in with their creations, a PR tactic which was effective. Had I either built beautiful plinths or had them done and THEN posted them in the beginning, the original thread would have died in its infancy. I leave these original (and FUN!...I had so much fun substituting inventiveness for experience, good tools and talent and look back on those days of simple jigsaw, pencil, Home Despot and clamps with nostalgia!!) plinths up in my gallery and continue to urge neophytes who have never approached a tool to join in the fun, report in, and showcase their efforts: there are NO self-made plinths which are not admirable, and aesthetics does not affect sound quality a whit!

Anyway, the Garrard plinth is still unfinished, and is in fact my Prototype plinth which I'll use as a platform for future Garrard experiments. Now I know I can push the Garrard into Destroyer Lenco territory, I've already got plans for a very funky/cool/modern/fun Garrard plinth (inventiveness with cheap materials), and for two tonearms minimum of course!

I was a HELL of a battle to get the Garrard to perform up to the heights we've pushed the Lencos to so far (I was indeed ready to declare defeat), which I'm certain will displease certain Garrard snobs (the lower components of human nature will always guarantee some will find a way to keep their lead over their neighbours, even if they have to invent it by denying reality, as they most often do) who want to continue to believe the Lencos don't rate so they can continue to feel superior by the simple expedient of owning a Garrard. Nevertheless, most of those who have compared Lencos to Garrards (and if we count only those who don't have an ego-axe to grind then ALL whose testimony is then trustworthy) in their own systems have greatly preferred the Lencos, which are a more highly-evolved/elegant implementation of the idler-wheel technology. In the end, what works for the Lencos works for the Garrards, though given their different construction (the Garrards are much better-built, just not better designed) different solutions must be found to implement the principles. In order to get the Garrard up to the unbelievable heights of a Lenco taken to extremes, attention must be paid to every single detail (as with the Lencos), including taking apart and restoring the motor, cleaning and re-lubing all linkages, making sure the wheel is up to snuff. Fall behind in a single aspect, and the Garrard will not match the Lenco (which proves the Garrard is in no way inherently sonically superior to/more effective than the Lenco).

For feet I use the same technique as I do for the Lenco: large carriage bolts which with their rounded heads approximate Tiptoes. The T-nuts are hammered into the inside of the plinth so that when torqued down (after levelling) with two wrenches (one to hold the bolts in place, the other to REALLY torque down the locking nut against the large washer which goes between the nut and the Lenco plinth), the marriage/effectiveness is supreme, the solidity incredible. This results in a great increase in detail/focus/dynamics and bass tightness/slam. Again, what works for the Lenco works for the Garrard, and as for any high-end turntable at all, be it belt-drive or not, suspended or not, a good platform MUST be found to maximize the performance. That done, I still have not found footers to match what I get from my carriage bolts. Of course, there are those who don't like the aesthetics, or prefer real Tiptoes, or who have special circumstances (cannot mount on a stand of sufficient integrity) and so on, and so must find their own way.

Now the Lencos don't mind a neoprene rubber gasket at all, but to the Garrard, this is anathema. Ditto rubber mats: the Lencos LOVES them, the Garrard HATES them. Now those who don't have an ultra Lenco and are using a Garrard with rubber mat are not aware of the sonically-destructive effect of rubber on Garrards. But with a Lenco as Reference, it is all too clear. I found a Spotmat sent to me long ago by Willbewill (thanks Malcolm!) finally found its natural home on my Garrard!!

So finally, when I attended to every little detail, securely and effectively coupled the Garrard to the usual Giant CLD plinth, removed every vestige of rubber, absolutely torqued-down the bolts/footers, put an identical marble/acrylic platform under the Garrard, removed the rubber mat and replaced it with the Spotmat, THEN the Garrard was precisely in the same league as the Lenco. The moral of the story being, don't assume the Garrard is superior due to a longer history of recognition, snob appeal or better build quality: the Lenco has only recently been recognized and is not as substantial (except for the platter, which is very evidently a better and better-built design) and has no snob-appeal, but it addresses problems by sheer elegance and clarity, where the Garrard resorts to Baroque brute force to achieve the same level of performance. Those who continue to champion a low-mass approach will get excellent sound because the idler-wheel system is superior, NOT because the low-mass approach is better (an idler mounted to a pile of fertilizer will sound better than most belt-drives at whatever price). The high-mass approach is more difficult to get right, but once done right is vastly superior, and at some future Idler Festival, the low-massers will find their asses getting firmly kicked by the monsters. Too bad, as my back would LOVE for the low-mass approach to be better, and maybe some day some wunder-material will be found to do just that.

If I fight so hard to have these various approaches recognized, it's because I want to be certain the idlers have every chance of unequivocally crushing their belt-drive "competitors", for lack of a better word ;-), and do the Amazing and Unthinkable: together force the industry which saddled us with an inferior system to recant! Now THAT would be exciting, would it not?!? Btw, this is not and never was an ego issue (those who have levelled this accusation periodically since the very beginning do us all a disservice, muddy the waters due to their own ego inadequacies, and consign us all to a bizarre, ineffective and meaningless fringe element to further their own spite, and I am deeply embarrassed to have to acknowledge this problem at all), this is a matter of Ideals (I am an Idealist, with a capital "I"), of the strictures of Science faithfully followed (i.e the empirical and verifiable truth, no room for political correctness, one does not compromise with experimental results/the evidence), and always was.

One other problem I never expected to be such a large one: Political Correctness. It is currently fashionable to go about believing that no one system is superior to another, and those claiming to have THE answer must be motivated, again, by ego. And so people volunteer to belong to a kooky and quiet fringe element rather than participate in a larger and meaningful battle. But in discussing drive systems we are in the realm of science and engineering, and here we are very definitely in the realm of THE answer. No one but a dunce would pretend that steam-powered engines are more effective than, or as effective as, a combustion engine. The combustion engine is quite simply superior (in terms of performance/effectiveness/power), which is why it dominates the world today. Similarly, there IS a superior way to play a record, and that is the way that most effectively guarantees as close to perfect speed stability in real-world conditions, actually playing a record (and with perfect speed stability comes everything else: bass, SLAM, detail, imaging, gestalt, DYNAMICS, transient response). Hearing an idler-wheel drive next to a belt-drive, one CLEARLY hears the superior speed stability, which shows that the measurements published mean diddly-squat (and that therefore the tests used to achieve the measurements are ineffective/meaningless). Remember, we have come a long long way, and what appeared to be impossible in the begining is now within our grasp (if only we continue and honestly and without fear report in!), the recognition of the idler-drive system, THE system throughout many decades and into the '60s', as the superior system all along!!

Last night I was invited to the audio abode of a serious collector of vintage euqipment, and among the many experiences there, he played old 78s on a Rek-o-Kut Rondine (which despite serious noise emanating from the hockey puck/idler-wheel and traveling across the room was not audible in mono at all) via a vintage tube/Quad ESL57 system, and this turned out to the THE clearest and most audiophile PRESENT and detailed sound of all!! And what struck me apart from the excellent sound quality was the recognizable absolute speed stability and SLAM of the old Rondine/system (I laughed out loud when I heard it!), in many ways, due to the idler system and the fact than in mono no rumble is audible (only in stereo is this picked up), the sound enjoyed by those music lovers of the '40s and '50s was superior to that enjoyed by audiophiles today (excepting those who have returned to the idler-wheel fold). There's life even in those extremely noisy idlers of the distant past, provided they are used for mono recordings and 78s!

The Garrard is a stunning performer, as is the Lenco, and even the rumbly Rek-o-Kuts in mono!, which proves (and will I hope in future) just how incredibly potent and successful in every area of audiophile interest an LP spun on an idler-wheel turntable is, and so Vive la Idler-Wheel!!!!

Hi all, actually, "stunning" might be too strong a word for my simple maple-veneered plinth, but thanks all the same Mario!! It was Willbewill's Spotmat which made the total effect (and I have a white one too), thanks again Malcolm!!

And I signed on for TWO, not one of Reinderspeter's brilliant new Super Top-plates (thanks again for the enormous and perfectionist efforts Peter), one for two tonearms (I would have loved three!), and one with none, for my long-threatened Lenco-Noll project! Can't wait to get my mitts on those, I'll have to clone myself in order to keep up with projects (not that I need any more, as the current iteration of the Giant Lenco - and Giant Garrard - is so far beyond anybody's ken there are simply no words adequate, excepting perhaps Superkalafregilistic!)....(ex-pee-al-i-do-shus).

Yesterday, my Morch/Decca suddenly snapped into focus, giving my RS-A1/Denon DL-103"E" combo a run for its money where beforehand it was but a pale and sleepy imitation. Don't know if the wiring in the UP-4 finally burned-in, or the Decca cartridge is finally burning in, or if it was the superb ca. 1976 Sony TAE-5450 phono stage (and I mean superb: it equals that in the Mighty ARC SP-8, it's the line-stage where the ARC whips it) which finally warmed up (it always takes a few days with vintage Sony stuff) and which I have wired into the ARC SP-8 aux input via tape outputs (effectively using it as a separate phono stage), or perhaps all of the above! When I received the Morch UP-4 as a part-tradies deal, I saw this beautiful jewel-like gem of a tonearm, saw its very sensible construction (tonearm wands of varying masses to match any cartridge and easily swapped) and I PRAYED to the Audio Gods that it be a killer!! Immediately, it killed the Rega RB-300 for speed and detail (but not for PRESENCE or SLAM), and was also more detailed than the SME V.

But then the RS-A1 came along and suddenly the Morch seemed lacking in energy and vigour (not to mention everything else), and I foresaw I might have to sell it (weeping, the Beauty! the Beauty! the Ease of Swappies!). So today with its flowering I am happy to report this is another Giant-Killer of a tonearm, when one considers the company it can keep ($4k tonearms), AND it can handle Deccas, which is no small feat, and good news, as a Decca Super Gold, when happy, is nigh-unbeatable by any MC in the world for detail, SLAM/dynamics large and small, powerful/fast/slamming bass or even imaging, unless like the Decca it is a Direct Scanning type (this doesn't mean that there aren't MCs or MMs which sound warmer or more romantic, or match it in this area or that). But be aware that a Decca is in an entirely different league than a Denon DL-103 (except gestalt and PRaT, and perhaps a certain naturalness), so that the Denon DL-103"E" can match a happy Decca in such a superb tonearm as the Morch speaks volumes for the capabilities of the RS-A1. But no matter, they both now blow my socks off, time now, to do the final set-up of my Garrard (the Dyna is a loaner) and pick a tonearm-cartridge combo for it, then its a Slammin' Christmas!

Anyway, enjoy your respective idlers all, and to the poor belt-drivers out there I wish you a Merry Idler and a Happy New Ear!

Hi all, for those who did track down certain vintage Sony pieces on my recommendations and reports, good news: I received my now perfectly-silent Sony 2000F back from the technician (who again stayed for some tunes via the Giant Direct Coupled Glass-Reinforced Lenco), and we immediately hooked it up in the system. Well, damned if the Sony, in terms of resolution, didn't match the two CJs and the EAR 834P. It comes with a very flexible phono stage (in fact, two!) with various settings for both LOMCs and MMs. It has drive, tons of PRaT and and an organic cohesiveness (ALL vintage Sony electronics from 1966-1976 have this: they were targetting McIntosh and Marantz at that time, and did a great job of emulating tubes via SS), and in strict audiophile terms beats out the legendary Dolan (which I owned and sold on after receiving the two CJs), except, like tube amps, in the bass. In my system as configured now, it is still edged out in terms of magic and dynamics by the three tubed preamps, but I'll set it up with a vintage Sony amp and see how it works out there. REALLY looking forward to this :-), the vintage Sony pieces are a hoot (and beautifully-built). Look for the TAE-5450 pre, the TAE-8450 (the top), the Sony 2000F, 1120 and 1130 integrateds (heavy-duty!), the 31XX series of amps and so on, including the V-fet series Sony developed (now currently adopted by Spectral), to demonstrate how serious they were back then.

Yet another CD man came by, this time far more audiophile-oriented (a HUGE stack and vintage and current classic high-end gear), who had given up on vinyl and embraced The Remote, out of curiosity at increasing reports of the Lenco POWER, something even the Lenco's "opponents" (besotted with belt-drive, the inertia of the long-dominating belt-drive Dogma and the lure of Status/recognizeable names/price tags and the support of the Audio Police [Stereophile, TAS, etc.]) grant the Lenco. Well, the first thing which struck me, both Digital visitors taken together, is how both immediately and readily admitted the Lenco's superiority to digital in terms of dynamics!! Now this is EXTREMELY important as, the ongoing/never-ending debate in the battle between analog-ers and the digital crowd is which system is in actuality de facto more dynamic. The reason this debate is ongoing is because both belt-drives and DDs lose out in dynamics against idler-wheel drives, and so in actual auditioning/comparisons, vinyl vs digital shootouts, the issue is not settled or clear. But, with the Lenco, the issue is clear, and devoted digitizers admit this within the first two minutes of exposure to the Lenco. The dynamics are more readily heard also because the Lenco is so refined, so precise, which allows the dynamic speed (the isntantaneous dynamic explosions) to be clearly heard (and not muddied by grain and various distortions). Also because, I believe, the Lencos in particular approach the speed stability of digital media (their sole advantage in my book over analogue, as the lasers do not affect speed stability one whit, leaving it entirely to the motor/transport, effectively operating in vacuum) more closely than any other 'table.

In the Shootout between the Lenco and the SME 30, the owner of the SME declared all Lenco superiority - which included dynamics and a sense of 3D palpability - a colouration. But I believe the dynamics are in the record/pressing/recording, as I also fail to understand how a slab of metal Direct Coupled to a large inert mass (Russian birch-ply/MDF) can create dynamics out of thin air. I mean we're talking as inert as a bag of sand, but without a bag of sand's killing of dynamics, which is why I favour the birch-ply/MDF recipe, which is also tonally spot-on and neutral (but, as in everything else, there are varying levels of success in perfecting this recipe, clamping and the quality of the materials have their effect, as well as implementation).

I live next to a musician and am occasionally invited to jam sessions (where beer is an important element ;-)), and get to hear live singing and playing in his living room. Those voices have no dynamic limits (this depends on the strength of the singer's voice), and likewise, on the Lenco, vocals strike the listener - perhaps more than anything else - with their limitless lack of dynamic ceiling on outbursts (and every instrument as well). In fact, the musician is so smitten with the sound of the Lenco/system he has asked me to host his jam group and entourage today to come hear for themselves. This after one of the songs they played last night: an incredible duet/stereo rendition last night, the two playing David Bowie's Space Oddity, one of the great musical experiences of my life. After THIS, which I was privileged to hear, the neighbour brought up my record players, and asked to bring them over. And to emphasize the point some more, he has no experience of audiophile equipment. We are talking SERIOUS performance for the Lenco, which also gets the music/magic right, unlike any other source I have ever heard, sounding SO close to the real thing (depending on accompanying equipment). I believe that, under the spell of the idea of "neutrality", which is actually a gross colouration (a coldness and analytical quality which is the stripping away of "flow", gestalt, organic and harmonic unity, which digital media embodies perfectly, but which certain DDs and high-mass belt-drives emulate with some success), many audiophiles embrace this artificial sound over and against something which does a good approximation of live music.

Which brings me to the two CJ preamps: they both (the PV-7 to a greater degree) somehow make ALL recordings come across as live. That includes studio recordings. I don't know what's going on, whether or not the CJ pres are adding something or retrieving, but I confess I LOVE it, as it makes my entire collection far more rivetting and involving, and makes understanding of each musical piece far easier to achieve. As with the Eurythmics' Sweet Dreams LP which until I heard it the other day I had never understood/appreciated as the masterpiece it is (and so many others!). The liveness comes also from the easy retrieval of the air and resonances in the studios (!), as well as both CJs' ability to cast 3D images, and so give the impression the musicians are in the room, live recording or not. And NEVER have I heard live recordings SO live! Of course, these experiences wouldn't be possible without the Mighty Lenco ;-).

Anyway Mike, good luck in your phono experiments, this is enough for now though there;'s so much more to talk about (the reinsertion of the rebuilt Leak Stereo Twenty, the incredible abilities of the Technics' SB/Studio Series of loudspeakers, and so on). I'll be sending in my PV-7 for an overhaul, and getting into the Tube Game, sigh, ANOTHER obsession ;-). Have fun with your obsessions all, as I first wrote nigh-on four years ago now and have continued to write, to some ad nauseum ;-), Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler Wheel!

Hi Mike, sorry for the delay, sill moving and adjusting. No, Spectral has embraced the V-fet in their latest designs, (Yamaha had also, and their V-fet designs, B-1 and A-1 I believe, were considered the best they ever made), but won't fix Sony designs. Though perhaps their V-fets are acceptable substitutes for vintage Sony pieces, if you can get them to part with some. However, in my experience I haven't ever come across blown V-fets.

As to the PV-7, my heart is more with the PV-7 than with the PV-8, and since it has weak bass, I figure this is due to a tired power supply, though it may be some new AT-7s might fix this. Though I'm really nervous about changing the PV-7's sound, I'll make sure everything is "by the book" in the rebuild. Still tube-rolling over here in the meantime :-). I'll eventually overhaul the PV-8 too.

I've now brought over my collection of vintage speakers (excepting the Klipsch Cornwalls for which I'll have to rent a truck) and today I'll have a big shootout to see which get to stay in the soundroom and which will be put in the basement: Klipch Heresy MKIs, Spendpor BC-1s, ESS AMT4s, and of course the Technics SB-4s which are currently giving me such enjoyment. For those wondering why I have so many vintage speakers, and no current ones, it's because all current ones I've tested have so far have had their asses kicked by these vintage designs :-)!! The ESS AMT4s have those fabulous Heil Air Motion Transformers midrange/high-frequency elements (said to be the best overall driver ever developed), the woofers in these particular ones are as fast as the AMT elements, are very sensitive (thus giving free rein to the Lenco mighty dynamics and transient speed) and the cabinets are as heavy and dead as cement; the Klipsch have incredible speed and detail-retrieval, are very sensitive and work well with SS as well as with low-powered tube amps and work well in small rooms; and the Spendors speak for themselves, have an incredible seductive midrange, excellent PRaT and gestalt/unity/harmony (another set of Lenco/Idler strengths) and with the right amp (Pierre's 100-watt SS amp which still sounds like an ultra-powerful SET) slamming fast and accurate bass as well, though they won't go particularly loud before bottoming out (due to the Lencos almost-excessive speed and slam in the bass) so for refinement and smaller rooms.

As for realistic dynamic swings not hurting ears (hardening of the upper midrange/aggressive treble), I've found that both the Leak and the Pierre amps accomplish this feat when accompanied by warmed-up CJs, which is one reason I'm so in love with the Technics SB-4s (as well as my next-door musician neighbour)! I'm hoping it's due to the CJ's, I'll find out today/tomorrow in my own personal Shootout (what fun!!). Let me know how the 5751 works out in the EAR when you get around to it Mike.

I'm building shelving in the basement for my large collection of vintage hi-fi, and for my large collection of record players (which is soon to include a Linn LP12/Ittok combo, I want to delve into its PRaT abilities). Soon as my soundroom/collection is organized, I'll start inviting various serious audiophiles over (already started) to experience what carefully-chosen vintage pieces can do, ESPECIALLY when backed up by large idler-wheel drives!! Have fun all!

Congratulations on scoring some Lencos, a Rega tonearm AND a Denon DL-103 Kravi4ka, a KILLER set-up for little money, killer enough to slay high-end belt-drives up into the Stratosphere! The general rule of thumb for achieving correct VTA is that the headshell/cartridge should be parallel to the surface of the record. Something which hasn't been mentioned in a long time is the effect of the Lenco's superior speed stability on both VTA and the tracking abilities of various cartridges. I've found that lots of the reported brightnesses and hardenings caused by too-high VTA are due to the nasty belt-drive speed instability, mitigated and sometimes even eliminated by the Lenco and other large idler-wheel drives (one reason for their "rich", juicy sound): just check out the VTA on the early Lencos posted under my system. Though dramatic VTA discrepancy by audiophile standards, cartridges so set up in the Rega were not bright, and in fact I lived with vintage MMs, current MMs and high-end MCs for going on 12 years with no audible sonic penalties with the Rega set up in the original Lenco hole. Not only that, but cartridges previously known for poor tracking (usually MCs) tracked superbly when set up on the Lenco! A case in point, the Kiseki Blue Silverspot, notorious mistracker, which tracked like a Shure V15 in my rig for over a decade.

That said, if designing from scratch, then one should build the plinth so correct VTA and geometry can be dialed-in. Like Mario said, the Rega best achieves a "universal" correct VTA for most cartridges when it is flush-mounted to whatever surface the Lenco rests on. Again as Mario points out, if you lower the tonearm-board relative to the surface the Lenco rests on, you can raise the Rega with spacers or after-market VTA risers. For most tonearms - the majority of which are VTA adjustable - I lower the tonearm-board relative to the surface as much as 3/8". While you can compensate by raising VTA, if it is already too high, you're screwed. Good luck with your project!!

As to Mass, while Mass is Class, I find that the "magic" weight - at which point the Lenco not only improves but transforms upwards to a whole new Level of Being (perhaps the Best in the World, GASP!) - is reached at 70-80 pounds, after which it is just more improvements. I design in order to be practical: the magic weight is 80 pounds or so, more than this will be a problem both in the present and in the future, and is already a challenge.

Hi Tessera, the main aim of the plinth is to be sonically neutral, and, by means of mass, nail the Lenco to the ground so that the wheel only drives the platter, and the mass "sinks" all the noise/vibration. Baltic Birch (of the Russian/thin layer variety) is heavier than maple, so more mass concentrated in a smaller volume. Furthermore, it is made up of thin laminations, glued cross-grain to each other, and so further eliminates/controls vibration/noise. MDF is even heavier, and can be easily worked. Back at the beginning of the original thread when all I wanted was to get the Lenco/Idler ball rolling, I didn't take the materials SO seriously (though I did in my very first plinths, which were made of a variety of sound-deadening and sonically "superior" materials such as plaster and Corian etc.), and just encouraged all to follow their favourite recipes/theories.

In fact, I didn't believe materials impacted the Lenco greatly, that all it needed was weight/mass (and this is still largely true), and I believed a total mass of 40 was likely as good as it got, more not being necessary. This view changed when Dopogue asked me to build him a plinth which could accommodate two tonearms, and when I tested it out (at a total weight of just over 70 pounds) my jaw hit the floor. It was then I began to advise the Giant Lencos. Similarly the baltic-birch/MDF recipe: while I generally recommended this combination, it was because it was available, relatively cheap, and very heavy, and as written, the birch was laminated. I built several Lencos before I tried this recipe, even though I recommended it, but when I did, I certainly heard - as with the Giant Lenco - an improvement, in frequency extension, in weight, in PRaT, gestalt, flow and in dynamics. Not to mention neutrality. And from that day forth this is the recipe I adopted (mass/weight, neutrality, frequency extension, dynamics, PRaT).

Now maple sounds great, and I find walnut sounds even better, but these are both coloured. So, I follow the following philosophy: build the plinth so it is tonally and dynamically neutral (i.e. extract the best of both). Once you know the 'table/plinth is neutral, the Source, THEN you can experiment to your heart's content with tonearm boards, and know you're hearing the material combination of tonearm board/tonearm/cartridge, and not the plinth. This will also allow you to find the best material for a tonearm board (more experimentation ahead). Currently I favour maple and walnut for their excellent sonic characteristics, but I should probably at some point chase the ideal of sonic neutrality.

Now I can't say whether the MDF might not cancel out the maple's sound (slightly sweet, like the syrup), and it would be a great experiment, but it'll take quite a bit larger plinth to achieve the same weight, which is fine if all you're doing is carrying it from the garage to the living room :-).

At this end I am just about ready to have the Review Lenco lacquered so it can be shipped to Cyprus. I'm cheating: in order to give it an edge, I've made it closer to 100 pounds total weight, being slightly larger in all dimensions at 24 1/2" x 20 1/2" x 7". But, my own Mr. Red is also overweight and oversized, and I cannot hear any appreciable difference between it and the "regular/classic" size. Consider it insurance. It'll be a two-tonearm Lenco, finished in glossy "seafoam green" lacquer, which is to say '57 Chevy Green, with '57 Chevy cream Lenco. All it needs is a muffler :-)!!

Have fun all, and good luck in all your Idler Projects!!

You are most definitely welcome Mario, and I forgot to thank Munkienl/Freek for the material in Jim's first and brilliant posting: thank you Freek! He was here (on the old thread) from the very beginning (along with Willbewill and a few others who have now vanished) and after having read me use him as a case study in someone who could hear some Lenco strengths (bass) but dismissed it due to the general consensus at the time over on VA - which STILL largely (a few honorable exceptions) dismisses the Lenco, sound unheard (the EXACT same prejudice I was fighting in the very first days) - as not a serious 'table. Reading Da Thread (then a new pipsqueak) and catching my reference to him (I did not name him to protect his identity but he recognized his posting, another loss with the deletion of Da Thread), he bravely took up the Lenco Challenge. He was then running a Thorens TD-125/SME 3009/Van den Hul combination if I recall, which he loved, and displayed the very quality I was hoping to address: don't dismiss claims (that idler-wheel-drive drives was a categorically superior system to belt-drive, and the Lenco proved it) due to prejudice, but test to find out the truth of the matter.

Many could still learn this lesson (just go sift through the VA postings), such as those who continue to dismiss and criticize the Lenco sound-unheard, due to the same old problem I had (and still have) with belt-drivers: since I own 'table A, then it HAS to be better than 'table B (blind prejudice knee-jerk reaction), except if 'table B is MUCH more expensive, or has a tremendous following, which assuages my ego. Ah, the good old days when only an intrepid few were willing to test my claims for the Lenco and the whole world was against us, and we could FEEL the momentum gaining as they first tried it with the then-cheap Decca International tonearm (25 euros!!) which I had been forced to track down.

I had remembered from my days in Helsinki from an old issue of Hi Fi News & Record Reviews that some company in Europe has tripped over a stash of these and were selling them for 25 euros. This was the trick to get people to try any better tonearm at all on the Lenco (they weren't yet willing to invest any serious money, even to the extent of a Rega), and as the reports came in of Lenco convert after Lenco convert due to the Lenco/Decca pairing, I finally got them to mount Rega tonearms (though I consider the Deccas musically superior to the Regas, the Regas are definitely more neutral and extract much more information, especially with MCs which also boost their musicality), which on the Lencos undergo a transformation into true gobsmacking detail-, dynamics-, bass-, highs- and imaging-Meisters!! With the addition of the Regas to the Lencos, the ball truly got rolling and more and more - still intrepid, adventurous, and rational (empirical evidence counts vs prejudice) with a sense of fun (roll your own, make discoveries) and adventure - joined in, came up with ideas, shared their experiences, to create together (the resources and time of the many is superior to that of the few) the now-ruling Giant Direct Coupled Lenco.

It's time once again to remind everyone of my rationale then, and my own internal thinking which led me not only by comparison (the very early primitive Lenco - not a patch on its current version - wiped the floor with every belt-drive I tested it against before I ever started Da Thread) but by logic to believe idlers were superior to belts in drive systems. To wit, given the Law of Diminishing Returns, one truly high-end turntable - which meant belt-drive back then - should not CRUSH another turntable, but instead, according to the price-tag/seriousness of the design (amount of materials, engineering), offer only certain refinements over the lesser turntable. But here was the Lenco (even set up balanced on bricks with no plinth with a Rega popped into the original arm-hole) CRUSHING highly-regarded belt-drives (at the time I was running a Maplenoll Ariadne and an Audiomeca, and had pit it against Linns and etc). My logic was as follows, and it applies every bit now as well as we are STILL in the same old fight (criticism without experience of the aural reality): the humble Lenco with all its faults (as indeed this is the HEART of the matter which so many have forgotten, or never knew due to the enormity of the now-deceased thread), its cheaper construction (as compared with the classically well-built Garrard 301/401 and the Thorens TD-124 and of course EMTs, AND of course the high-end belt-drives it was being pitted against), its so-so main bearing, its relatively unspectacular platter (as compared with many of the belt-drive monsters) CRUSHED belt-drives (of course the belt-drivers refused to acknowledge the possibility I was speaking truth, which is why I sneakily seduced many into joining me in the experiment by presenting them with a fun project - hence the title - in order to begin to accumulate my evidence). WHY??!!?? It couldn't be because of its build quality.

To overcome all the minuses there HAD to be a BIG plus, and that plus HAD to be the drive system, nothing else, since THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE. Hold in your minds the immortal words of Daniel R. von Recklinghausen, former Chief Research Engineer, H.H. Scott: "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing." This embodies the Spirit of the scientific process I was always going on about in Da Late, Lamented Thread: experience/experiment trumps theories, the end (this, in a nutshell, is science, and we are all qualified to judge for ourselves given enough information). Not complicated, but increasingly in the scientific community - and among the general population of course - prejudice/belief/theory trumps results, which are swept under the carpet to favour the favoured theory (which, for instance, is why the belt-drive ruled so long).

Now, at the time I believed - due to its inferior construction - that if the Lenco was this good (and it was) then the much-better-built Garrard must REALLY be something else, which would only go to show how much superior the idler-wheel system was to the belt/tape/string drives! Now, I had discovered the whole idler-wheel principle when, just-moved to Helsinki with my new Finnish girl-friend, I was putting together a good little budget system (NAD 3020i/Boston A40 MKII), and picked up a turntable cheap at a flea market for two bucks. It was a Garrard SP25. It was non-functional and so I opened it up to repair it, and I was amazed at the Baroque complexities of the underlying mechanisms (an auto-changer with hundreds of springs, widgets, levers) and puzzled by the wheel and motor arrangement, which I had never heard of (the black-out on idler info was that effective back then). So, being practical, and knowing I could never repair whatever was wrong with it, not understanding it one whit, I simplified the task: I simply removed everything which did not have to do with driving the platter directly, all the automatic mechanisms linked to the tonearm, and cleaned and re-lubed it. It worked. So, curious, I soldered a better cable to it and bought a decent cartridge for it (a superb Glanz). I could not believe the sound which was emanating from that system (even the little SP25s when modded retrieve an astonishing amount of information and have astonishing dynamics and bass), and immediately understood that this drive system was better than the belt-drive system (due to the above rationale, and because I already owned a legendary Maplenoll and an Audiomeca), and I grew angry. Why had I never heard of this system??! Was belt-drive not touted as the best of all systems??!! Now aware of "idler-wheel drive" (I even had to look up the term by sifting through countless magazines in Helsinki libraries, before the internet), I began to dig for information. I found, eventually, the Garrard 301/401s, which a few small companies were restoring and re-plinthing in the back pages of British magazines.

There being no internet, and my living in Finland, it was impossible for me to find any Garrards, and so I married the internal drive system of an SP-25 to the platter of a Connoisseur BD2 in a two-level plinth similar to the Cain & Cain plinths being made today, and even with separate acrylic armboard (I'll try to dig up a photo) to be able to hear what a more serious version could sound like. It was glorious. Finally, one day, again in a flea market, I tripped over a large idler-wheel drive (it was evident to me), with Lenco badge. I thought to myself, “It isn't a Garrard, but it is a heavier/better idler, let's play with that!” I bought it, had my Rega tonearm and Kiseki cartridge sent to me from Canada (this is all in '92-'93), and set it up on metal stilts (no plinth at all), and heard SUCH UTTER PERFECTION (against a context of belt-drives) that I was once again overwhelmed, and once again angered. I knew that this system had been unfairly assassinated by a concerted effort of the press and industry (as the LP very nearly was by the Digital Parade). A friend who was by now wealthy heard it (“The hairs are going up on my arms!!”), and invested in its development, as he was toying with the idea of manufacturing. So I researched the issues and came up with the "Lenco L75 Prototype rebuild 1992" as it appears under my "system" on Audiogon. The plinth approximated the open architecture of the Oracles (and the brief Meitner) by being solid and in two tiers to dissipate noise into the atmosphere and not store energy, the top-plinth was extremely low-mass (a single small layer of Finnish birch-ply) not to store energy and was isolated from the lower by lossy silicone grommets not to communicate the mass of the massive lower plinth on which the motor - in order to minimize/eliminate noise/vibration - was mounted, as I had cut off the motor mounts on the top-plate, and made new ones on the lower massive plinth in the same orientation as the upper (as it had to be), thus using only three of the springs on which the motor sits, and some rubber shims on the new towers to hold it in place. This was to be the Prototype of the new turntable which was to be manufactured out of brass and white marble (I was in love with Greece back then as now). But, this was the time when all companies were ceasing production of both turntables (Thorens for instance) and cartridges (Shure), and it looked like the analog thing was finally going to be Dead. My backer backed out, I got on with my life (drifting around the world back then enjoying life, Lenco in mothballs), and didn't return to Canada until years later. I had my Lenco shipped to Canada, where it was my main source, made some for friends, but never forgot my anger at a lying system (press, industry, scientists/engineers/experts). Then, one day, in my new work, I was forced to get on the 'Net which I had resisted, and tripped over Audiogon, being new to the whole concept of internet forums.

I first tried to gather any other idler-wheel fans out there - FLOP - and then, seeing there was absolutely no interest, devised my sneaky "Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot" to gather followers and amass a body of evidence. In order to make the project/plan work, it was necessary for me to simplify the plans (a single plinth) in order to make the project simple and so encourage people - amateurs and woodworkers alike - to give it a try and have some fun, and make some discoveries (that idler-wheel drive was superior to belt-drive) and report on it, and so add to the body of evidence/proof. From this sprang the various Lenco websites which dot the internet today, and battles (often vicious and personal) waged across the forums led to others discovering idler-wheels (rather than the select few enjoying hem but keeping their heads low) and eventually open discussions with no more attacks (kind of ;-)).

Here, there was a delicate balancing act: I HAD to keep the design simple on Da Thread, because if any newbies had come onto the thread in the middle of discussions of oil-baths and secret chambers and metal-work, they would not have given the project a second thought and the whole thing would have died in its infancy, Da Thread and the project - to have idlers recognized as the truly great system it is (not that it wouldn't perhaps have done so eventually, but the thread was growing and gaining steam already) - disappearing like all the others into obscurity. But Da Thread was a learning experience for me as for the participants, because, in the course of simplifying the design down to one plinth and the Lenco simply bolted to it, I discovered that rumble and motor-noise was after all not an issue, and that after all it was not necessary to go to the enormous lengths I did on the Prototype (I was worried about this for a long time) to produce a quiet and incredibly DYNAMIC and refined Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove. I learned to respect and admire the Lenco as it had been designed, the more so the more the design evolved: it is ELEGANT and, after all, ranks with the best in the world, due to the implementation of the design.

Another issue is that of over-damping: with too much effort directed to eliminating the non-existent (inaudible) noise issue, the baby (DYNAMICS, BASS, and PraT out the yin-yang, which is the character of the idler-wheel drive system, while stunning detail, frequency extension and imaging is the quality) risks being thrown out with the bathwater, and everyone coming to the erroneous conclusion it is the idler-wheel drive system which is at fault. Then there is the common sense aspect: how can one even know about the success of these innovations in the absence of the experience of the “normal” reality (i.e. Lenco in simple heavy plinth, or even on bricks with a better tonearm)?? One MUST have context for any such experimentation to have meaning, or to be even directed in the right direction. In the case of the Lencos/Idler-wheel drives, the context is belt-drives (most of us have that context) and DDs, both of which I experienced to a serious degree. In other words, if you compare it to nothing, then your judgments are meaningless, and you are committing the very same error I spoke about at the beginning and which I fought against so bitterly: you are placing theory/prejudice (all in your head) ahead of the facts/empirical reality (experience of the simple Lenco). This is what Freek and those others who participated over time understood so well.

Anyway, these are the various balls I had to juggle over time, and over time I learned many things, prompted by issues and ideas to various experiments. I have now come to the Giant Direct Coupled Lenco and also learned that various weaknesses of the Lenco can be made to work to its advantage: if the Lenco, like the Garrard 301/401 and Thorens TD-124 and various others had the superior cast and ribbed top-plate, the Direct Coupling – which is a BIG step on the evolutionary ladder – could not be implemented nearly so effectively. Those who try high-mass on these other “superior” cast idlers come to conclusions which are apples to oranges, and so meaningless. From this, if I were to design a new idler-wheel drive, I would make the top-plate better, yes, by greater thickness and so more structural rigidity, BUT, I would make it flat and not ribbed to allow for effective Direct Coupling - which, incidentally, proves that a high-mass which is an effective neutral sink for noise, like a CLD wooden plinth (I would steer clear of sand and lead-shot as too damaging to the life and dynamics, from endless similar experiments on my Maplenoll), is an extremely effective way to go, as there are no musical penalties ( PraT and dynamics out the *ss) and a HUGE improvement in detail, imaging, frequency extension and bass, dynamics and speed.

As to the problematic motor, I direct everyone again to Recklinghausen - "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing." - it is in itself, by its actual results (actually listening to records), proven quite a bit better than theory (examination and knowledge devoid of listening tests) suggests. Yes it’s a “mere” shaded-pole motor, but results argue it is not so “mere”. It has hidden springs and structure designed to eliminate noise (Dr. Lenco’s genius at work). It is mounted horizontally and not vertically thus resulting in less stress on the main bearing and more speed stability (i.e. the platter is not pushed to one side introducing instabilities like rim-drives and belt-drives). And the Lenco engineers/Dr. Lenco did indeed understand motor issues, as this type of motor had an advantage, as explained in the Lenco company literature: “The 4-pole constant-velocity motor limits changes in turntable speed to less than 1% for up to 13% change in line voltage. Rumble and hum are negligible. Maximum wow and flutter is 0.2%.” Now, I am not saying it can’t be improved on, everything can, what I am saying, is that given the results (its track record so far, AND it has been deemed superior to the “vastly-superior”, according to these criteria , top-of-the-line idler and DD EMTs, by someone who actually owns rebuilt an replinthed Lencos, Garrards 301/401s, Thorens TD-124s), not too much can be made of its “weaknesses” (again Recklinghausen) to dismiss – in the absence of experience – the Greatness of the totality (again Recklinghausen).

This is why the Lenco is a work of genius: ELEGANCE. Where EMTs, Garrards and Thorenses are better-built and use “better” motors, the Lenco simply uses what is necessary. As some have pointed out, the towers from which the motor is suspended are cheap tacked-on affairs. Yes, but given that the Lenco motor is hanging from and isolated by springs, a stronger arrangement is not necessary (as simply mounting the Lenco on bricks and attaching a Rega tonearm demonstrates). The motor cannot be divorced from the flywheel-platter, as the idler-wheel makes of the whole an EXTREMELY effective system: the platter has much of its mass concentrated on the rim (as opposed, at least, to the Thorens and the Garrards) and is balanced, which due to its very secure coupling (idler-wheel) regulates the motor speed as the superb motor (spinning gat 1800 rpm and balanced to produce pretty well spot-on speed all on its own via simple momentum) regulates in its turn via torque (wheel) the platter, to create an extremely refined and yet powerful end result. The main bearing certainly doesn’t look like much (though it is very nice and obviously made of very high-quality steel) compared to both these other vintage offerings and modern high-end turntables, but given the horizontal mounting of the motor and less stress (proven by the fact that almost all Lenco main bearings are still in superb condition still) more is not truly necessary. The Lenco motor’s sloping spindle means, also, that such tricks as the magnetic brake on the Garrard, which is often criticized for introducing stresses, is not necessary: the Lenco motor simply spins at full-tilt all the time, open and free, and the wheel is simply slid along length of the sloping motor spindle to achieve perfect and accurate speed .

Again, I am not against improving the idler-wheel system (as I have often been charged with doing), but I am warning against being TOO dismissive of the Lenco design, especially in the absence of experience(as postings dismissing the Lenco as a good budget project over on VA so often do), the Lenco being far more than the totality of its parts. It is a finely-judged common-sense real-world design (producible back in the day at a common-sense price, as it would be today), and a brilliant contender for The Best, due to the elegance of its design, and quality of its parts aside, it is likely the most highly-evolved idler-wheel drive ever built.

Now why do I write this HUGE posting now (and I apologize)? Because, with the disappearance of the original thread and the consequent amazing resource it represented, I feel the Audio Gods are sending me a message, and I am thinking it is time to direct my energies elsewhere (certain business opportunities, and a book I was working on which was interrupted when my life was hijacked by Da Thread). The original thread was a screaming success and all I had wanted to achieve with it has been achieved (idler-wheel postings are a growing percentage of all postings and the idler-wheel revolution I had first tried to initiate is well underway), and now, human nature being what it is, internecine fighting will begin between various idler-wheel groups. Low-mass, high-mass, this way that way, it’s all music to my ears as the idler-wheel Greatness is now being heard, whatever the implementation, which was my aim. I will continue monitoring activities in order to protect my baby (so don’t think, Anyone, I will calmly let you get away with anything, I’ll be watching), but I think I will make my presence less felt and let all the experienced idler-wheel drivers take over much of the thread, at least for now, while I set other things in order and get the ball rolling elsewhere. Of course, I will continue to build and experiment and seek to improve the Lenco and other idler-wheel drives, and will post once my Rek-o-Kut and Garrard projects are done. In the meantime, it is fitting that Mario initiated this new thread, a testament and proof that some were paying attention and willing to test the reality against their theories. And once again, I will stress what should be a Mantra for the industry and the world, and remind everyone that theories are worthless until tested, and that the result , whatever it is (like growing intestinal disorders following the release and marketing of genetically-modified foods and continuing application of antibiotics in feed) trumps the theory: "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing."

I'd add that you need to first check that the wiring is correct (and of course the red transport screws are undone), as noise and vibration is a sign of improper wiring as well, in which case adjusting the armature (which is a very good idea in its own right) will not work. Since you have a Leak, it appears you are in Europe, and if not in Europe, then you need to check the wiring anyway. Good luck!

Happy Labor Day weekend all, and here I am once agan labouring at the keyboard on this new Home Despot Thread!! It warms my heart to see the words "Home Despot" once again at the top of the analog forum, and I would like to thank you very much Mario for so adroitely re-igniting what has come to be know as Da Thread, due to its incredible humongousness: what was once very likely the longest thread in audio history, not just Audiogon's history, and a real feather in its crown that grew, changed and developed naturally, a testament to Audiogon's leading-edge format (I think it's the best), open-minded discussions of viable alternatives, and interest in achieving true advancment in the audio arts!!

That they not only tolerated our "subversive" activities (which were actually in the interest of real advancement, however many may have taken them), but indeed encouraged them by allowing us instant posting, is a policy I fervently hope they will once again allow us!! At least until they somehow manage to restore the original thread, or Da Thread, which represented 3,700 posts of accumulated experience, details, evidence, and a fascinating case study invaluable in its own right, of a technology/vintage turntable/Lenco which was at first greeted with mild curiosity, disbelief, resistance; through gradual acceptance, gobsmacked-ness ;-), and evolution of the fulfilling of its potential (beyond enormous to perhaps a New Standard), still underway!! So let's pray this information and record which was beginning to draw some more serious attention out there to Audiogon (Home Despot), which was the subject of discussions - positive and negative, definitely controversial - on forums and in private chats across the internet and around the world (I'll post this very reply on various Lenco forums to add to their archives), and was seen as an important element in the idler-wheel revival (and so a further testament to Audiogon's potency and fame). The accidental deletion of this resource and record (and what may have come to be regarded as history) certainly gelds this particular bull to a certain extent, but it's too late to stop the Idler Train now, to put the Genie back in the bottle, to close the barn doors!! Just check out the "Garrard 301: Some additional questions" on this very forum.

Jim, you have done an amazing job of summarizing my writings and findings on "Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot", you are hired!! Thanks to all for their e-mails and support on various other forums, up here among the snow-bears I am exploring lands of unparalleled and hair-raising, back-shivering musicality, thanks to some supernaturally-musical components (including, of course, a Giant Direct-Couped Lenco), the sort which should be examined by the design experts to isolate what it is that make them "tick", rather than dismissed as budget flukes or niche oddities, as the idlers were not so long ago treated - "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad;
if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing" - and the resultant knowledge used to improve statement products. At least, I would hope so :-)!

Enjoy your idler-wheels all, and for those who have not yet found one or tried one, enjoy your idler-wheel dreams and plans!! As Mario reminds us, get out there and hunt down those Lencos, which sold in large numbers and are practically unkillable, and if you stumble on Garrards, Rek-o-Kuts or others, then pick them up too!! If not any of these, I've written it before and I'll write it again, (and it looks like this time it will be taken more seriously), satisfy your curiosity by picking up a humble Garrard SP-25 (try to make it a MKIII or later, as the palters are aluminum and not magnetic), restore it as-is (clean, re-lube and perhaps damp with bits of Dynamat or rubber), perhaps get rid of the rattly automatic system to free the surprisingly decent tonearm (same bearing type as the much-respected Audio Technica 1005 and 1009), solder a decent signal cable, and mount a decent MM or even MC (!!). Now these won't match one of the Big Boys, but they'll make your collective jaws hit the floor regardless, as they have the characteristic idler-wheel sound - incredible potency, dynamics, life and PRaT - I keep on writing about and drawing attention to, you should be able to find these for roughly five to twenty bucks. Alternatives are the superbly well-built Elac idlers (my fave record-changers, beautifully designed and built, and FUN), and the idler Duals. Have fun, and good luck!!

Very nice work Peter! You'll have to continue to keep us apprised of developments, and fire me an e-mail when you come up with a price. However, I would like to see the old sliding speed selector thingie if at all possible.

Hi Jim: I fill up to the top of the bolt holes, though it would be simple enough to plug them with something removable and fill it to the brim (but be careful not to overshoot the mark!). I also mixed in some black powdered stain. I used marine-grade epoxy, which is expensive, which I find cures to a true glass-like consistency (I know, because I actually cut myself on a broken piece!), and so is very strong and will go far towards actually strengthening the top-plate. The beauty of this is that it cannot overdamp, since it, in a manner of speaking, doesn't damp at all, but instead strengthens to prevent/eliminate resonances. Or, think of it as a form of damping, but without the risk of affecting the dynamics/energy. A cheaper alternative to marine-grade epoxy would be automobile epoxy-resins used for fibre-glassing, which sell quite cheaply. I don't think, however, that it cures to quite the rigidity the marine-grade stuff does. The marine-grade stuff is all very similar, this stuff is just like the stuff I used in Finland (and I realize now it was quite a gift, and it was a gift at the time, it's quite pricey).

Interesting account Nigel, I will be seeing just how far I can take a Garrard, next project, coming soon!! Of course, plinth materials do make a difference, and one reason I eventually dedicated myself to birch-ply/MDF is because, after trying out several exotic recipes in my earlier Lenco rebuilds, damned if the Birch-ply/MDF didn't make me stop and hear - I think (can't be absolutely certain) - greater dynamics and more even frequency response (deeper tighter bass and higher cleaner highs) or neutrality. Of course, I could be wrong, but it seemed to me this was the case. Building plinths is a lot of work, and building several in various materials just too much work. Then there are synergy issues, where a recipe sounds better because it better counter-balances a given tonearm/cartrdige combo. So I'll just trust my instincts on this one, what a swamp! Say Hi to Malcolm for us, from me especially, he was such a help in the early days with his endless finds of treasure/info.

The AR2ax's continue to amaze me: like the Lenco, most don't know how good these are because they never tried them with serious components (in the Lenco's case, with a serious tonearm). I keep harping on these because for those on a budget, it is the closest thing to a full-range high-end audiophile speaker they will get, and so which will allow them to experience that awesome idler bass AND detail and musical magic!! A heckuva lesson in music reproduction done right (assuming a good amplifier too). (And, in low whispers, those who can afford a new full-range high-end speaker, but just wanna see ust how far a few bucks can go fer a kick, or designers who want to actually learn something and achieve actual progress, shhhhhh....I won't tell anyone ;-)).

I am hoping to try out a very strange and wonderful tonearm, which is pricier than the Rega RB-300 (but not by much once the Rega's mandatory re-wiring is done), but which just might be another budget Giant-Killer (as the MG-1 air-bearing arm already is). Back later with more adventures, I hope :-)!!

Congratulations on your impending religious experience Nigel!! And just in time too, as I do believe I have a new and significant upgrade to offer all the Lenco-ers out there.

Back when I had made the first "high-end" idler from cobbling together the working parts of a Garrard SP-25 to a Connoisseur platter and bearing (in the absence of finding a Garrard 301 or 401 and before I had stumbled on the Lenco), I had married the Garrard inner platter/drive wheel to the Connoisseur platter by pouring in marine grade epoxy-resin, which is very liquid and hardens to a true glass-like hardness and consistency. Now this has been at the back of my mind for years, but given the Lenco's incredible Mightiness (even in the early days before Direct Coupling and very high-mass superior to the VPI TNT Dopogue had, as well as a Well-Tempered, STD, Linn LP12 - Hi Malcolm, Rjdcan, Mark!! - among others), I didn't think it truly necessary to go to these lengths to damp the top-plate, as the much easier Dynamat (and various other damping materials) did a good job. But now, given the enormous efforts made to either reinforce the top-plate or eliminate it, and the tremendous success of Direct Coupling, I thought I'd dust off this idea and give it a go. The thinking behind this is several-fold. I have repeatedly warned against over-damping the top-plate and plinth for fear of damping the Lenco's Mightiness in the bargain (damaging its amazing dynamics micro and macro). I have heard the difference between lots of Dynamat (there goes the neighbourhood) and a little (Ah there it is again!). Now the glass damps the top-plate with extreme effectiveness, as it literally pours into and fills all cavities (I use a caulking gun to create little walls around the bits you don't want filled, like the speed and on-switch linkages), and, by using an extremely smooth tape (I use double and triple thickness packing tape, pressed on as perfectly as possible for a perfect surface) to cover the arm-hole and other holes, the glue fills these in too and makes them flush with the surface, thus eliminating those problematic holes. But not only does the glue make for the perfect damping material (eliminating vibration/torsional movement while doing nothing to subtract the 'table/tonearm/cartridge's natural energies), it also reinforces the top-plate to an extreme degree, and so prevents any grosser vibration. The Direct Coupling does the rest. No need to cut away the body, no need to reinforce with metal sheet. But: this is not a reversible mod, so some participation and reporting back is required.

Now, as always, I was more worried about losing the musical magic than I was desiring to increase detail and various other sonic artefacts. Recall my last post where the Lenco/SME V/Denon DL-103"E" was causing severe shivers and spasms in addition to the usual raising of hairs and minor shivers the "ordinary" Giant Direct Coupled Lenco causes via the magical AR2ax's (it turns out these have AlNiCo magnets which might explain their supernatural abilities). Well, this Lenco already had the glass-epoxy mod. So, with great difficulty (the SME is not an easy arm to set up or exchange), I went back and forth between a regular Lenco and a Glass Lenco using the ARs to see what advantages and disadvantages there were, musically-speaking , as the ARs are PRaT masters, given a Lenco and suitable electronics. Sure enough, when I mounted the SME on the regular Lenco the shivers stopped, though the hair-raising phenomenon and whiplash-inducing head-banging continued. Tonight, after a week of living with the Lenco on the normal Lenco, I moved it to the Glass Lenco: the shivers, the intense spasms, the whole-body hair-raising is back with a vengeance, and a form of intense BEAUTY which is quite simply sublime.

Now, like the Direct Coupling, set up is important, as, yes, there is more detail, speed and focus, and this can lead to some unpleasant surprises, like discovering a certain album is bright, or a certain arm/cartridge combo is not as optimized as you thought. You'll have to optimize these to compensate, but what is most important, the musical payoff is TREMENDOUS. It should be, as it does more of what high-mass and Direct Coupling already accomplish, which is to hold the Lenco down nailed to the universe so as to allow that near-perfect drive system to do its work unimpeded, and with total confidence. The result is Pure Magic. If it was only in audiophile terms important, I would simply go back to Dynamat. So, for the intrepid, and in the knowledge the mod is permanent (or at the very least a total bitch to undo), I would appreciate any feedback on the success (or not) of this mod!!

Now while I have drastically reduced my participation on forums to a large extent, this doesn’t mean I haven't been very active in the Lenco War. I've stepped it up a notch: expect to see the Lenco show up at shows in the future fronting various types of equipment the better to demonstrate them (anything upstream of a Lenco or other large idler is bound to be shown to best effect!) thus showing in no uncertain terms just how potent and successful (in fact the MOST Potent) a drive system idler really is. Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler Wheel!!

Hi Peter: the experiment was not mine, but reported by someone else on the Hi Fi World forum, and I am guessing the mass was nowhere near that of a Giant Lenco. This report is merely corroboration for what I have already heard: a LARGE improvement in every way with the extra added mass. A "small" (40-pound) Lenco was already unthinkably good, easily crushing a VPI TNT MKII for instance, and in musical terms pretty well everything else in the world (barring other large idler-wheel drives), and in terms of noise too. A Giant at 70 pounds is much better (beyond any known limits so far, but then, so was the 40-pounder ;-)), and I am working on a true Giant, at roughly 100 pounds, to enable me to mount three tonearms at a time: I got it bad!!! I have no idea what the extra 30 pounds or so will gain me sonically (diminishing returns?), I'm building it to accomodate my Maplenoll tonearm as well as two others. I have a G88 to work with for which I will cannibalize the parts from an L78 or L75 (newer motors are better, and metal idlerwheel and carrier arm). When this Beast is ready I will report on whether improvements are even audible!! This extra mass is only truly effective/audible when combined with Direct Coupling.

Hyperbole?! WHAT hyperbole ;-)!?! Up here nuthin' going on but angels clustering in my living-room every night to get a taste of the Heaven they are away from on assignment for the moment.

Hi Mario: I had warned against recorded rumble several times on Da Thread, that the Mighty Lenco (and other idler-wheel drives) has no lower limits and so retrieves recorded rumble, Deccas being especally bad in this respect. The danger being, of course, that the 'table is dismissed for having TOO MUCH bass resolution (and the greater the mass the better/worse it is). On several recordings, I can hear people walking by on other floors of the same building, and opening and closing doors...the shifting of air masses is being picked up!! Now THAT's low-frequency resolution. But one must be very careful not to throw the Mighty Baby out with the bathwater, and take care that the rumble one hears is in fact coming from the turntable and not from the recording. Along with that type of rumble/noise comes, mind-blowing bass, of course.

Hi all: Up here I’ve been having adventures chasing the Kundalini Effect across a variety of components, thanks for the moment to the Lenco/SME V/Denon DL-103 matching. Now I realize the SME V is a pricey component, so for the foreseeable while, after I return the SME to its rightful owner, I will see if I can extract the same effect from my Rega tonearm (only re-wired, no other tweaks) with the Denon with the addition of after-market tweaks and Twl’s lateral weights, or from some other tonearm/cartridge combo (the Grados likely have the potential too, already come very close).

I’ve been playing with the Glass Epoxy Mod too, and learned in the process just how much like a violin the Lenco is!!: tighten the bolts – either the woodscrews used for direct coupling or the bolts which insert in the threaded insets on the Lenco top-plate – and the sound hardens and bass and PraT go away, loosen so it’s snug and it re-appears. And I would say the Lenco threaded bolts are even more critical than the direct coupling screws, though it goes without saying that you must be very careful not to distort the top-plate by too much pressure on the woodscrews. Get it right and everything comes into focus, and the Glass Mod is the most natural-sounding iteration of the Lenco I’ve heard so far, preserving the Mighty dynamics and transient speed, but with an added Grado-like richness (NATURAL richness music actually has), and with a Grado-like sense of ebullient drive and rhythm and bass (any wonder I love the Grados?!?), and all the improvements in detail-retrieval and soundstage.

Now, I had been using the Sony 3130F/AR combo to test for the Kundalini Effect, as these do it better than any speaker I’ve heard so far, except for the Athenas. Now the ARs were designed with tube amps in mind, and so don’t sound good (especially in the bass) with modern SS amps due to their elevated damping factor. Older SS amps had very low damping factor, and consequently extract much better/more exciting bass from the ARs. Henry Kloss, who worked on these speakers (as well as Vilchur and others) recommended wiring resistors in series with the speaker cables to emulate a tube amp, I’ll have to look this up for more details.

Which brings me to the 100-watt solid-state Class AB amp I had written about way back, built by a follower of Da Thread from its beginning, which I had heard and likened to a 100-watt Class A SET in sound. Well, I finally went and picked it up and it is everything I had hoped it would be and more. Actually, when I hooked it up to my ARs, the Kundalini Effect went away, but in its stead I was left with a HUGE walk-through soundstage, incredible and filigree dainty detail, endless and perfect high frequencies which appear rolled-off but aren't, being due to the UTTER and TOTAL absence of any grain or distortions. Makes my little Sony amp sound quite barbaric in fact. But. The Kundalini Effect is gone, those fascinating wrecking-ball slamming percussion instruments are gone, that Super Energy is gone, because the 100-watt heavy monster (three times the size and weight of my little Sony amp), sounds just like a very loud 3-watt single-ended tube amp, all Supreme Refinement (how does he do it?!?), Ultra Detail with HUGE space between all the clearly audible instruments. WHAT transparency. Sitting there, it struck me that this amp needed my easy-to-drive perfect-midrange-to-high-frequency ESS speakers, so in they went.

NOW we are talking PERFECTION. The detail is absolutely astounding (and this from my humble Denon DL-103"E", but the ESS are incredible in this sense...as well), the energy and speed is back, the bass fast and slamming, the image incredible and HUGE and yet at the same time specific, and all without any audible distortions at all, just like reviewspeak: it offers a clear window (and I mean CLEAR, nothing there; just the grooves, then the sound in the room with nothing in-between) onto the event. I have never heard anything like it. And the Kundalini Effect is back, but with an added very beguilingly beautiful sound from those fantastic delicate/dynamic Heil tweeter/midranges, it will be my Reference System to amaze and astound. Many of my older Lenco converts became converts when they heard my Lenco played through the ESS back in the old home days. They STILL talk about that experience. But they ain't heard nuthin' yet.

Now this is important: I got the Kundalini Effect (in addition to the tingle/hair-raising effect one only too rarely gets in high-end audio, this is the experience of actual intense physical shivers, which I have seen with my own eyes affect others too) from both the Sony/AR combo and from the Pierre Amp/ESS combo, which means it is independently attributable specifically to the Lenco/SME V/Denon combo, and not some freak of synergy having to do solely with the totality of my system. Strike another blow for the Mighty Lenco, but also for the Denon DL-103 (and variants), which truly does have something unique to it and it alone (you don't see cult followings of the Denon DL-304, or DL-S1, do you?): a musical INTENSITY which no other moving-coil can match (unless it is a direct-scanning type, I may find out some day), even remotely. I hook up the superb Koetsu Rosewood, and though the sound improves in every audiophile sense (detail, speed, bass, highs, imaging), the Kundalini Effect goes away, like hitting the OFF switch (this doesn't mean the tingle factor/hair-raising experience is gone, it remains and is still musically-intense). Re-inserting the Denon brings back the effect immediately, like hitting the ON switch. The Denon has more PLUCK in its pluck (string-plucks LEAPING out with HEFT), and more SLAM in its slam, hitting like a heavyweight, with style, like Ali, vs every other MC's Sugar Ray Leonard impression. Now not everyone prefers the Denon to the Koetsu: some prefer the Koetsu's greater audiophile abilities. But, significantly, among those who prefer the Denon is a drummer. This highlights what is going on: those who are more sensitive to timing and rhythm prefer the Denon; those who are less sensitive to this prefer the Koetsu, which goes some ways to explaining the arguments over which equipment is better, simple sensitivity (or lack thereof) to various musical issues. I believe, anyway, that prolonged exposure to the Lencos and other large idler-wheel drives leads to greater and greater sensitivity to PRaT and gestalt/coherence.

I have to say more about the image from Pierre's amp. I didn't know my records sounded anything like this!!!! I have a whole new record collection!!! Now this a "regular" class AB stereo amp, one transformer, two channels, solid state. But I have NEVER heard imaging like this, and I have owned a variety of tube monoblocks in my time, which excelled at imaging. Not only is the soundstage HUGE and walk-through-and-around, but this is also due to the fact that all the musicians and instruments are their actual size: here you have a human with a human-sized head, and WAY over there behind and to the right is a regular-sized guitar, and off to the left about twenty feet down some small percussion instrument doing its thing. This is tied to the enormous detail (and did I mention perfect and with no distortions whatsoever?...I mean, is this even possible?!?), which is so audible because of the incredible transparency (there's no amp there!!!). In fact, the sound is SO PERFECT, the detail presented with SUCH a total lack of strain (100-watt single-ended tube amp-like) that I think it's a coloration. Then again maybe not. I don't know what to think, but I know this: I have been taking out many of my albums to learn just exactly what's on them!!!

Now this amp isn’t available commercially (but perhaps, if you ask nice, you might get Pierre to make you one, that’s his decision) but I write about it to highlight an aspect of this hobby of ours and commercially-available products. To wit, this just goes to show you amps too are like instruments: Pierre took a normal Class AB circuit, and tuned it by the judicious application of this resistor here and that capacitor there, even listening to different solders, and by designing the circuit boards for maximal musicality (issues of capacitance, inductance and noise in the design) and by using a frame (C-core I believe) transformer, which he says sounds much better than toroidals. I mean, who does this in commercially-avaliable products? They come up with a good circuit design with good components and good sound, and then wreck it by either downgrading the quality of the components to increase profit, or by inserting audiophile-darling caps and resistors without testing for their actual effect (i.e. a gain in detail at the expense of musicality/gestalt/magic). I've heard Pierre's other designs (true dual monos and some monoblocks), which were actually even more detailed with better imaging and firmer bass. But they didn't have this smooth silky vice-free/SET-like sound (sounding more typically solid-state) and sense of illimitable dynamics (clear skies above, no hardening or distortions) and gestalt this amp has. And Pierre was entirely aware of this, and already knew in advance from my writings that I would prefer the 100-watt SET-mimicker. I'll have to get more details from him, but the idea is, that what is considered a pretty low circuit on the Totem Pole (Class AB solid-state vs tubes and Class A) can be turned into a silk purse by doing it right. I’ll say more on this as I know more, but for the moment, my Giant Direct Coupled Glass-Reinforced Lenco (getting long ;-))/ARC SP-8/Pierre Amp/ESS AMT4 is producing ludicrously good sound up here (no one hears this unaffected, some even literally shake in their seats!), and I can’t wait to hear what my Grado sounds like on this rig!!

Hi again Peter, it's good to know your new plate will incorporate speed changes, which makes it all the tastier!! For the moment, I'm off to try to extract the Kundalini Effect from other combos, starting with my beloved Grado Woody, and of course my Decca! Have fun all!

Hi Peter, that is some brilliant planning and beautiful representations of your new Lenco plate!! I would caution that the most dangerous source of noise is the motor/idler/platter interface, particularly the motor/idler as source of noise, then picked up by the platter/tonearm/cartridge. So you don't want the motor island to be TOO decoupled, but indeed bolted securely to the heavy plinth like all the rest (the constant reduction in noise as the mass increases proves this is effective), but disconnected as you have designed it to cut off that avenue of transmission. Though of course orientation of the motor must be perfect.

Speaking of high-mass, we now have some measurements/Empirical Evidence (using ears and a trick to make rumble more audible, that is) in the form of measurements taken as mass increases of noise and its suppression. Have a gander at this, lifted from the Hi Fi World website:

"Just one final tip! In order to check how much “noise” is getting from the motor to the deck chassis/plinth (and subsequently to the stylus):-

1)Take a matchbox (ideally with a few matches in it) and place it on the chassis (NOT on the platter!) next to the platter and within “reach” of the cartridge.
2)Turn the volume control of the amp to minimum. Gently lower the stylus onto the matchbox.
3)Carefully switch the deck on. Slowly increase the volume control. The matchbox acts like a sounding board and amplifies any sound emanating from the deck.

Obviously, this does not show up any deficiencies in the main bearing but it can be very revealing and is useful when fine tuning....Go away for a day and there's a stack of posts to read! Clive, I think clarifying what we are calling everything is a good idea, as my terminology (turntable chassis bolted to a plinth sat on a base) is a little different to yours (turntable chassis bolted to motorboard sat on plinth). Cobblers, I think I have misunderstood some of your comments as a result, apologies if this has caused confusion. Anyway, just been in search of some of the dreaded rumble using a matchbox (thanks John T). Rumble was not something I had concerned myself with in any of my experiments as I had not been noticing it and I had therefore rather forgotten about it. Cranked up the volume to a moderately loud level, sat the stylus on said matchbox and stuck my head against a speaker. Rumble rumble! Next thing I remember, my wife was leaning over, dabbing a cold flannel against my forehead, I must have been out for five minutes, it must have been the shock....But seriously though, I am hard pressed to hear it from my listening position when the room is totally silent and when there is music playing, no way. Out of interest I removed the spacers that separate my two part plinth and bolted all six layers of birch ply together into one lump and listened again. Rumble was quite considerably reduced (I am guessing) perhaps a third. No way I was going to hear this from my listening seat. It would have been interesting to have tried this when it was in its hollow 1970s box, bolted to a bit of warped 12mm chipboard, with no proper feet. Out of curiosity I thought it would be nice to see the rumble, so I hooked up my scope, and there it was, not a simple sine wave, but not far off, by the look of it a low base frequency with two or three harmonics thrown in and a bit of other spurious noise. This seems like quite a good way of "listening" to the mechanical noise of your deck? Incidentally it was also interesting walking across my room. My seemingly solid concrete floor and heavy equipment rack didn't seem quite so solid when I watched the scope go crazy with every step. Anyway, not quite sure where I am going with this, but clearly the accepted high mass approach is doing what we are told it will do. Assuming the mechanical noise my turntable is making is fairly typical, it seems likely then that those of us preferring lighter wooden plinths (motorboards) are tolerating a higher level of rumble, but not one that is likely to be a problem during use."

Now, let's think about this for an instance: how much more effective would the experiment have been if the two stacks had not been bolted but instead glued together? And what effect on the sound is there as the mass increases and allows ever-finer levels of resolution to emerge from ever-reducing noise? My own experiments prove to my own satisfaction that there is absolutely no penalty in terms of PRaT, in fact the reverse, but with the caveat that as resolution increases, more and more care must be taken with set-up.

And using those scientific instruments - my ears (and faith in them and empirical evidence) - again, I have for the first time tried walnut as an armboard material, and was amazed to hear an increase in PRaT and coherence/gestalt over maple!! The midrange seems airier and more natural, as does imaging, and highs seem more natural. Now, the walnut seems more natural-sounding overall, more a midrange material, while maple in comparison sounds more Hi-Fi, with higher highs and perhaps lower tighter bass (not sure yet). But with some tonearm/cartridge combos (like the Denons which can occasionally sound hard) walnut is a an excellent fix/balancer. On the other hand, too-gentle combos might profit from the maple. Me, for the increase in PRaT and coherence/gestalt, I think I very definitely prefer the walnut. Of course, this is only using the SME V/Denon combo so far.

The walnut was such an improvement in PRaT/gestalt, that it raised my ESS/Pierre amp combo up to near the level of my Sony 3130F/AR2ax's in the Kundalini Effect (and don't underestimate either the old Sony amps or the ARs), tipping the ESS combo into producing the Kundalini Effect which it just shy of producing with the same frequency and intensity as the Sony/AR combo. In fact, I now need two sound-rooms, as I can't live without the glorious highs, midrange, clarity and perfection of the Pierre Amp/ESS (Heil Air-Motion transformers) combo, and can't live without the intense Boogie Factor/Kundalini Effect (which is caused by the tremendous coherence/music-cut-of-whole-cloth along with serious PRaT, SLAM and DRIVE, and a good dollop of midrange neutrality) and unbelievable bass of the Sony/AR combo!! And common to both systems is, of course, the Giant Glass-reinforced Direct-Coupled Lenco!

I am starting now on my Giant Garrard project, and am already eyeing my Sony 2250 to see if I can't boost its performance, as I hear something special from this old DD workhorse, and am hoping to bring to light another Giant. Of course, there's the tremendous Rek-o-Kut eyeing me accusingly as well. Perhaps I'll take some time off to get all these projects off the ground, and eventually start a new thread, we'll see. In the meantime, I'm working behind the scenes to get the Lenco and other idlers more exposure out in the mainstream, where the Conquest (of The World by idlers) is continuing apace, even if it is less visible for now. Watch this, or a new, Space!! In the meantime, I hope you all are having as much fun as I am! Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler-Wheel!!

Well, up here the SME V has sailed away, and it has taken the Kundalini Effect along with it, and left me destitute and desperate. So I searched for a combo which could fill the new Void in my audio life, as the simply re-wired Rega RB-300 wasn't doing it (and I haven't the various upgrading kits here to apply to try to squeeze it out), and though I could have squeezed more magic out the Lenco/Rega/Denon by switching out the Pierre Amp/ESS and switching in the Sony 3130F/AR2ax combo, I didn't want to give up the amazing Pierre Amp and its trick of sounding like a 100-watt SET, but with bass reach and high frequency extension. So I looked to the fabulously musical Grado as my saviour.

Now the Grado's high frequencies - and the Pierre Amp/ESS combo demands perfect high frequencies, at the very least not grainy - on the Rega RB-300 are quite good, but it loses some of that drive, and rhythm, not to mention not tracking as well as with lower-mass tonearms. The MAS/Grado combo shows some grain in the new set-up (ARC SP-8, etc.) which wasn't audible before, and also didn't match the SME/Denon combo for the Kundalini Effect. Now I remembered that the Grado sang such sweet music on the Decca International, and I remembered I had won a Heavy Metal Decca International (I'll post photos at some point) in an auction here on Audiogon a while back, an all-metal more modern-looking version of the cheapie plastic Decca we all know and love. I didn't even know this version existed until Pierre pulled it out one day when I was visiting, himself unaware of the cheap plastic version!! LUST (Pierre wouldn't part with it)!!!! So when I saw it pop up unused here on Audiogon I kept my lip zippered and crossed my fingers that no one was aware of these two versions. Anyway, desperate and destitute and down-trodden and in despair, I pulled it out and decided to give it a go. The bearing pillar is much larger, longer, and made of heavy polished metal with a beautiful black/hematite finish. The mounting arrangement is much heavier too, being a threaded bolt of sorts with no set-screws, more hematite. The tonearm proper is all metal with no plastic except the insert for the cool-looking streamlined headshell. The tonearm cable is removable, with a very serious screw-on connector, but otherwise the same old crappy wire. The counterweight is different as well, also looking cooler than the original. But other than all that, it is the same as the plastic version with magnetic repulsion for a cushion, the same unipivot bearing, and the same anti-skate arrangement.

Having nothing but hopes, I lowered the stylus into the groove and my jaw hit the floor. Easily the most detailed and delicate and imaging sound I have ever gotten out of my Grado. I said many times that the Grados being "undetailed" was balderdash due to people being used to, and attracted to, overemphasized high frequencies, and that Grados retrieved more midrange information, more resonances, and better imaging than any high-end MC, and it's now proven true in spades. I mean, the way the Grado clearly retrieves the tiniest details from the mix, with itsy-bitsy little percussion waaaaayyyyyy in the back of the soundstage, and yet STILL surrounded by air and echo (and I mean each individual sound, way way way back of the soundstage in the mix), is incredible. In addition to all of that, the high frequencies now perhaps match those of the Shibui/Fabled Shibata (through horse-trading I have acquired a Shibui Denon, mounted in a machined aluminum body, with a boron cantilever and Shibata stylus, stunningly beautiful high frequencies), being truly sparkly and delicate and filigree, with amazing deftness and extension, but with speed and SLAM. Never heard my Grado do THAT before. And the dynamics/explosiveness are totally out of this world (Grados always did have a slamming sound)!!

Now recently I've heard a Giant Direct Coupled Lenco produce some absolutely amazing sound from a Dynavector 17D MKIII mounted to the parallel-tracking MG-1 air-bearing tonearm, in a very high-end system, comprising Aesthetix phono stage and preamp, Bryston 7BSST monoblocks and Harbeth Monitor 40s. Of course, the imaging was superb. I would say that the imaging I am hearing from the humble Decca/Grado combo is superior, thanks in part as well to Pierre’s amazing amp. But funny how we ping-pong back and forth blowing each other away up here with our various Lenco set-ups ;-)! First, this Lenco-er heard the SME V combo and was blown away. When he got here, he had been planning to sell a Koetsu Rosewood he owned. After hearing mounted on the SME V he was overwhelmed and decided not to sell the Koetsu, and has now sworn he will own a SME V. On my part, when he demonstrated his Lenco/MG-1/Dyna 17D MKIII combo to me (a truly stellar combo), I left swearing I would own an MG-1 (good thing it's cheaper too ;-)) and a Dyna 17D MKIII. Tonight he's coming over, as I told him, to hear what a Grado can REALLY do!! In fact, now that the Grado Promise is realized, I am wondering: where do I go from here? God I love the Grados. Perhaps, finally, a higher Grado. There are other unipivots as well which I'll be playing with (and the Grados very evidently - like the Deccas which it resembles in many particulars - loves unipivots).

Now this Decca tonearm isn't modded and still has the original wiring. Is it really that much better than the plastic Decca, or is it because of the much larger plinth it is mounted to, the Direct Coupling, and the Glass Mod (all new since I last heard the Decca/Grado combo)? I don't know. But I have never heard a Grado produce such delicate and ultra-extended high frequencies before! Be fun if others who have Giant Direct Coupled Lencos could try their plastic Decca Internationals with Grado Woodies, if they have any hankerin' to, and report back.

Anyway, I have many new toys to play with in the next while I'll report on, including and in addition to the Shibui, an RS Labs RS-A1 tonearm (which has unfortunately just gone up in price). Also begun building a Giant Plinth for my Garrard 301 grease-bearing, which I'll be testing out with a Dynavector tonearm (on loan), Audio Gods willing. Regardless of all this, I am now, with the discovery of the Decca/Grado combo, a Happy Camper again. Now these metal Deccas don’t show up too often on eBay, but don’t dismiss Decca tonearm sales without first checking out the photos!! Have fun all!!

Eureka!!!! I found all my Maplenoll tonearm bits (stuffed in boxes all over the place) and will finally be building the Lenco-Noll I have been threatening to build Lo these many years. I have gone to all this trouble and planned this for so long because this is the only air-bearing, or linear tracker of any sort, which was ever made with a fluid damping trough at the front of the tonearm. In fact, I think it is one of only two front-loading troughs ever developed, period (the other being the Townshend trough). We all know fluid damping helps focus sound in most tonearms which have that provision, but damping is most effective at the headshell, where the spurious energies originate. I lived with a Maplenoll 'table for many years and can attest to its effectiveness. Anyway, I start cutting tomorrow, having already worked out the design, which will include a tonearm board for another tonearm...why waste all that space ;-)? This baby is reserved for my Decca Super Gold, which will likely be my Final Testament (but I have so many other audio goodies, including my Vestigal tonearm I am dying to try out ;-)!!).

Hi Oregon, there are so many candidates for the Rega tonearms, which favour MCs, especially when mounted on a Lenco, as you and everyone else knows who tried the venerable Denons and other MCs on them!! My main source before starting Da Thread was a Lenco/Rega RB300/Kiseki Blue, an MC which is leagues ahead of an OC9 or a Denon in terms of detail, and which has musical energy akin (but likely not equal to) that of the Denons. The other night I was mighty impressed by the Dynavector 17D MKIII, which again has a musical energy and PRaT lacking in too many high-end MCs. But thinking outside the box for a moment, and following Mario's thought, why not do something interesting and unexpected, in the light of the fact that the Denon DL-103"E" is so much better than the regular 103 - without sacrificing its musicality/gestalt/PRaT: send your Denon to Sound Smith for their ultimate ruby cantilever/extreme stylus profile installation?? I now have a Shibui Denon with boron cantilever and Shibata tip, and I can say that it is very definitely a Denon, with all the slamming and energy that carries with it, but with extreme detail and beautiful extended high frequencies. Interesting that the Shibui uses the regular Denon as a platform rather than the 103"R", which may have been too much of a good thing when mated to an extreme cantilever/stylus. You'd be first on the block with this baby!!

Hi David, I mourn your packed-away Lenco, may it see the light of day once again!!

The Dynavector tonearm arrived safe and sound, thankfully, and speaking of the Transcriptors Vestigal tonearm, could two tonearms be any different? The Vestigal is a tiny delicate affair, with a headshell tied by a string to a counterweight at the back, with the tonearm tube being a beam which swings with no vertical pivotting. The Dynavector is a MASSIVE affair with its headshell linked by a tiny shaft directly to the counterweight, the lateral and horizontal bearings being split. But while being visually as opposed as the North Pole is from the South, like those two poles the two are essentially the same design: both separate the horizontal bearings from the vertical, both using the tonearm tube as a beam with no vertical play which swings out over the record from its horizontal bearings at the tonearm pillar, while the vertical pivot point is very close to the cartridge. I'll post photos soon with one next to the other for those who are interested.

Evidently, the Dyna will favour low-compliance MCs and MMs (perhaps the Decca would work!) while the Vestigal favours high compliance MMs (and high compliance MCs). The Vestigal literature, btw, mentions that "the best cartridges are set to trace at 1/4 gram, at 70F" and that "your records will last 100 times longer when used with the Vestigal tonearm"!!!! And though the Dynavector is a Monster of mass compared with the Vestigal (don't drop it on your foot ;-)), it also has a very small vertical mass, which it achieves differently than the Vestigal. The Vestigal is a beautiful piece of work btw, more like a violin than an appliance, with six different adjustments (!!!), each needing to be adjusted to match the others as well, and with jewel bearings, which I bought after hearing how incredibly good the Transcriptors Skeleton was for a belt-drive, with amazing transparency I ascribed mainly to the tonearm (though the 'table is very very good). We'll soon find out. A heavenly match for Grados, and likely my Ortofon M15E Super. What can it do on a big idler?!?

As more and more people send me their exotic tonearms for Idler-ization, and I get a few of my own, the more and more my already-enthusiasm for the Rega tonearms increases!! They also LOVE idler-wheel drives, where, like Hercules putting on his ring, they become Divine. It can stand its ground with the most exalted tonearms out there (seems too many are still listening strictly for detail) in terms of absolute and overall sound quality, and is easy to set-up and install, easy to mount cartridges, fun to play the effective-mass game with the spring downforce of the RB-300 to better match to a variety of cartridges, and it's NOT delicate and IS robust, a true and trustworthy work-horse!! And most important, very musical. Set up an MC on it, and only come back to fiddle with it when the stylus is dead, simply spending hours spinning discs. A true high-end tonearm which does all this, and is cheap too with innumerable upgrade possibilities!! I think I'll arrange to be buried with mine, it has migrated across very many 'tables over the years, and across many of my Lencos!!

So, glad to hear you loving the beauty of your Lenco, Welcome Home, Fish ;-).

Up here I've been experimenting as well with my new RS Labs tonearm (had a hard-on for this one for years now), which is quite simply stunning, though a Bitch to set up due to the threaded holes in the headshell (can't mount my beloved Grado Platinum, boo-hoo). May be the Best Tonearm on the Planet (I'm finally building myself a serious two-armed Lenco: I'll take the RS-A1 for a serious test spin and report back later), THE most transparent, and the pivotting headshell works: all tracing distortons nasties are gone gone gone!! Where are my old friends hardening and steeliness on certain passages?? Ronnie warns me not to look at it too hard as it will fall apart, and it certainly is no Rega in this respect, very fragile. But, apart from the headshell holes, not very difficult to set-up. Can't own one if you have children or pets though, or live in an earthquake area. Have fun all!

Hi Peter W, your ambitious beastie is looking to be Gorgeous in that wonderful veneer!! I have to say, that having lived with a one-armed Lenco for so long, and now having just finished my own two-armed Lenco, it feels so good to be home again. A while back I was running two small Lencos, and now I have one Giant Lenco with two tonearms. Just doesn't feel right without at least two tonearms hooked up and ready to go at the flip of a switch! Ahhhh NOW I am content!! I have one MM, my Decca, connected directly to my ARC SP-8 preamp phono stage, and the RS Labs is sporting my Denon DL-103"E" which is hooked up to my Pioneer C-90, used as a phono stage only via the tape outs, and then back into the SP-8 1st auxiliary stage. FLIP its the Decca; FLIP it's the Denon :-)! I may replace the Decca with my long-missed Ortofon M15E Super, just to hear what it can do. The Decca sounding in many ways quite close to the Denon, I want more "distance"/difference between the two.

Up here various Lencos continue to destroy the belt-drive opposition, I soon head south, Lenco on Wheels, to make the point effectively in a bigger city! As I've written before and will likely write again, and is NOT hyperbole: it is impossible to exaggerate the abilities of the Lenco, as it literally has not yet met even close to its match. Its upper limits lie way waaayyyy WAY up there, and I will continue to challenge all comers in actual demonstrations and showdowns, until I finally hit a wall: the record of actual empirical and reported comparisons will show, not certain noisome gadflies, what its true abilities - and by extension the idler-wheel principle it is an ambassador for - are. Keep your eyes peeled for news!! In fact, as I've written often, one reason I LOVE the Lenco so much is that it allows me to indulge in outrageous statements and streams of Purple Prose without actually exaggerating. It sounds like hyperbole, but how can one "hyperbolize" what has not yet met its match and so measured?!? Those who don't want to believe it - even after close on three years of non-stop reports and conversions (i.e. the hard and accumulating evidence) - are missing out on one of the few things which truly live up to the Hype (which is only hype if it isn't true, and since it's true, it isn't hype :-)!). This, of course, infuriates those noisome gadflies no end, gnashing their little mandibles, to my great entertainment. The Lenco Train and the Idler Train it is part of is still gaining steam, ain't life a Bitch ;-).

Hey Mario, sounds like quite the project, I wish you would have told me you knew Jimmy Newtron before this, I want an introduction ;-). Excellent work ReindersPeter, I look forward to the Giant 3-armed version!! I saw the cost of shipping, send mine by bottle, make it a big one.

In a strange series of synergies, my ARC SP-8 beat the crap out of my Pioneer in terms of excitement and PRaT before, then I introduced the RS Labs. In hooking it up to my system the increase in detail, imaging, transparency, in fact everything, was astounding, even over the SME V. But. There's alwats a "but". The PRaT was missing, even though the RS Labs was hooked up to the same head-amp-to-ARC phono stage the SME/Denon had been hooked up to before which raised up the Kundalini Effect. Then, in deciding to hook up both tonearms on my Lenco at once, I hooked up the RS/Denon to the Pioneer, and suddenly there was the PRaT again!! The no-PRaT-RS + the no-PRaT-Pioneer added up to excellent PRaT. Go figure. I guess two negatives make a positive. Beware the Synergy Factor. Back to the Cave!!

Hi Mike: to make Direct Coupling a success the wood-screws must be tightened just so, just like tuning an instrument. So I use several wood-screws and I do indeed use lock-washers (or rubber-sided washers) to go between the head of the screw and the Lenco top-plate. I tighten until the washer is snug and solid with no sign of movement (and solid enough that if I try to move it with a screwdriver it can't be moved), and no further. I also use bolts in the original bolt-holes as Lenco intended. Also, I have Direct Coupled Lencos both with and without nitrile rubber as a shim (there seems to be some variation in the height of the top-plate), and have found absolutely NO sonic or musical penalty, recipients of either of these types of rebuilt Lencos have been universally gobsmacked, and I use both myself and am myself gobsmacked (thank you Dr. Lenco!) at the speed, detail, high, lows, midrange, power, bass and incredible dynamics, in either iteration!!

Hi Chuck: the Decca is a hummy cartridge (like the Grados), no doubt about it. The hum you're experiencing is the Decca picking up the motor's electro-magnetic field. So far, the only way to wipe this type of hum out is to follow Mario's recipe of two sheets of mu-metal glued to the platter. Click on Mario's system to see how it is done. In my own system the Decca also hums (like the Grado), but at such a low level that it is inaudible when playing music and I am not motivated to do the mu-metal mod. Also, I'm used to this sort of thing, being a fan of both Grados and Deccas (both of which hum on most turntables to some extent), and so it simply doesn't bother me (like tube fans used to some level of tube roar). You could try grounding the Lenco motor itself and see what happens, and as usual try grounding the 'table and not the arm, vice versa, both together, motor alone, all together, and so on until you achieve the best level of silence, every system responds differently to these combinations.

Over here I took my Mr. Red (copyright Mike Green ;-)) on the Great Travelling Lenco Road Show to Toronto, where a manufacturer and distributor of high-end audio goodies heard it, and he and his associates were blown away (it turned into a mega session with hours of music, no one could tear themselves away), and now there's a good chance the Lenco will be used to more effectively demonstrate their wares at an upcoming audio show, and in their shop. I won't report further until things are certain, but at least the prospect is pretty exciting news!! In order to make the demonstration more effectively, I used a $200 cheapie high-output MC to show what it can do with one hand tied behind its back, my beloved Satin M-117 with removable stylus, mounted on my Morch UP-4. Vive la Idler-Wheel!!!

Ooooo..., a Fisher 400C, NOW I'm jealous!! Gotta get me one of those, let a beautiful Fisher tubed tuner pass me by just a little while ago, and been kicking myself ever since :-(.

The Ortofon M15E Super sounds soooo good, and the detail superb (on a slim unipivot), even set against the Decca Super Gold (which is superior to the Koetsu Rosewood in terms of information-retrieval, not to mention slam and bass) or Denon DL-103"E" set-up on the world-class, world-beating RS!! There's a lot of performance in some of those old vintage items, as Lenco-ers and Idler-ers know :-). I'm still stunned by the AR2ax's.

Holy Crap, Jimmy Neutron indeed!! I'll stick to something easy, like the Intergalactic Spaceship I'm building using a television screen as protection against meteorite strikes (NOT LCD, as those screens aren't unbreakable like the old-fashioned TV screens are) on the body of the spacecraft, a Volkswagon Beetle (air tight), a microwave oven and an air-ionizer, which I'll convert into an ion-thrust engine. The only problem is getting the thing into space, so I plan to sneak onto NASA's cape Canaveral and duct-tape my spacecraft to the exterior of the next launch unit during the night. My plan being, to accelerate to a large fraction of the speed of light once free of Earth's gravitational field, then return to Earth in the future to start a re-examination of the concept of Progress using vintage audio, assuming humanity is still able to speak at that future point, as writing is already on the way out (as I discovered when in written contact with the isurance section of Purolator, a shipping agency which had lost an item and refused fair compensation by sticking to the fine print: avoid avoid Wil Robinson!!!), and television ain't doing us any favours. But keep us posted as to your progress Mario, we'll watch in awe from afar!!

Over here I am restoring a local fellow's Lenco L70 (my first one!!) with the Dreaded Plastic Wheel. The complaint being "It's noisy". Yes, noisy as Hell: I could hear it down the hall through the closed door of my bedroom as I left it to run overnight after cleaning and relubricating main bearing, motor, and idler-wheel bearing. The wheel was straight with no flat spots, it had simply hardened over the years. Nothing helped, not soaking in liquid detergent, not lacquer thinner, not Rubber Renew. But being such a noisy beast it provided me a chance to re-experiment; like tuning a motor by deliberately leaving it on a hard surface exaggerate/amplify the noise in order to bring it down to a minimum. I noticed that simply by placing my hand on the top-plate the noise reduced considerably in volume. Extrapolating from this we can see how effective damping materials applied to the top-plate are in reducing noise, and if so for a noisy Lenco, then so for an already-quiet Lenco, allowing fine details to be more easily heard. The Lenco was sitting loosely in my old Blue Bomber Direct Coupling plinth. I noticed that by pressing down so the bottom of the top-plate contacted the "shims"/cut-out/second Coupling layer, the noise reduced even further. I stood on the Lenco top-plate while it was playing (yes, I know, don't believe the deliberate and misleading exaggerations of the Lenco "weaknesses", it withstood my full weight without a problem), and the noise reduced even further, showing that direct coupling DOES reduce noise considerably, and if so much for a very loud noisy Lenco, then what is it doing for an already quiet Lenco? Extrapolating, we can understand that the difference is likely of the same magnitude, the already inaudible noise-floor dropping even further to allow yet more information to emerge from the grooves and a deep-black background (not digital-black with no - CHOKE! - air, but analogue black where the air of a venue becomes more and more audible). Finally, I threw a simple rubber mat on the platter and the noise was again audibly reduced, and so extrapolating once again, we can see how gluing a rubber mat to the platter will be even more effective.

I had another plastic wheel left over from old days, and I tested it by feel, and it seemed to me that it was ever-so-slightly softer and more pliant than plastic wheel #1, so slightly in fact that it seemed it could be my imagination. Nevertheless, I removed wheel #1, and cleaned and re-lubed wheel #2 and dropped it in. The noise, with the accumulation of all these steps, was now completely gone, showing that after all plastic wheels can be made to be decent. It also shows that different plastic wheels had different formulations. Next step is to have the plastic wheels re-rubbered and ground in Missouri I believe it is, to see just how far I can take a plastic wheel. Lencos are getting scarce, and we can no longer afford to chuck aside the plastic wheels!!

Anyway, I'm thankful for the chance to work on this problematic L70, which was like taking a crash course/re-cap of all we have been doing since the beginning!! Refreshing to get a noisy one and hear so clearly what each step brings!! The fellow will be astonished when he claps ears on his Lenco now! I'm also applying what came so clear to me with the L70 to the Garrard 301 I am rebuilding, a brainstorm hitting immediately afterwards leading to a re-design of the plinth and the mounting arrangement.

Anyway, now it's back to my own Lenco, enjoy your idler-wheels all!!

Now THAT is skeletal Ronnie!! Reminds me of my first Lenco set-up, when I had no tools and no plans and the Lenco was sitting on stilts (that model, an L75, had usable metal stilts for some reason) with the Rega RB300. Even over a budget NAD 3020i/Boston A40 MKII system I heard details from my records I had never heard before, and with more musical intensity to boot. And this in comparison to both Maplenoll and Audiomeca turntables.

Great info for the Lenco archives Jim, keep'em coming.

Up here I'm still in the process of rebuilding my Garrard 301 grease-bearing, a big job!! But almost done, and hope to be hearing first notes very soon. Been playing with a variety of tonearms, have to say the Dynavector 507 MKII is perhaps the best I've heard (but the RS Labs may match it overall, but not for bass, have to listen some more), and it's not just audiophile niceties the Dyna excels in, it is also incredible at PRaT and gestalt, and an amazing match for the venerable Denon DL-103s. Too bad I can't afford one. Also playing with a Morch UP-4 unipivot, which is very light on its feet and ultra-detailed, reminds me very much of the Mayware, if better-behaved. And in spite of all these great tonearms, or perhaps because of it, my admiration for the Rega RB-300 just continues to grow as even in this august company (and including my experience with the SME V), the Rega holds its head up high. Likely due to its ultimate rigidity and simplicity (no rattly bits), even more rigid than the SME V (bolting arrangement simpler and stronger, no convenient doodads attached, etc.), the Rega has a PRESENCE, or palpability, none of the other tonearms so far have matched. In addition, in terms of detail, provided it has been re-wired, it is very close to the best, as it is in the bass and overall dynamics. The Dyna sets the standard here, but the Rega is not crushed. And, as if this weren't enough, the Rega is musical and easy to set-up!! I'll always have one anyway.

Which brings me to a phrase I always hear about various components, which ties in in turn to the history of audio. The old phrase "Poor Man's..." Now, I always heard that the Denon DL-103 is a Poor Man's Koetsu: it is no such thing. The Denon is superior in drive, PRAT and gestalt to any Koetsu; the Koetsu is superior in the purely audiophile areas of detail, frequency extension and imaging. This goes possibly for every single MC ever made, though the Dynavector 17D MKIII might stand a chance and the Ortofon SPUs. Since making music is the Prime Directive for any audio component, this places the venerable Denon DL-103s at the top of the heap, which is why they're venerable, in spite of being constantly damned with faint praise (many know better).

So how does it get the reputation of being a Poor Man's Koetsu? Because those who listen and write this choose to ignore the superior PRaT, drive and gestalt of the Denon and focus exclusively on detail and such-like (AND price), the great sickness /obsession of modern audio/audiophiles. Similarly, many years ago, when all were singing the praises of the superiority of the belt-drive over the idler-wheels they replaced, they chose to ignore the loss of dynamics and PRaT, of bass and excitement, and focused exclusively on other things, mainly a diminution of rumble (which it turns out was in many cases a myth and restricted to a few poorly set-up 'tables). Much more recently, the hyping of digital technologies also ignored the loss of musicality, and was leavened by a heady mix of misinformations, including the mythical increased dynamic range of digital media over analogue, which simple hearing (and various research papers which contradict the other research papers, which are based in unproven theories and the careful choosing of certain statistics and mathematics or other less "helpful" ones to achieve certain results on paper...Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics) proves is not so. Which is to say that many "improvements" are bought at a price, that the price is utterly ignored, the pretense (La-La Land) being there isn't one, and that thus Progress and improvement is in many cases a myth. When the Denon's superiority (and many other pieces) in certain areas is accepted by the high-end designers and matched by them as a base-ground, THEN we will have Progress, not by pretending these superiorities, and the cost of losing them, doesn't exist. Those who take the time to actually listen to a properly set-up idler-wheel drive, rather than stick to their hoary old (and new) theories, learn this lesson.

Distilling all this, the Idler/Rega/Denon combo is THE greatest value in high-end audio today! Dependable and unfinicky too. Have fun all!!

Hi David, Boy, the adventures just dont stop over there, do they? I haven't had my Rega up for a while now, I bought a new Rega RB-300 which I'll be re-wiring soon, and then I'll once again have a stab at Twl's tweak, as last time I couldn't find sufficiently heavy weights to implement it adequately. Now I am armed and ready!! Tom's invention should work as I know from experience, as increasing the mass for certain cartridges really does work to maximize them (i.e. the venerable Denons), and after my trials with the Dynavector 507 MKII I can see the lateral mass really does work: never heard the Denon DL-103"E" sound better, or nearly as good, except for the screaming-deal RS-A1 tonearm.

Due to too much Rock 'n Roll, I have bought more neighbour-friendly monitors, the vintage KEF Reference 103.2s (just can't shake that vintage sickness ;-)). I was hot for some classic KEF-driver speakers (like the legendary LS3/5a's, or the Spendor BC1s, or the Linn Kans, etc.) and tripped over these at a good price and discovered there was practically a religion devoted to them! They take power like nothing else, and between the Lenco and the 100-watt Pierre amp the sound is nothing short of incredible. These things really rock!! Very detailed, very neutral, and very musical, they seem to have no upper limit to SPLs, which kind of mitigates the reason I bought them in the first place :-). Oh well, I guess volume and dynamics is my destiny, thank you Dr. Lenco!!

At this end I've managed to get a very nice lacquered finish for my latest plinth, and I am working on making myself a Giant Lenco in high-gloss Nivea Cream Can blue (I do like colours!!). In the meantime, I've made myself a Giant Red Two-Armed Beast to tote around to play Crush the Belt-Drive, varnished for toughness, new pics under my "system". Oh Boy I'm having fun!! Next up, after the Garrard I'm currently working on, the Sony 2250 I've long threatened to try out, methinks another sleeper a la Lenco (though theoretically not as good being a DD, this one is especially musical - servo-control - we'll see/hear). Have fun with your own projects and enjoy that idler magic all!!

Hi Mike, thanks for the compliment, I've been practicing and researching!! "Mr. Red," I like that. I've got all sorts of plans now for various veneers, coloured lacquers, and combinations for the future, this is loads of fun! Yes, that's a Moerch UP-4, which I'm trying out with the Decca Super Gold and various cartridges (sounds great with the Shibui too) for now. A beautiful piece of audio jewelry, and very fast and detailed, with deep, controlled and detailed bass. Again relatively-speaking (in the light of such stellar budget bargains as the Regas and various vintage tonearms), the UP-4 is a bargain, and is useful as tonearm-wands are easy to swap in and out, and come in masses to suit any cartridge made. Perfect critter for a guy like me, with his peculiar cartridge addiction ;-). The fellow who sold it to me assured me it was better than the DP-6 (he thought so anyway), though I have yet to do those comparisons myself. The RS-A1 is a contender for Best Tonearm in the World, but it isn't near so user-friendly or versatile.

Hi Mario, thanks for the compliment! Actually that was early impressions I never went back to rectify: the MG-1 does indeed provide superb bass, perhaps even better than the Rega's when mounted on a Giant Direct-Coupled Lenco, and that's saying something. For an especially synergistic match, go for the Dynavector 17D MKIII. Indeed, in many cases air-bearing parallel-tracking tonearms have been criticized for woolly bass (but not all of them, like the Maplenoll). If there is any criticism of the Dynavector it is that it is over-damped in the bass (like the Audio technica OC9), which partly explains its legendary super-speedy reputation (the rest being due to good 'ol amazing engineering). But when mounted to the MG-1 on a Giant Lenco SNICK!! a perfect synergy results, with jaw-dropping tight deep and full bass, incredible dynamics, incredible detail, and awesome imaging. In fact, I was so impressed when I visited a friend with Giant Lenco/MG-1/Dyna 17D3 I decided then it was slated for my own future (factor in ease of use, and easy tonearm-wand swapping). Add in the fact the MG-1 has no "sticking" problems (common for air-bearings), has on-the-fly VTA, and fits the Lenco perfectly and to the millimetre as if they had come out of the same factory (just move the bolt-hole over roughly half-an-inch so the stylus clears the platter when at rest), and for many you have a no-brainer!! As to record wear, while I'm certain it occurs, most of my records will indeed survive my own journey into the Great Beyond ;-), as they have done already several decades many of them, in spite of pivotted tonearms.

Hi Ronnie, Man, that is SOME Co-EEnK-ki-dink!! Hope you can repair your Moerch, what did you think of it while it was working?? I ordered one of Reinderspeter's new Lenco plates without tonearm to accommodate my Maplenoll, Whoo-eee I got it bad. I'll have to camp out in the yard while my turntables take up space in my home :-). You know, I'm getting used to the size of these Giant plinths, they even look kinda small to me now ;-). I had to make Mr. Red even bigger than usual to make up for the loss of mass of having two tonearm-holes. Now that you mention it, it does look funny!! The sound, however, is beyond unbelievable: are there no limits to the Lenco potential?!?

Now THAT is what I'm talking about: we need more reports of conversions and discoveries. The Idler War isn't as heated as it once was, now it has sunk in it is after all, an excellent system, but it isn't won yet. The issue is which system is superior, and this is an issue of ideals and scientific, empirical, verifiable truth, not the sort of thing you compromise on (except for pinheads, that is). So, rather than simply tow the Ho-Hum politically-correct line that all systems are equivalent (in the absence of actual testing to see if this is true), a HUGE bore which makes me sleepy and looking for my slippers and a comfy chair, dreaming of retirement and warm baths (and those who tow this line wonder why the world ignores them, except a tepid few), report in you onlookers! And those who have not yet tried it, try it and report in. It won't kill you, and may (i.e. WILL) even bring you that much-reported but rarely found Musical Bliss from a stereo system!!

Take, for instance, Gigantic multiple motor monsters with mile-high platters. Now I don't believe these can match a properly set-up idler-wheel drive with an 8-pound platter (at roughly an inch and a half thickness), but let's just say for argument these Megabuck Status-Enhancing Monsters can: at what cost?? How much in materials, in hardware and in research does it take to equal an 8-pound metal platter driven by a rubber wheel (it only has to be round) by a superb motor rotating (built and designed specifically for the job of driving a record player) at 1800 RPM, and anchored in wood? The idler-wheel system is simply superior (does the job better, and with less effort). And I don't believe that the priciest belt-drive available today can match one home-made Lenco.

This is what I mean by science gone bad: an inferior system is promoted by a silent conspiracy between the industry and the press; scientists and engineers come in and accept without investigating; inferior system becomes new Paradigm; new Paradigm, due to inherent weakness, invites more and more extravagant solutions; extravagant solutions cost money; cynical industry milks it for all its worth; and the stereo waters are muddied as Status-enhancing gear which sounds like crap gets rave reviews and no one knows anymore what's what. This is the can of worms we open when science goes bad. Apply scenario to amplifiers, speakers, cartridges, preamplifiers, food, etc.

Which is a way of saying, Ronnie: "Oh, you haven't heard your UP-4 yet!" ;-) (it having been mounted on a belt-drive and all). In fact, this applies to all tonearms, as one fellow remarked the other night when I demoed the UP-4 with a Decca Super Gold, a Grado Platinum, and the RS Labs with the Denon DL-103"E" (i.e. they ALL sound incredible). Based on this experience (and via my simple KEF 103.2s), he has already ordered a Grado Woody, and is going Lenco (and selling his Wilson Benesch Circle). Oh this sport of Crush the Belt-Drive is so much fun: try it at home folks, you'll make money in selling your belt-drives and can put it towards something good!!

I have finally done it: I have made the Garrard 301 (grease-bearing) the equal of the Mighty Glass-Reinforced Direct Coupled Giant Lenco!! More than once I was ready to throw in the towel and either declare defeat, or actually try a low-mass approach in the thought that perhaps the Metaphysicians (who said high-mass destroyed Garrard-PRaT and that birch-ply was the only material for Garrards) were right!!

But logically, what works for the Lencos should work for the Garrards, as what more than anything made the Lencos (and other idler-wheel drives) Supreme (in a world of ball-less belt-drives and antiseptic DDs) was de facto, in practice, actually playing a record, speed stability. High mass further improves speed stability by nailing the Lenco to the planet (and the higher the mass the bigger the nails), and also, via Direct Coupling, by reducing the background noise to an empty inky blackness. PRaT, which is Pace, Rhythm and Timing, and gestalt (all of the musicams coming across as One, as they should, rather than the vivisection practiced by many belt-drives), are all a function of speed stability. If the platter revolves at a precise and perfect 33.33 RPM while playing the record, then the PRaT and gestalt should also be perfect (assuming a perfect tonearm and cartridge in this respect and so on...). High mass storing energy and releasing it over time to damage timing was a myth put forward by the belt-drive camp to explain why high-mass BELT-DRIVES were often poor at PRaT. The real reason was that high-mass belt-drives have high-mass platters, and high-mass platters cause the belts, which always react, to react slower due to momentum, at a lower frequency, where timing resides (1-2-3-4; 1-t-t-t-two-3-4...).

So given all this, then the Garrard should have responded in the same way to the same recipe as the Lenco (even to the extent of sounding incredible with a birch-ply/MDF CLD recipe, which I still find to be the most neutral recipe, truthful, dynamic and extended at both frequency extremes, if not romantic like Amazonian Kerfafala-wood, or African Gnu-lumber), and finally, it did. It is now, as well as the Lenco, a Destroyer Of Worlds. I learned in the process that the Garrard HATES rubber mats (in fact, rubber anywhere at all), and responds incredibly well to Spotmats (which the Lenco hates). Different design and metals in the two platters, as well as different main bearings, and pretty well everything else, excepting the idler-wheel systems they share (and even so with differences) explain their different reactions to different mats.

Are there sonic differences between the two? It's hard to say, but if pressed at this early stage I would say the Garrard sounds BIGGER, like a widescreen cinema, as in everything is processed through a fish-eye lens to bring the midrange forward. But in addition to this, the soundstage seems bigger too, with shortened depth next to the Lenco, which in its turn is more lazer-focused and precise and perhaps a wee bit less dramatic, though this depends on the recording I think (some types of/recordings of bass come across with more impact via the Lenco, others via the Garrard). But this could be the mats, or something else. More comparisons in the months ahead, hopefully I will be able to do a comparison of same tonearm/cartridge into same phono stage to nail things down. But in the meantime, I am happy to report the Garrard will be sharing playing time with the Lenco in my system, and I couldn't be more pleased, especially as it was the humble Garrard SP-25 which convinced me long ago that the idler-wheel system was quite simply the superior system, and once I discovered that there was such a thing as a bigger Garrard, and most especially the fabulous Beasts the Garrards 301 and 401, I began to dream of finding one and owning one, but one never came up back then, and instead I found a Lenco. Idler-Wheels rule!!!

So tonight I am once again captured by my stereo system which won't let me go, even to the extent that Kraftwerk held me rivetted to the seat, breathless, waiting for the next electronic flourish to slam across the soundstage against a pulsating and DEEP electronic bass foundation. Viva la Idler-Wheel!!

Ha, I KNEW there were advantages to the new abode!! Thanks for the kind words Mario (AND JoAnn), it was a pleasure to host both you and your wonderful wife, you're welcome to come back anytime, and we'll explore the Caves of the Unknown!

There are only so many hours in a day, so the Garrard had to remain mute for the listening session. And more I would have liked to demonstrate: the unrecognized (except by the fortunate few) Greatness of the AR2ax's (this demonstration included the Pierre Amp matched to the ESS AMT4's), which when paired with the little (but incredibly POTENT) Sony TAE-3130F amplifier (ca. 1966) produces the Kundalini Effect.

Which brings me to speed stability, my constant subject with respect to reproducing music. The ONLY advantage digital media have over analogue sources is speed stability. Since the CD, DVD and SACD players don't have to deal with mechanical drag/brakes, only light/lasers, there is no braking effect and consequently these have a speed stability (piano especially) transient speed and clarity which attracts many audiophiles. This - reaction to the braking effect of the stylus in the groove which causes speed instabilities - is the Achilles Heel of belt-drives, and a fatal one. Properly set-up idler-wheel drives wipe out this digital advantage, so one reaps the benefits of vinyl - higher resolution AND analogue "flow"/naturalness - and wipes out speed instablities, which brings out the missing transient speed and slam, AND brings with it all the information digital loses: air, resonance, decay, PRaT, gestalt and natural musicality, not to mention the actual superior DYNAMICS and BASS (both reach and detail).

Next week I plan to finally finish the Garrard project (which includes the finish), pick out a tonearm/cartridge combo and have it sit there as a semi-permanent addition to my then-three-tonearm/cartridge system (until I have the new design ready, which will have two, perhaps three tonearm boards, more easily done with the Garrard "motor unit" construction).

Which brings me to the platform question Mike: those photos were of early days when the new set-up was not yet finalized. I have since mounted both 'tables on similar platforms, in the case of the Lenco on marble/acrylic, and in the case of the Garrard marble/corian. The easiest source of marble slabs are kitchen supply stores (marble cutting boards) and kitchen cabinet contructors. I would think granite would be as effective, which you could get done at any stone cutters business. As soon as I have finalized the Lenco and Garrard set-ups I will refresh the photos with new pics. I know that one of the tonearm/cartridge combos will be my Heavy-Metal Decca International paired up with the Grado Platinum, which combo is Supernaturally Musical and potent. Vive la Idler-Wheel!!

Oops, forgot to mention Mario's mumetal mod: it works! As already described, the hum (using both Grado and Decca) intensifies just before reaching the platter, then disappears as the cartridge goes over the edge and hovers above the record. A real panacea for those who abhor hum. Having heard it, I will have to so treat my own platter, as I love both the Grados and the Deccas, both the hummiest in the business. Better to apply in a heated environment, instead of outside where the glue freezes up here in the Great White North, yikes!

Hi Stefan, this is a traditional mod as well for the Garrards, with the same reported results as you report. However, many of those who have tried this tweak and who love the idlers for their great dynamic power report as well a consequent loss of dynamics with the lowered noise-floor. Of course, this is dependent on how audible this is in a given system: if not in yours (some find it an across-the-board improvement), then it is not an issue. To me anyway, idler-wheel dynamics are Sacred and not to be diminished in any way, and since I so build my systems to maximize speed/impact/dynamics/rhythm, these types of mods (over-damping as well) audibly reduce the dynamics. While adjusting the motor for minimal noise by taking it apart and orienting the motor-core is difficult, and adjusting the nose-screw, it accomplishes the same thing without reducing torque/dynamics. Direct Coupling further eliminates the noise to well below that of high-end belt-drives, while increasing the dynamics, focus and speed. Do you hear any diminution of dynamics or bass impact with this tweak?

Up here the gremlins went on a rampage and took out my SP-8, Pierre Amp, and even my beloved little Sony amp is acting up, so I am now using my TAE-5450 preamp with the rebuilt TIP-modded Dynaco ST-120, and decided to set up my very vivacious Athena Technologies speakers for the Christmas season, as they get to the heart of the music in a way very few speakers do (PRaT, dynamics, easy listenability with decent detail and imaging combined this designer's particular talent). I was amazed at just how detailed and beautiful-sounding even this humble system is. When rebuilt/restored and TIP-modded the Dynaco ST-120 is indeed a very serious little amp, and I'm going to try it with my more-serious KEF Reference 103.2s to see just how good it is. I just LOVE these vintage gems, they are so much fun!! Have fun likewise all, this type of fun just seems so appropriate over the holidays!

I dialed-in the Garrard 301 with the fabulous Dynavector 507 MKII tonearm, and even with my cheap little Satin HO MC the level of refinement and detail was amazing. The Dynavector is truly one of the Great Tonearms (but with a BIG price-tag), and shows that when properly set up the Garrard (in this case Giant Direct Coupled CLD birch-ply/MDF plinth) is indeed a very refined and delicate retriever, while preserving that astonishing idler SLAM and BASS, in fact just like the Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove Lenco! There is no high-frequency hash of the sort so often reported in the press in the past (they had to find/create/invent fault somewhere or simply throw in the towel and admit belt-drive was a mistake and very definitely inferior).

Anyway, hope you're all having some fun!!

Hi Stefanl, brilliant analysis, the higher voltages in Europe would make a difference and would account for the greater noise/problems of both Lencos and Garrards over in Europe! But I do recall my own Lenco was very silent when I was running it in Helsinki, there must be some variation in motor quality/set-up/optimization. But I caution you against relying too much on the flywheel effect of the brilliant Lenco platter, as the belt-drivers as well rely too much on simple momentum to overcome the braking action of stylus force drag. The trick would be to "push the envelope": reduce the voltage no more than absolutely necessary and no more, find the right balance.

The superior bass and transients and dynamics of all idlers relative to their belt-drive cousins is due to greater torque, and given the much greater mass of many of the high-end belt-drive platters and consequent momentum relative to the Lenco and Garrard platters, this points the finger at the more powerful motors and more potent drive system (rubber wheel vs flimsy slippy-stretchy belt) of the idler-wheel drives, which like a bulldozer (controlled by a prima donna ballerina at the top of her game) simply plows (with absolute finesse) through the stylus's attempt to stop the platter. Since many do in fact report a lessening of dynamics, dramatic colour and PRaT when reducing the voltage in Garrards, then in some systems reducing voltage is audible, and is therefore happening even if not audible in other systems. Just like a dropping noise floor (increased plinth mass married to Direct Coupling), which is not audible by a lessening of noise but instead by an increase in fine detail and clarity, so an increase in motor power/torque is audible by finer gradations of transients and micro-dynamics, and timing issues as well as more and more delicate resolution of bass detail and focus. Of course, given the higher voltages in Europe, you probably have more leeway over there. I'll have to try this experiment some day, but given that over here in my system and those I've tested it in motor noise is not audible (nor from the Garrards I've played with), for the moment anyway it'll have to wait, and I'll rely on the reports of others on this side of the pond.

Last night I set up a Benz Micro ACE cartridge on a fellow's Garrard 301/MAS 282 set-up (the first grease-bearing one under my system, which I rebuilt for a fellow around the corner from me a ways back), and the sound was truly beautiful and musically-potent! I've heard the ACE before and was struck by how musical it was then, and it was confirmed last night. So add the ACE to the roster of truly musical MCs: it has a beautiful balanced sound, lots of high-end MC detail, it swings and has PRaT, and in addition dynamics and an ineffable musicality, flying straight to the heart of the music, whatever the genre. Classical made me sentimental and soft-hearted when it demanded, and rock made me want to rock. Another screaming bargain, a classic in the making if justice is served, as MCs which are this musically effective are thin on the ground. The reviewers nailed this one, as to a man they report the same thing, Benz outdid themselves with this little beauty! I'll be borrowing it later on to test in my system and report further.

This also confirms the greatness of the little MAS 282 tonearms, and to those out there who have them I urge you to get better tonearm cables, as the stock one seriously drags down its potential. This tonearm has superb bearings, and an almost supernatural way with retrieving dynamics micro and macro. I look forward to re-setting it up on Mr. Red to rediscover just how good this little gem is, as the ACE had the very same amazing lightning way with dynamics large and small my Grado Platinum had when it was mounted on it.

Sorry Stefanl, other than what I've written I can't say anymore, as I haven't had a noise problem to deal with. That said, looking at the logic of the Ladder of Importance - i.e. that the source is most important as losses here cannot be made up further up the chain (which is why it is turntable first, then tonearm, then cartridge) - the whole debate about DD, belt-drive and idler-wheel drive demonstrates that first and foremost within the turntable is the drive system. And behind the drive system is the motor (the various motor improvements and mods, DC vs AC and so on)! This is doubly true of the motors in idler wheel drives and DDs, as these are directly (DD) or near-directly (idler) coupled to the platter. So a lot of attention must be paid to, and in the case of both the Lencos and the Garrards, HAS been paid to, the superbulosity (TM ;-)) of the motors.

Given that the motors in these superb idlers are indeed themselves superb, I believe anyway that as little as possible must be done which might interfere with the drive system/motor. Also, to me, Dynamics are Sacred, which is one reason I always caution against overdamping. And the further I go the more I am against any type of damping, period. The problem with damping materials (Sorbothane, Dynamat, sand, lead) is that they do not differentiate between noise and music, thus, when damping noise and vibration, they also damp dynamics and detail (though a balance can be struck in which enough noise is suppressed to allow detail to emerge more clearly). I no longer use Dynamat or any other noise reduction, other than the plinth itself, which is "hard" and yet soft enough to absorb noise (especially with Direct Coupling) and not reflect it as stone would (aaahh the humble simplicity of good'ol wood), and glass epoxy, which controls vibration by stiffening the top-plate and is a form of CLD in its own right to cancel out noise (but does not damp in the classical sense like Dynamat, Sorbothane, sand or lead). Now, Direct Coupling is difficult to achieve without damaging the signal/music, but if done correctly, it is all positives (great reduction of noise drained into the plinth, even inaudible noise, meaning the noise floor drops precipitously) and no negatives (no loss of PRaT, bass or other sonic information). With the reduction of noise comes much greater focus, separation of instruments, transparency, speed, transients, bass detail, midrange, imaging, etc.....effectively a BIG step up the ladder.

Similarly dynamics. Do as little to reduce the torque of the motor as possible (effectively, I believe do nothing to reduce torque), and the extra (even inaudible) dynamics will be heard as finer and finer micro- and macro-dynamics, which means being able to hear more detail, even better transparency and separation, faster transients which allows better differentiation and better decay/tonality, and so on.

When one combines Direct Coupling, Glass Reinforcement and the total torque of the drive system with the elimination of all damping materials (in the classical sense of noise suppressors like Sorbothane and lead) except the plinth itself, one achieves (especially with a Giant plinth which magnifies all these attributes thanks to the Direct Coupling) a level of reproduction which must be heard to be believed, and even then is hard to believe!! This is because the idler-wheel drive system is then unfettered (from noise as well), freed and allowed to accomplish the task to which it is set: spin the record at as precise a 33 1/3 while actually playing a record as it is possible to do. Spinning a perfect speed, one reaps the 10X the information which actually lies encoded in those licorice grooves, while eliminating the one area in which digital media have a musically-significant advantage (over belt-drives anyway): speed stability.

So, I've essentially eliminated damping materials, left the motor to spin utterly unfettered thus maximizing torque, and relied on both motor tuning and Direct Coupling (to the largest plinth practicable) in order to eliminate/reduce noise. Furthermore, I LIKE the original Lenco top-plates, their shape and their knobs, and so by using glass-epoxy to replace damping materials (reinforcement and CLD of actual damping), I have aimed to preserve some of the looks/style/ambiance, while Funkifying a dated design. All of this thinking has been combined in my latest project, as well as a return to some simple fun in design in the Burled Funky Lenco I have just inserted under my "system". Please excuse yet another plinth, last one for a long time promise....except the multi-armed and also-funky Garrard plinth I am planning for myself soon!

Finally, some observations on the Lenco vs Garrard: the Garrard has a "fatter" bass than the Lenco, and sounds more big-hearted and colourful/dramatic as opposed to the apparently more accurate and precise Lenco. But. The RS Labs sound stupendous on the Lenco, but it has one weakness (relative to tonearms which are superb in this respect): the bass seems slightly overdamped (depending on recording). But mount the RS Labs on the Garrard and suddenly this changes, and the RS Labs bass is perfect in every way and all snicks into place with perfection, detail, imaging, dynamics, etc (this with the Denon DL-103"E" anyway). Similarly, some tonearm/cartridge combos simply sound better (within the context of my system) on the Lenco. The more I listen, the more I think I'll mount my RS on the Garrard and leave it there. All this to say, that no matter how superb and high-flying any record spinner, synergy issues will always come along to confuse us (as mysterious phenomena beneath our radar work beneath the surface, forcing us to rely on our ears in order to optimize). So keep an ear out and optimize your respective systems!!

And just in case some want to read between the lines and jump to the conclusion that belt-drive also only need optimization in order to compete: only if you want to improve an inferior system. A properly set-up quality idler-wheel drive is superior in every way, not just some, to their sad belt-drive brethren. As I always say to those who want to preserve their politically-correct philosophy and try to force me to "admit" it is a matter of taste: "Sure, if by matter of taste you mean a great deal more detail, dynamics, bass, imaging, tonality, gestalt and PRaT." Which is why we are now in the $100K belt-drive league (and climbing) as logically, why are such extremes necessary in order to extract such performance, if not the problem of making an inferior system perform up to the heights now being reached with more effectiveness/lesser cost by DDs and idlers?

And btw, idlers are also superior to DDs, as their motors spin at much higher RPMs (roughly 1800 RPM), which means that momentum and torque in this case truly does go a long way to eliminating motor speed imperfections (further eliminated by the flywheel-platters), while DDs must depend on complex circuits and electronic tricks to try to eliminate the relatively much-amplified motor imperfections (since they spin at only 33 1/3, being directly driven, thus making the imperfections - all physical systems are imperfect - much more audible). The problem at these very low revolutions is that quartz-locking becomes audible, leading to an unnatural sound very much like that of digital media, dynamically constrained relative to idlers, and dry relative to belt-drives. Idlers are the current champions in terms of superiority of drive systems in the here and now. Vive la Idler-Wheel!! Have a Merry Idler Christmas!!!

No, I still use neoprene to bridge that gap (when necessary), but it is not an active killer of vibrations (including musical vibrations) like Dynamat or Sorbothane, or sand and lead shot (lead sheet is better, as it is relatively solid and inert and I may experiment further with this material, while lead shot is too active), and the Lenco loves it (as it does its own original rubber mat). Let's put it this way: in the absence of Direct Coupling and the glass mod, Dynamat is far more effective at damping out vibration/noise and improving the overall sound than rubber sheet, which has little effect. But, once Direct Coupling is done, then Dynamat and such-like materials/active vibration killers are no longer necessary, and become a liability, sapping both dynamics and detail and other types of information, and it is better to go for the glass mod and relying more on the plinth itself.

This week I will be getting down to brass tacks and finalizing both my Lenco and my Garrard for more impressions of their differences, if any. What with differing platter metals, platter mats, and so on, all conclusions must be taken with a grain of salt and accepted as ball-park sort of general impressions. So far, all I can say is that in terms of actual information retrieval/raw detail, they are on an even footing.

The Curse is partially lifted and my little Sony Powerhouse amp is working fine again, so my Christmas system consists of the Sony TAE-5450 preamp (while my ARC is in the shop being refreshed with new caps), Sony 3130F amp (Mario would have LOVED this one!), and ESS AMT4 speakers, which are still the overall reigning champs - along with the AR2ax's! Have fun all!

Hi Wolf, lead or sand in the stand is fine I think, the idea being, I believe anyway (and I speak from experience), the further away from the cartridge the better (if you REALLY want to kill the sound, try putting Sorbothane between the cartridge and the headshell). Of course, here as elsewhere some fine-tuning might be required, striking a balance between too much lead and not enough. Of course, it's easy to go crazy trying to optimize, the Middle Path is always good, but considering there are ways of silencing the Lenco which don't involve active damping materials, then this is the way to go. But assuming the Lenco is bolted to a heavy plinth, a lead-filled stand might be ideal, use your ears to fine-tune. Myself, I mount my Lencos and Garrards on solid marble/acrylic platforms, themselves resting on Tiptoes, and those mounted on glass and metal shelves. Lead this far away from the source, and considering the undamped platforms (except some ubiquitous neoprene rubber), would likely be an excellent idea!

Great news Peter, it's Christmas!! I look forward to handling these beauties myself, using one as a platform for my "Lenco-Noll," contact me for shipping, moneys owed and so forth.

And up here it is going to be an Audio Christmas for me, as I'm allowing myself a few days to play with my new and old toys. Through a lot of complicated horse-trading I have acquired a VPI JMW 10.5 for my Decca, and this pairing is singing sooo sweetly on my Lenco!! The Decca is slamming and induces the Kundalini Effect, to the extent the ESS can manage it, I'll be setting up the Fabled AR2ax's (they are the seismographs of PRaT) tonight to get the full brunt of the Kundalini Effect in swing in time for Christmas!!

I'll also re-wire my new/old Rega RB-300 and test it out with a variety of MCs to see how it rates/compares against the Morch UP-4 (a fabulous match for the Garrard 301 btw), and also set-up the MAS with a variety of cartridges to see how IT rates against the various Giants inhabiting my plinths!! I am still blown away by just how good the MAS sounded with an ACE recently at a buddy's place, exactly the same strengths as I heard when it was mounted with my Grado in my own system: dynamic spread and dynamic speed/acrobatic alacrity, and ensuing clarity, which proves that detail/information-retrieval is GREATLY affected by the successful retrieval of macro- and micro-dynamics.

For those who have MAS tonearms, this tidbit of information from a necessarily old review of a MAS ‘table/MAS 282 tonearm dug up by a local. It also shows just how deep the understanding assumed by the reviewers for the readers in a world in which record players were the chief source, a different world from today:

"The indicated vertical tracking force was accurate to within 0.1 grams. Although the anti-skating is adjustable only in 0.5-gram steps, it proved satisfactory, since skating compensation can only be approximate anyway. The arm-cueing was well damped, providing a gentle descent of the stylus into the groove with no sideward drift. The arm exhibited very low pivot friction and no detectable play, a result which is consistent with the claimed bearing tolerance of only 10 microns. The capacitance of the tonearm wiring was measured as 100 pF in each channel...The tonearm’s infrasonic resonance was assessed with a Shure V15 Type IV phono cartridge. Since the MAS-282 tonearm has vry low pivot friction and no provision for damping, the arm/cartridge resonance was very pronounced, rising to a 30-db peak at 11 Hz with the Shure’s damping brush disengaged. Engaging the damping brush brought the resonance down to a 10-db peak from 15 to 19 Hz. One of the major byproducts of an undamped resonance is exaggerated cantilever deflection in response to surface irregularities and disc warps, and a consequently large variation in the effective vertical tracking force that acts to hold the stylus in contact with the groove...Therefore, it is recommended that the MAS tonearm be used with an external damping device or with phono cartridges having internal damping. (This advice, of course, applies to all tonearms that have low pivot friction and no provision for their own damping.)...Most important of all, the reproduced sound was excellent. Even with thunderous bass levels the instrumental textures were clearly defined, the background noise was very low, small details were heard with exceptional transparency, and the stereo image was both deep and stable.”

Lots of interesting stuff there to absorb and cogitate on, enjoy a look back at a World of Vinyl all, and once again, have fun and Merry Christmas!!

Hi all, hope you had a Merry and very fine Christmas and will have a very Happy New Year!! Hope you sorted your Lenco Helen, good to hear from you again!! Glad to see you're progressing and having some fun by the sound of it Peter, from your description I'd say it sounds like....an idler-wheel drive!! Congratulations and welcome to the Land of Idler. And good idea Ronnie!! Shame on me for not planning a Christmas plinth. Next project, only to be installed over the Christmas season :-).

From the merry sport of Crush the Belt-Drive (and we're climbing the ladder here with some very serious and pricey pieces being crushed) we are progressing to Crush the Direct Drive!! Now, in the interest of promoting the Sermon of Speed Stability Uber Alles (speed stability is THE most important facet of turntable design), I had avoided going after the DDs, wanting to make common cause with them against the Ubiquitous and Dominating Belt-Drivers except in certain allusions and reports of some comparisons and experiences. Feeling all Christian-like and forgiving, I thought about it and sorta felt sorry for those poor belt-drives, their companies, their admirers and so forth, and thought "Really, this isn't very democratic of me, I shouldn't single out the belt-drives any longer," so I now declare Open Season on DDs!!!

Now, this is more an accident than a plan. As you all know, I consider quartz-locking the major problem with direct drive which, since it is being applied to a motor which revolves soooo slowly, and so magnifies any motor imperfections/speed anomalies. Quartz-locking IS an audible speed anomaly (like the belt, an error and an evolutionary dead-end), which results in a dry, mechanical, non-fluid sound, and to a certain extent a quashing of dynamics, especially in comparison to idler-wheel drives. Now seeing as I am, to a certain extent (and to many on many forums), a Pariah in this jelly-fish politically-correct world of no definitive statements or beliefs (even in physically-proveable empirical science) - and you'd better not pronounce or we will crucify you ;-) - I may as well declare War on the DDs too, and offend everyone democratically and equally!! Liberty, Fraternity, Equality is what I say ;-). Now, as I say, this is an accident: one Lenco of mine has finally and utterly squashed a maxed-out Technics SP-10 MKII at a total of some 80-90 pounds; and another one quashed an EMT 948. I hope to provide more details on these comparisons at some point, or better yet get the involved parties (both of whom own their particular machines) to post themselves!! Nevertheless let us ponder the meaning and import of these latest developments. The Technics SP10 MKII is considered one of best Direct Drives ever built, being the no-holds-barred brainchild of a very large corporation with near-limitless resources, Technics/Panasonic. Needless to say, it is quartz-locked, however robustly and well-built (much better than, again, the Lenco). The owner of said Technics had this to say, being the owner of a Giant Direct Coupled Lenco: "I no longer feel anything for the Technics, it is for sale."

Any EMT at all is a Legend, and even makes the more Snobbish, status-oriented Garrard owners (not that all Garrard owners are snobs, after all I am one, I speak only of certain of the more status-oriented ones) quake in their Guccis. The fact that a Giant Direct Coupled Glass-Reinforced Lenco made the owner of said EMT declare that the Lenco was going to cost him seriously in sleep (as he listened into the wee hours) should give those who look down their noses at the Lencos pause. Think about this fellows: a Lenco has the owner of an EMT 948 thinking about selling off his EMT. That the Lenco even provokes such thoughts is cause for celebration for all idler-wheelers, and for the cause of Equipment in the Service of Music. If indeed the idler-wheel is, as I claim, superior (and it is looking more and more likely), will not admission of this fact lead to better sound reproduction in the home for all? How very democratic and Christmas-sy, and an excellent way to start the New Year: with Real Progress, and not the illusion of Real Progress!! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!

Finally, let us consider once again the question of MASS (amen). Technics-ers have no debate about high-mass vs low mass: to a Technics-er, there is only one formula, a Heavy plinth. And the heavier the better. A minimum of 40 pounds for the plinth alone is the mantra. Whats does this mean? It means that high-mass, simple as it is, IS the answer. There is no metaphysical mystical affinity of SP10s for high mass and low-mass for certain idlers, there is only Speed stability (Uber Alles) and Mass (to stabilize and absorb noise), nothing else. Unfortunately, it is more difficult to get high-mass and Direct Coupling right, and those who can't make it work and refuse to acknowledge their failings muddy the waters for the rest of us. All I can say is persevere, it works, it's simple and effective, if difficult.

On the question of DDs, I do believe they can be very musical and superior to belt-drives, as I have heard superb DDs: the discredited servo-controlled DDs such as my Sony 2250 for instance, likely another sleeper like the Mighty Lenco. The Sony 2250 has an utterly superb main bearing, perhaps the best I have ever tested, is the product of awesome precision metal-work and it is a heavy and serious machine. But more than that, it is incredibly detailed, in a sunny Mediterranean way, sparkling and light. I've already begun to design and build a plinth for it, and we will see just how good it can be. Unlike idlers with their shaded-pole motors, DDs like the 2250 should respond very well to AC conditioning, in fact, this should be crucial to extracting all the potential from servo-controlled units. Once this one finished to my satifaction, I shall engage in the amusing sport of Crush the Legendary Quartz-Locked DD :-)!!

And getting back to idlers, I was once again considering the Rek-o-Kut last night, and I think there is, indeed, hope for it as a serious audiophile machine, even if it does have a soup-can of a motor. The idler-wheel itself is actually less massive than the Garrard 301/401's, which open up the possibility of Silence. I will apply the lessons learned from rebuilding and restoring Lencos, Garrards and Thorens TD-124s to maximizing the Rek-o-Kut Rondine I have. Remember, every single detail must be attended to. And the Rek-o-Kut is one seriously beautiful Art Deco piece, and I LOVE Art Deco!!

And get this all: the Giant Garrard 301 sporting a Morch UP-4 and a good MC is now my reference for delicacy and daintiness, which puts paid (and will in future in actual comparisons and demonstrations) to the Myth of the Harsh Powerhouse Garrard. The Lenco with JMW/Decca is my Rock'n Roll Machine!! And one last discovery I allowed myself for Christmas: the AKG P8ES is an absolutely superb MM, in fact, it challenges the very best of both MM AND MC! I hope you're all having as much fun as I am!! Happy new Year!!!

I'd like to wish everyone a Happy New Year and Happy New Musical Discoveries!!! And thanks both for the informative and useful reviews and the kind words! I've got lots of new stuff to report and discuss, but no time today, time for some feasting!!!

However, in a quickie, my Mannheim Steamroller Christmas LPs have never ever sounded better than they currently do via both my Garrard 301 currently sporting the fabulous Rega RB-300 (with my fave recipe of Cardas internal wiring soldered to Music Boys) and a good MC, and via my Lenco/JMW 10.5/Decca Super Gold Party Animal (with TONS of atmosphere)!! On re-inserting the Rega into my system the feeling overwhelmed me that an old and reliable friend was back, and made me all sentimental and Christmassy: no matter how often these Rega tonearm get lauded, they are STILL underrated, having a knack not only for excellent audiophile performance (once they are rewired that is), but also for simply getting on with it and letting the music stand front and centre (this, of course, on an idler-wheel drive), and so focusing our attention on the LPs rather than the equipment. More listening and comparisons ahead. I've got the AR2ax's hooked up, the bass is awesome, neutral as heck, detailed beyond even the ESS, and the musicality/gestalt/PRaT first-rate!

Enjoy your respective New Years Day all, all the best!

Time now for the Mighty to Tremble, in what is shaping up to be a very exciting and significant New Year!!! Having applied all the lessons learned in maximizing the potential of Lencos, and using "Mr. Red" as my Reference and Standard, I sent out a Garrard 301 I rebuilt for the owner of a Platine Verdier, and first impressions have come back already, featuring the word "embarrassing".

Now, before I continue, let's return to logic and the Law of Diminishing Returns: if the Lenco - and back when none of the more recent mods and principles had been applied - was CRUSHING highly-regarded belt-drives like the maxed-out Linn LP12s, Well Tempereds, various Nottinghams and VPIs, then what did this mean for the ultimate performance of the idler-wheel drive principle vis-a-vis the "competition"? Given that once one reached a certain level of performance, improvements should have been incremental and not orders of magnitude?!? With Direct Coupling (and still in the absence of Giant Mass or the Glass Mod) and motor-tuning a small Lenco humiliated a VPI TNT (even if an earlier model), and again given the Law of Diminishing Returns what does this mean for the idler-wheel drive system?

Now already recently a Giant Direct Coupled Glass-Reinforced Lenco bested one of the great legends of Direct Drives, an EMT 948 (which in its turn humiliated - the word shocking was used by the owner - upper-end belt-drives by, I believe, Basis and Amazon), and according to the report, all other EMTs as well, proving it takes an idler to beat an idler ;-) (DDs now out of the picture, at least until I try out the servo-controlled and simpler variety). Now the report, from the owner of the Platine Verdier, not a mere witness, is that the Giant Garrard 301 oil-bearing (in traditional CLD birch-ply/MDF plinth) has crushed, in no uncertain terms and at a disadvantage (no platform, cheap cartridge, lesser phono stage vs the Platine Verdier with extremely expensive MC, on superb platform into much better phono stage) the superb and well thought-out Platine Verdier. As you can all imagine, the system in which this all took place is superb.

Now by this I am NOT saying the Platine Verdier is not superb: it is a work of industrial art with some amazing engineering and design ideas, and true Collector's item (if one is fortunate enough to afford it) and MUCH better built again than the "humble" Garrard 301. So what, again does this mean? It means my Fellow Idler-Wheelers, that the idler-wheel drive system is the best of the three systems currently available, and that by a fairly large margin, no other conclusion need be made. If only the superb Platine Verdier had an idler-wheel drive system, alas!!!

So far only rough and short descriptions have been sent me as the fellows involved are too busy listening to the music, but if more details come in, I will pass them on, assuming I have their blessings, and more news of great significance to boot, which I will sit on for now. Btw, these fellows deserve kudos for seriously considering both the logic and the mounting evidence, for their intrepid sense of adventure, for trusting the evidence of their ears,and for recognizing that high-end belt-drives had some serious musical issues, which is what led them to consider taking the step of trying their hands at idler-wheel drives. Similar kudos go out to ALL those who have had the gumption to do so, and to those who are seriously considering it. Reports will continue, converts will continue to be converted, underground and behind the scenes, it's too late to put a cap on this particular Pandora's Box, The Idler is Out, have fun all, have the spine to trust your ears and stand by them (and identify and reject the unreasoning prejudices with which your minds are infected, as many have already done, again kudos): the ultimate measuring device when it come to reproduction of music.

Now, I write and report this purely out of an interest in discovering the truth of the matter and out of idealism...in opposition to the Politically Correct stand - made by those who are more interested in garnering support and cheaply and easily gaining "respect" than in discovering the truth - that claims, in the absence of tests to determine if this is true, that all three systems are equivalent. But in the interest of keeping the subject alive and stimulating debate I write...Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler-Wheel!!!! WHAT a New Year!!

Hi Steve, this thread IS fun isn't it? Nothing like stirring up a bit of fun and experimentation!! If the postings on eBay are genuine, EMT 948s are selling by the dozen at the moment, at 700 pounds British a pop. I confess, given their incredible build quality, it certainly doesn't seem genuine, but perhaps someone out there knows.

To recap a bit of history already recapped earlier in this very thread, this is the second EMT owner to fall for the charms of a properly set-up Giant Direct-Coupled Lenco, the first being a fellow with a very large collection of not only EMTs, but also Garrard 301s and 401s, and Thorens TD-124s. He's got the Bug bad (as do I). So, to start the New Year, let's have a look at the history of his own discoveries and recounted tales, in the Great Tradition of Accumulating Evidence. It seems that indeed the Lenco has no upper limit, being only limited by implementation, tuning and recipe. The Lenco demonstrates that build quality is not the whole story, implementation and drive system is: compared with the Garrards, Thorens TD-124, a host of belt-drives and most certainly the EMTs, the Lenco is at the bottom of the heap build-wise. But, it is also a very elegant design aimed like a laser-beam at the problems of speed stability and motor noise and transmission. As I wrote, again at the beginning of this thread, and at many reprises from the beginning of the old thread:

"This is why the Lenco is a work of genius: ELEGANCE. Where EMTs, Garrards and Thorenses are better-built and use “better” motors, the Lenco simply uses what is necessary. As some have pointed out, the towers from which the motor is suspended are cheap tacked-on affairs. Yes, but given that the Lenco motor is hanging from and isolated by springs, a stronger arrangement is not necessary (as simply mounting the Lenco on bricks and attaching a Rega tonearm demonstrates). The motor cannot be divorced from the flywheel-platter, as the idler-wheel makes of the whole an EXTREMELY effective system: the platter has much of its mass concentrated on the rim (as opposed, at least, to the Thorens and the Garrards) and is balanced, which due to its very secure coupling (idler-wheel) regulates the motor speed as the superb motor (spinning gat 1800 rpm and balanced to produce pretty well spot-on speed all on its own via simple momentum) regulates in its turn via torque (wheel) the platter, to create an extremely refined and yet powerful end result. The main bearing certainly doesn’t look like much (though it is very nice and obviously made of very high-quality steel) compared to both these other vintage offerings and modern high-end turntables, but given the horizontal mounting of the motor and less stress (proven by the fact that almost all Lenco main bearings are still in superb condition still) more is not truly necessary. The Lenco motor’s sloping spindle means, also, that such tricks as the magnetic brake on the Garrard, which is often criticized for introducing stresses, is not necessary: the Lenco motor simply spins at full-tilt all the time, open and free, and the wheel is simply slid along length of the sloping motor spindle to achieve perfect and accurate speed."

So, now to the previous Lenco-EMT comparison. For a bit of background, he considers the EMT 927 - an idler-wheel drive - superior to his EMT 950, which is the 948's Big Brother. Among EMT aficionados the 927 is THE EMT of all EMTs. Check out Stafano Pasini’s website (EMTs), as he is an avid collector of EMTs. Significantly, the EMT 927, considered the “Ne Plus Ultra” of EMTs (and hence of turntables period in many circles), is an idler-wheel drive. Just for emphasis and to make the point clear so it is not lost and dismissed as a minor detail: the EMT of all EMTs is the 927, and the 927 is an idler-wheel drive. Peter also had a very hard time bringing his Lenco up to the Heights which it can currently reach (as did I). Now, to the record:

"Hello Jean,
Thanks for your inspiring input. I do agree with a lot of what you say. But when you say: "Each must adjust his 'table combo to match his or her system, these are like complex instruments in their own right!" That turntables in general are amongst the most complex creatures out there, as far as "getting them right" is concerned, I would be the first to admit, but to say that each must adjust his own table combo to match their own system, I feel is perhaps stretching it a bit. My own tables (Garrard 301 (all types), 401, TD124, EMT 930st, 927F, 938 and 950) all have been with me for many, many years, and been played through a lot of shifting electronics and speakers during this time. They are all very good TT:s and consistently performing accordingly, regardless of the rest of the system. Others, like SP10, LP12 and others, have proved to be, at least to me, more inconsistent and perhaps "system dependent". Therefore, when I play my Lenco, that's what I'm looking for, a consistent, solid performance, that can compare with the above machines. My opinion is that if you have an "ultra-solid-table" and the system still doesn't sing or sounds perhaps poorly balanced or whathaveyou - then it's not turntable tuning that you should be thinking about...on the other hand if you know that your system sounds balanced and performs in a satisfactory way except when playing vinyl, then...the TT probably is where it's at.
So methinks that it's all about keeping track of what your point of reference is, and preferably just introduce a single system change/mod/alteration at a time to be able to tell what was responsible for what at the end of the day. This method is, however quite time-consuming as we all know, and can test anyone's patience, but still...
When I listen to any TT (including the L75 in my new plinth), I compare it to my above "references", of which, the EMT 927F, sitting in its EMT shock-absorber frame, on overall balance is the best TT I have ever heard so far.
At the same time, I already know just how good a "good" Lenco can sound, and I gather from what I've been reading in this fantastic thread, that many contributors feel that Jean's method brings this machine right up there, with the very best - so you bet I'll persist - far too important stuff to "ignore".
After all: MUSIC MATTERS MOST! or in short; 3M! - so there's no room for "chance" or "leaving well alone" - more like FULL THROTTLE on this one (;-)
Thanks again for the great input - I'll keep posting any progress I might make.
Thanks Mike for the clarification - greatly appreciated!
Cheers
Peter

07-25-06: Tunein4fun
SUCCESS AT LAST!!! Have worked almost around the clock on my Monster L75. Done it all (apart from gluing the mat to the platter...I will, I will...) - tried various bolting patterns (2 - 12 woodscrews in the pan) and added the top layer to the plinth - the 4 mm bolts are discarded and in their place are sturdy 40 mm woodscrews - drilled up the bolt-holes straight through the chassis. Did some complementary work on the chassis damping, put an Ortofon AS-212 with a Denon DL-103D (playing through old UTC 1950's vintage step up trannies (Petra Music Boys) into my 1958 EICO HF-85).
What can I say, Jean (!!!) and all you other guys who've been so supportive and helpful: GOBSMACKED!!!
I truly couldn't believe it when I heard even the first note being played (it happened to be soft piano entertainment/easy listening piano) - the AIR around that single tiny gentle chord...and then it just went on and on and on...PRAT...DUUUUUUUUUUUDES!!! - now I know what you mean - I had imagined something darn good, judging from the very positive comments from so many contributors - but it's better still; it's just all there (including some minor electrical noise, that I need to sort out) and in such a beautiful way.
I'm humbled and feel obliged to thank Jean again for creating and researching (working-really-really-hard-over-a- long-period-of-time) this "DIY" venture into pretty damn serious TT teritory - THANKS MAN!!!
As many of you have read; I tried this and I tried that and I was (almost) ready to call it a day - but hey, had I put this much work into it already, I just had to see it through, and I'm truly glad I did. To anybody considering taking this project on, I can just say WOOOWW!!! and GO FOR IT!!!.
Cheers
Peter

07-26-06: Tunein4fun
Hello Krenzler and Peter and thanks; the "differences" from "before" are many; I took the time to experiment with the number of screws in the pan - I tried to go about it in a "systematic way", tapping as I went along: I started off with 2 screws, located in the two original existing holes, that are used to bolt the L75 down to its original plinth (they are at 12 & 6 o'clock. From there, I used other existing holes and added some of my own whenever I felt I didn't get the "thud" I was looking for in that particular area. I ended up with 12 screws in the pan - they are not large screws, and they have been tightened so that when tapping the pan anywhere (i.e. in any area supported by the plinth) I get the same kind of "thud" i.e. it sounds uniformly the same (as far as I can tell anyway).
I'm sure that the same result can be had, using another number of screws, positioned differently from mine. As mentioned previously; earlier I had left out the top layer of the plinth (i.e. the ply layer with the "big round hole" - for the pan - in it). This meant that the chassis part, surrounding the pan was "sailing in the wind". I know Jean mentioned to me that he - with some player at least - had heard very little difference soundwise, coming out from bolting down that particular chassis bit, so I didn't think much of it. What I found on my Monster L75, was that adding more chassis damping material (almost completely filling it up) and bolting down the chassis edge (i.e. the outer lower edge of the entire square chassis) made a huge difference. Jean earlier quoted Shindo, who said he used woodscrews to bolt the Garrard to his plinth instead of the original Garrard bolts, 'cos of the superior coupling he got that way. So I thought I've got nothing to lose, trying the same trick. The sad part is that I did most of these "changes" in one go, so it's impossible to recap what each alteration actually accomplished. However, I intend to make another MegaMonsterL75 (inspired by Jean's reports on the improvemnt of adding even more mass) and hopefully on that one, I will be able to keep a log to try to find out what does what.
There is no material whatsoever, between the pan-bottom and the plinth - it's bolted solid to the wood.
Peter, mounting the Ortofon arm, wasn't all that difficult - I enlarged the original Lenco armhole, so that the Ortofon base could pass through it (these bases come in taller and shorter versions - I used a shorter one). I made a tonearm-board from an LP12 tonearm-board - this is only supported by and coupled to the plinth in the corners via quite small woodscrews (just gripping and then a tiny bit more). I will post some pix later.
The Monster still isn't properly supported or "ideally located" but it doesn't seem to care.. it simply produces stunning music (;-D
I was playing some Jimmy Smith this morning - an old 1960's US Verve (stereo) - geeeeeeez...I'll say it again; I'm GOBSMACKED!!! It's beyond "audio", as Jean put it (;-)

07-26-06: Reinderspeter
Tunein4fun,
Out of curiosity, where does this leave the Lenco in comparison to your EMTs?
Peter

07-26-06: Tunein4fun
Reinderspeter...curiosity killed the cat...and I have yet to A-B these machines, but my very convincing gut feeling is that the Monster is superior in quite a few areas (the most "natural PRAT" I have ever heard for one). The first time I heard a 930 play, it was an eye-opener for real, and I just had to have one. It took me a very long time to track down a 927, but when I finally got the chance to hear one play, I was impressed out of my shoes - it was so much better - the best TT I had ever heard overall - took me an even longer time to locate one that was for sale... The feeling I have, listening to my Monster is much stronger still - I really do lack words, but to use some; gobsmacking, flabbergasting, astonishing, mind-blowing - I-HUMBLY-ADMIT-I-HAD-NO-IDEA; it's that sort'a out-of-this-world kind'a thing - by far the biggest kicker in my entire audio-life (been into "audio" for 35 years and especially TTs). This is not a "linear" improvement on other TTs - it's a GIANT LEAP for vinyl reproduction. So I would say; THE MONSTER RULES! I will eventually, for fun or "for the record" do some A-B when time permits, and post whatever results I get here.
Short version: The Monster is simply one heck of a TT!
Plans for the MegaMonster are already in the back of my mind - some ideas lurking about, and a couple of things I'd like to try. Please note that this attempt is not at all prompted by any urge to "improve" on the Monster (I'm not touching the Monster...it's faaar tooo goood for that) - simply to have fun - yup (;-)- afterall that's what life's (almost...) all about methinks.
Even with the plain or "lowly" Shure M75 the Monster excels and shines in the most enchanting way, regardless of what I throw at it music-wise - a fact that probably will put whatever little "credibility" I have, on the line with some people, but hey; so be it!!!
I realize that I have used some pretty strong wording in this post and if somebody reading this, thinks that I'm exaggerating or that I'm "over the top"...think again (;-)"

End of record. All that said, will this latest EMT owner sell his EMT? I don't know. But if he does he won't have any trouble selling it Steve, so just keep your eyes open in case he does post it. I had waited to see if the Lenco-EMT comparison was just a matter of mistaken first impressions, but so far this isn't the case. The Lenco story (and by extension the Idler Story) isn't over, not by a long shot. It can be further perfected and many are working on this. However, the core of the Lenco - platter, bearing and idler-wheel/arm - remains as a testament to the Power of the Idler. Comparisons will continue, reports will continue to come in. The Lenco is still the cheapest way to achieve world-class reproduction, and it may be even better than that. The Garrard is more expensive, but when one considers just how good it can be made to be, it too is cheap for the investment made, as was reported in a review in positive-feedback (401vsTNT). Long may the search for magical music in the home continue, time now to go out and enjoy nature!! Have fun all!!

That's exactly it Bob. The reaction that it CANNOT BE simply superior speed stability that accounts for the Lenco's (and Garrard's, and idlers in general) incredible sound is a very common one, and I hear it all the time both via e-mail and from those who actually hear my own Lencos here in my area. The idler-wheel drives, once properly set-up, show just how bad belt-drive (and DD) speed stability really is, which is difficult to accept due to endless oceans of ink (and bytes) devoted to their "superior" speed stability measurements. Evidently, the tests devised to measure speed stability were in fact designed to support these claims, like loaded dice.

The CLD plinths, which are dead neutral and I believe superior when made up of humble birch-ply/MDF, absorb and kill off noise (ESPECIALLY when Direct Coupling is implemented), and the more the mass, the more effective it is. The massive CLD plinths also ensure more and more stable platforms, which in turn improves speed stability even further.

As I had posted long ago in the very beginning of the original thread, and as posted under my "system": "We know things now they didn't know when they were manufacturing idler-wheel 'tables. We can now realize their potential. Due to the high rotational speed of these motors, great relative mass and so high torque, no expensive solutions need be made to address the weak motors now used in high-end decks. The platters on the Lencos weigh about 8-10 pounds, with much of the mass concentrated on the periphery: the old boys understood flywheel effect to ensure stable speed. The Lenco platter is a single cast piece, of a zinc alloy of some sort, very inert for a metal, and then machined and hand-balanced in a lab. No ringing two-piece platter problems to overcome. Even the motor is hand-balanced in a lab, and weighs something like 3-4 pounds, and runs silently on its lubricated bearings. Think of it: a high-torque motor spinning at well over 1500 RPMs (compared to a belt-drive motor's average 150-300) which pretty well wipes out speed variations by itself. The idler wheel contacts the motor spindle directly, while contacting the platter directly on its other side, thus transmitting most/all of that torque without any belt stretching. Many high-end decks offer thread belts which don't stretch, thus giving an improvement in sound. The Lenco does the same with its wheel. But the platter is also a flywheel, and so evens out whatever speed variations there may be in the motor. It's a closed system (motor-plattter, platter-motor) and speed variations brought on by groove modulations don't stand a chance in this rig, and it is clearly audible. The trick is that big, solid plinth you build at Home Depot."

Believe your ears: idler-wheel drive is THE superior drive system currently available to us, and provides de facto PROOF (auditioning and comparisons) the other systems do not achieve the speed stability they claim to do. Implementation and understanding (and the fine details) is the key to unlocking their full potential.

I don't argue at all, and never did, that belt-drive was developed to reduce noise and pitched that way, Bob, it is implicit in what I wrote already: "The CLD plinths, which are dead neutral and I believe superior when made up of humble birch-ply/MDF, absorb and kill off noise (ESPECIALLY when Direct Coupling is implemented), and the more the mass, the more effective it is," and "The trick is that big, solid plinth you build at Home Depot." Meaning that I acknowledge the plinth is to reduce noise first, and to improve speed stability as a consequence as well. But the fact is that the Lencos when in production had lower rumble figures than the then-rising belt-drive Linn LP12:

"02-20-04: Willbewill
Here are some interesting facts about idler drive decks and rumble: In 1962 Garrard 301 cost £ 17 14s 6d plus tax whilst the Goldring Lenco GL70 (predecesor of GL75) cost £ 22 10s plus tax (admittedly it had an arm and 301 didn't) but it shows it wasn't a cheap deck. Interestingly in 1976 GL75 still had a £ 10 price lead over 401. Rumble figure for 401 was quoted as 'almost non-existent' - I haven't been able to find a rumble figure for GL75 but the GL78 which was more expensive and had a slighly bigger and heavier platter (but I think it used the same motor?) came in at -60dB (original LP12 only quoted 'better than -40dB!).
regards
willbewill"

Anyone who has set up a Lenco on bricks can attest to the fact there is no rumble, assuming the basics have been attended to. The most popular plinths at the moment for Garrards are low-mass two-tier designs with open architecture which have no Direct Coupling and no high-mass, and yet no rumble is reported.

Which is to say, that when the facts are gathered, it is evident that the rumble issue was always exaggerated by the Belt-Drive Conspiracy in order to promote - and sell - the belt-drives. In fact it was also in the best interest of both Garrard and Lenco (as they saw it) to go along with the belt-drive thing, as it was much cheaper to build a belt-drive, and the profits accordingly greater. It didn't help that Garrard themselves recommended that worst of all possible solutions: fixing the Garrard to a flexible plywood sheet and depending on rubber to isolate, and placing that on a hollow box. What amounted to a determined effort to exaggerate and amplify any noise coming from the deck.

So, while the noise coming from the latest belt-drives are lower than they have ever been, it is seen that this is true also for the idler-wheel drives. The plinth does not remove an audible source of noise, what it really does is reduce an inaudible noise, the noise-floor, even lower so that finer and finer details (and consequently things like transient attack and atmosphere) become more and more audible. The mass also focuses even more the drive system so that speed stability is even further enhanced (by preventing even contaminating micro-movements, like a noise-floor).

So, to put it plainly, I see the whole noise issue as incidental and not crucial: the plinth, and proper restoration, removes that as an issue. Or in yet other words, of course noise must be attended to, and it is. That taken care of, as it must, it becomes purely a matter of which drive system is superior. As I have repeatedly written since the beginning, in adopting the belt-drive they threw the baby (music: PRaT, SLAM, bass, gestalt) out with the bathwater (noise), and ignored the evidence of their senses, i.e. that with the [purely theoretical] banishment of the noise, they had lost the musical POWER. They lied to themselves, convincing themselves there had been no price, no losses. And, as I have written repeatedly, since the music is paramount, even if there had been a noise issue, it is a better choice to live with the noise and embrace the greater musicality, than to make great sacrifices in musicality in order to reduce noise. All who prefer vinyl (with its ticks and pops) to digital make this choice. But, since the noise issue was in fact a phantom from the beginning, we do not have to make this choice, we can just go out and try to hear an idler-wheel drive and see what it brings to the party, without any fear of noise, and decide which is the superior drive system!!

Anyone remember "Perfect Sound Forever"? Even the most rabid Digitophiles would now admit that was a load of horse-sh*t, being at the end of decades of improvements since then. And yet the mainstream press trumpeted it across all lands as if it were accepted, proven wisdom without making a single attempt to dig deeper, as did the larger specialized audio press (a few smaller publications excepted). Apply this history to science too, including current much-lauded theories and activities.

But, there is apparently Balance in the Universe: the American car companies with their planned obsolescence are now paying for their cynical decision to go for the bucks and sell off their integrity, and simultaneously provided a door (and financial ruin for themselves...much as the hired CEOs who have no stake other than their bonuses and who currently plunder these companies care) for the Japanese car companies to take over by simply building reliable and dependable cars. Had the music companies not touted "Perfect Sound Forever" and gone for the much-greater profits allowed by the digital media (anyone remember them saying prices would drop?), then music would not today be downloadable, which has killed CD sales and allowed large-scale piracy/downloading to the now computer-armed people and their handy-dandy internet connections. Poetic Justice. Perhaps I am part of the Universal Balance in action: the Poetic Justice of the similar belt-drive phenomenon!

It was the duty of the the belt-drive designers (being experts, and this is true of all scholars and, indeed, Thinking Men on any subject) to think to reinvestigate the Fundamental Assumption of their craft (once the Assumption had been, like Perfect Sound Forever, trumpeted and accepted): that the belt-drive was superior. They didn't, and today we are saddled with $100K machines, an admission if ever there was one that the system is deeply flawed (else why the necessity for such extremes?).

For those who continue to doubt the idlers like the Lenco are true high-end machines, use your heads: the original thread almost reached 4000 posts and lasted for almost 3 years before it was deleted because of an unprecedented success in standing up to and beating a myriad of past and current high-end belt-drives. All the Lenco (and by extension idler) websites and discussion posts which exist today exist because of this success: the Lenco is a proven and true high-end machine, as are the Garrards. Now that the news is in and the latest versions have defeated both an EMT 948 (and by extension CRUSHED the belt-drives it had CRUSHED...very pricey current belt-drives) and a Platine Verdier (which anyone would admit represents close to the pinnacle of the current belt-drive art), the fight is truly on, and the idlers an actual threat.

As in the days of Linn-, VPI- and Well-Tempered-crushings: given the Law of Diminishing Returns which states that beyond a certain point improvements are incremental (and if the Platine Verdier is not beyond this point then nothing is), then what does it mean that a Garrard 301 in high-mass plinth (very definitely no better than a Lenco) has CRUSHED a Platine Verdier?!? Could even a Walker accomplish this?!? So just how good is the idler-wheel system, embodied by either Lenco or Garrard? This will emerge in the coming months and, if necessary, years.

But, Bob, I advise you to not discuss these weighty matters of misinformation and deception with your audio buddies, and simply stick to the inert high-mass plinth, and the effect this has on both speed stability and noise, and of course the matter of true speed stability and the idler-wheel drive system (motor and wheel and platter as a closed system). Ask them to absorb any more, and they will rebel and deny the evidence of their senses, which some might do anyway. Let the implications rise up and sink in on their own. Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler-Wheel!!!

"As I have repeatedly written since the beginning, in adopting the belt-drive they threw the baby (music: PRaT, SLAM, bass, gestalt) out with the bathwater (noise), and ignored the evidence of their senses, i.e. that with the [purely theoretical] banishment of the noise, they had lost the musical POWER. They lied to themselves, convincing themselves there had been no price, no losses. And, as I have written repeatedly, since the music is paramount, even if there had been a noise issue, it is a better choice to live with the noise and embrace the greater musicality, than to make great sacrifices in musicality in order to reduce noise."

The preceding is taken from my post a few back, nowhere did I write these early idlers were superior in every respect. This unplanned putting words/thoughts in my mouth/on the page paints me as an unthinking idler-wheel fanatic who must be pacified: I was and am very precise in putting out my thoughts and the facts. I am an extremely rational and logical man, which explains my constant posts as to the proper understanding of - and corruption - of scientific methods/ideals/empiricism. Was I not right about the idler, those who have tried it? Did I exaggerate one iota its effectiveness as a system, does the evidence not bear me out? It is evidence, testing, comparison and logic which leads me to write what I write, not blind fanaticism, my writings depend on finding, gathering and reporting the evidence and the ensuing conclusions. Now this type of discussion is very important and provides me with a platform on which to further explain which is very useful to me, and I don't want to dampen enthusiasm, so please continue, but with due regard to what I actually write, and have written ;-). To get back to the point, what I wrote above for all to see/read was that "They lied to themselves, convincing themselves THERE HAD BEEN NO PRICE, NO LOSSES."

To elaborate further, the industry and the press and by extension the general audio population believed (at least claimed) there had been no price WHATSOEVER, that the belt-drive was clearly superior in every way and an ACROSS-THE-BOARD improvement. The press and industry never once indicated there had been any loss, that belt-drives gave anything up at all, which explains the state of affairs when I arrived on the scene, where any open mention of idlers as serious equipment brought on a vicious game of Pile on the Heretical Rabbit (check the archives on various forums). Even comparison between a high-end belt-drive and a cheap little idler record-changer like a Dual or Garrard SP-25 CLEARLY shows enormous bass power, PRaT and gestalt - which is to say musicality - in the comparison. Detail and such audiophile niceties is incidental and not germane to this discussion, since nowhere did mention these in the context of the rise of the belt-drive. Once again, from what I already wrote: "in adopting the belt-drive they threw the baby (music: PRaT, SLAM, bass, gestalt) out with the bathwater (noise), and ignored the evidence of their senses, i.e. that with the [purely theoretical] banishment of the noise, they had lost the musical POWER".

This, once again, is an issue of musicality, not of audiophile niceties (though once properly set-up it is clear that idler-wheel drives are superior in EVERY area): again from what I clearly wrote: "it is a better choice to live with the noise and embrace the greater musicality, than to make great sacrifices in musicality in order to reduce noise." Musicality is what is important and what I stress beyond all other things, and it is here that the deception (self- and otherwise) was made.

Now it would be greatly interesting to somehow find all the published and germane material from the rise of the belt-drive and analyse it (this is in fact my "official" profession/education/training) - quite a lot was posted back in the old thread - and some day someone should do this. For instance, the Lenco was dismissed due to the nefarious Vertical Rumble Theory. According to this, the idler was the WORST of the three system, and the WORST of all idlers were the Lencos (which is to day the Lencos were considered the WORST turntables in the world, bottom of the heap of audio fertilizer/failures), this is the truth of the matter and provides the missing context for this discussion overall.

The Lenco, it was theorized, was incredibly noisy and rumbly due to its vertical wheel, the rumble thus generated was "in-phase" with the cartridge, as opposed to the horizontal rim-drive of the Garrard, which being horizontal and not vertical produced rumble at a 90-degree angle to the platter and so was not so serious. Now anyone who hears a properly-functioning Garrard or Lenco knows there is no audible rumble from either machine: the Lenco on bricks with no plinth whatsoever does not produce audible rumble (unless one is determines to maximize the problem somehow). So what had happened? The reviewer/review in question had forgotten to loosen the motor transit screws, the theory was then developed and put out to explain the extreme level of noise, and it was so reported, spread about and accepted, eventually to become the first Dogma I faced in the very beginning of the Da Thread. See as follows:

02-11-04: Rich121
Any developments? This forum has gotten very quite. I posted about this project on other sites...boy.. alot of negative feedback about this turntable!!!

Richard

"02-15-04: Rich121
My question before, as to why the hight mass was because, the motor is directly coupled to the platter, any vibration, any non-linear movement of the idler wheel equates to rummble. You cannot remove that no matter how massive you make the plinth, it goes directly to the platter.
When rumble is caused on the platter in this design, since the idler wheel is mounted on the bottom of the platter, instead of at the outer edges (like Garrard), the rumble is out of phase (you can check for this by pushing your mono button on your pre-amp, if you hear less with mono switched on, then, you have this rumble problem).
Also, I have been told by many, that from their experience, that you need to stay with a less expensive (not as revealing) cartridge, as, the rumble is definately picked up. If in the one I build, this becomes true, I will be very dissappointed. The one i'm building will have a brand new idler wheel, so as to not have any flat spots caused by the wheel sitting against the platter while not in use. I would like to use as good a cartridge as I can afford, but, I'm not sure about whether it would be worth the risk."

02-20-04: Rich121
Did you not read the posts? They basically repeated what I said in this thread earlier.... These are Lenco owners who posted... I'm talking about the posts on AA that Musicus53 reported. Obviosly, you did a search of AA to dig up the few positive posts, why don't you tell the truth, about the overwealming negative posts? That are from Lenco owners. Most every one that still owns a Lenco, says that it is only useable for old 78's because of the rumble (which you claim is not there!, Which you claim can be eliminated with a massive plinth...) What it amounts to, is your claiming that it will (plinth) defy physics and magically divert the rumble from the platter, to the plinth!!! What a joke!!!! The plinth is not even directly connected to the motor/idler wheel/platter.... it is connected to the plate, then the plate is connected to the motor, motor to idler wheel, to platter WHICH IS WHERE THE RUMBLE ENDS UP!!!

END OF SEGMENT. It is clear from these postings what the atmosphere was back then at the begining of Da Thread, 2004, much as many would deny me and erase the very vicious and aggressive battles I fought (with my deniers as well) across a variety of forums before idler-wheelers could freely experiment and post without fear of attack/humiliation/implication. This atmosphere was generated by the Belt-Drive Consortium, and having for years suffered condescension, insult and personal attack due to my sticking to the idler-wheel system in preference to the belt-drive system, I determined to shove the idler up their collective asses as far as it could possibly go (which doesn't mean that I didn't firmly believe, due to evidence AND logic, that it wasn't de facto the superior system). Which, I am happy to say, has been shoved waaaayyyyy waaayyy up there, with the help of all those who had the courage (especially in the beginning in the face of a lot of opposition) to go ahead and try it and report on it, and continue to do so :-). So thanks to all those who continue to post and to spread the word, kudos to you all!!

And now for a little bit of history, and more context, from the First Posters, those who accepted the Challenge, which proves the Anti-Idler Pro-Belt atmosphere only 3 years ago, my how time flies:

02-12-04: Dickson
Hi,

I have been intrigued with this "Lenco" project from the first post by Johnnantais. I used to believe that a TT should only be belt drive. I guess this was what was preached from when I was a teenager. Thus all other types of TT's should sound bad, but I never checked this out myself. Thus about 3 months back I started to look for a Direct Drive TT. I now have the table but have not set this up yet. A friend talks of outstanding bass due to the speed stability.

Now I have purchased a Lenco GL75 on Evil Bay and am highly enthusiastic about setting this up. Just waiting for instructions and more details from Master Johnnantais.

02-16-04: Musicus53
John,
I stumbled onto this thread a few days ago and already have my "feelers" out for a Lenco L75 to start the project with (no luck yet). I was about to drop some serious scratch on a Teres (which would probably create more than a little stress in the "marital bliss" department), and would therefore love to give this a shot before doing so. And you're right, it sounds like fun! Since I've always owned belt drive tables (Ariston then VPI, etc.), I'm not familiar with Lencos other than in name. At the risk of betraying my DIY inexperience, do you think I would be able to install a Teres (or VPI, etc.) platter as a possible upgrade, or do the mechanics/bearing of the table make this impossible?
Don

02-19-04: Musicus53
Hi, John

I just wanted to let you know that your fame (or in this case, infamy) is rapidly spreading since you've now a subject in the Vinyl Asylum! I thought the post about you was actually laughable, but I had to repond (as "Vinyldork"). I just hope a "deprogrammer" doesn't kidnap me now and convince me that Lencos are crap before I get to do the project! Some great links from bornin and I'm looking forward to the pics.

Don

02-20-04: Bornin50
Hi John

Respect dude - don't let the doubters get you down! The Swiss beauty gets the stage she's been waiting for.

Cool!

02-21-04: fmunniksma@home.nl
Johnnantais, in response to your 02-20-04 posting: I´m the guy who wrote the VA post you quoted entirely without mentioning your source. I just fooled around with my L78 i just used for 78s and reported my findings at this point. Indeed, with the standard plinth and arm. Not very nice of you to accuse me of suffering from the Dogma that´s obviously becoming an obsession for you. But i´m a good sport and i take up the challenge! I´ve been fooling around with Thorens TT for ± 2 years, stuffing them with damping materials, building heavy plinths etc. I´m already mailing with Tjoeb about the Decca arm(I´m living in the Netherlands, they´re round the corner!). And i´m going to make a plinth, MDF, birch multiply, we´ll see. One question, do you keep the original springs? With the foam inside?

Greetings from Holland, Freek.

03-07-04: Munkienl
Hi all,

again a little update, i got my L78 out of the plinth now. Thanks Willbewill for the template and the pictures, way to go! I will be keeping the original armlift, you can adjust it with the knob on top, i´m going to glue a piece of rubber or whatever on it to get it up to the correct height. I found an alternative for doing the sanding/painting routine for a week, self-adhesive plastic with a convincing maple wood pattern, 4 euro per roll at my local DIY. they had several wood patterns and even Johnnantais´beloved white marble!
I´ve been listening to the L78/Decca/Stanton 681EEE in the original plinth on a very humble system, 1980s Yamaha amp, little Mission 2 way monitors, cheap cables. Even in this humble system the bass is incredible as well as the speed and dynamics. If the heavy plinth really takes care of the rumble we´re in business!
Tomorrow i´ll have the guys at DIY saw 4 slabs of 22 mm MDF out for me. I´ll keep you posted.

Greetings, Freek.

END OF SEGMENTS. The last post emphasizes what I've been saying in this post, that even with almost no work and without a decent tonearm (though the Deccas are very musical, which is another issue) Freek could hear the bass, boogie factor and dynamics of the idler-wheel system, in comparison to his beloved Thorens TD-125/SME 3009/VdH MC combo. He is not speaking of audiophile niceties but instead of MUSICALITY, precisely what I have been writing all along.

Anyway, I gotta run, I'm sure you're all relieved, I'll be back at a later date to elaborate on this, including the question of whether idlers were ever given a fair shake when the belt-drive took over. Thanks for the opportunity of a discussion, much appreciated, keep it up!!

I'm baA-Aack! So, to get back to Ivor Tiefenbrun and the Linn, Bob (please excuse my earlier vehemence), let's resort to logic and evidence. What he brought to the party in particular was his philosophy of source first, with which I completely agree (within reason): Garbage In, Garbage Out as they say (this applies to the computer models so often resorted to in science as well). However, did he ever pit his Linn against a properly set-up idler-wheel drive (likely this would have been a Garrard 301 or 401)?

Idlers were already on the way out by 1974, already losing ground to the belt-drives due to bad press and economics (increased profits) for reasons mentioned above. 1974 was the year in which Tiefenbrun introduced the Linn, which was chronologically far behind the Thorens belt-drives and the ARs (each having its claim to be the first to issue a belt-drive, which, it turns out, was actally invented by....Lenco!!! :-)), not to mention the Aristons which legend has it gave Ivor the idea for the Linn in the first place (the story being that Ariston approached his father with a view to having him do the metalwork for their turntable, the deal fell through for some reason, and Ivor adopted the design). So we have to ask: were any serious comparisons ever done between properly set-up idler-wheel drives (and with decent tonearm) during this time and fairly reported, or did the belt-drive designers simply assume that battle was over and the belt-drive "proven" superior, and the reporters and industry go along and promote this view?

And from a practical point of view, place yourself in Ivor's place: and along comes Ariston with its copy of a Thorens TD-150, and you see an opportunity to get into turntable manufacture (don't forget my background is originally high-end and classic belt-drives). A belt-drive requires only very basic metal-work (a lathe, a folded metal subchassis, springs, a motor an an elastic band). So would Ivor even have any interest at all in producing an idler-wheel drive with its much more complex mechanisms, far more demanding metal work and specialized-for-record-playing motors? Since it was an impossibility to take idler production on, and they were on their way out anyway due to bad press and economic reasons, then likely Tiefenbrun never did do this comparison, or even thought it necessary. Which brings me back to an earlier statement: "It was the duty of the belt-drive designers (being experts, and this is true of all scholars and, indeed, Thinking Men on any subject) to think to reinvestigate the Fundamental Assumption of their craft (once the Assumption had been, like Perfect Sound Forever, trumpeted and accepted): that the belt-drive was superior. They didn't, and today we are saddled with $100K machines, an admission if ever there was one that the system is deeply flawed (else why the necessity for such extremes?)."

Now let's turn to another possibility and consider the reports of another early participant of the original thread:

"This evening is the first chance I have had to play with the beastie. I found (it took me a little while) the Origin Live modified Rega 250 that I bought two years ago intending to mount on an Empire 208 if I ever found one. I didn't.
I also found my little used Denon 103D. An hour later we were ready to go. No plinth. I precariously balanced the Goldring on two lead shot filled plwood boxes that I made ages ago to set a pair of Carver Amazing speakers on. The speakers are long gone, but the heavy little boxes thankfully remain. Albert I don't know what TT you had before the Goldring, but my expectations were certainly not high since I have a heavily modified Linn LP 12 with an Ittok arm and Koetsu Black cartridge. I have to say that the Goldring with the lesser cartridge (the Denon 103D at $225, while a very impressive cartridge is no match for the $1,500 Koetsu), unravelled the music and separated instruments better than the Linn with the Koetsu. At first I thought that was hearing over-simplification of passages, but when I started hearing things in the foreground that were either distant on the Linn or very subdued, I knew this was not the case. Separation of lead and backing vocals and clear enunciation of words seemed better on the Goldring. I think I have to switch the Ittok and Koetsu to the Goldring to be completely fair. But then I think that there would be an even greater bias towards the Goldring."

"I continue to be impressed by this TT - even without a plinth - which I know will improve everything. It's subtle for the most part and reveals everything with a very light touch, never screaming "look at all this detail". But when there are massive dynamic swings it is scary. For the ultimate test of just how scary, play "No Pasaran" from Joe Jackson's 1987 LP "Will Power". It will make you leap out of your pants. Also even in it's plinthless state it sails through those classic 'test' tracks like "Sad Old Red" by Simply Red and "Ride Across The River" by Dire Straits - both tough tests of the ability of a system to reproduce bass that stops and starts on a dime with no overhang."

"I am a long time Linnie. I have own LP 12's for 28 years. My current Linn has an Origin Live DC motor and a Cetech carbon fibre subchassis. On a whim I bought a GL 75 and put an Origin Live modded Rega 250 and my beloved Koetsu Black on it. Holy shit, better bass, much better leading-edge dynamics and pretty remarkable imaging. This is all without a plinth. I'm just resting this beast on two lead-filled boxes. I am about to make a decent plinth and see where it goes."

"I STILL haven't built a plinth for my GL 75, OL Rega, Koetsu Black. But I'm playing it all the time. And I get more impressed with every LP. I should mention that I went from thin, model train oil to Mobil 1 grease and then a combination of the last two. My last choice seems to be the best. When I eventually get around to building the plinth it will be on this site. Just listened to Dire Straits' "Brothers In Arms" and Little Feat "The Last Record Album". I'm hearing things that were not there AT ALL on the Linn. Buggeration. Is that possible ?"

END OF SEGMENT. So let's consider the context here: a Lenco with no plinth at all, precariously balanced, with a Rega tonearm simply plopped into the original hole, STOMPS a fully-tricked latest-edition Linn LP12. Now no one would say the latest Linns aren't a TREMENDOUS improvement over the original Linns, so we have to come to some conclusion. And, the conclusion is this: either a proper and fair showdown was never done between the belt-drives of the day, or it was and they lied. At some point, somebody, somewhere, lied, or at the very least misdirected. By this last I mean they focused entirely on the noise issue by which the idler-wheel drive was discredited and character-assassinated, and simply failed to mention the fact idlers had in fact more dynamics, better bass and better timing and attack than belt-drives. If they focused solely on the noise issue, as I wrote up above, and ignored/pretended there was no loss, then this is negligence and prejudice. If they lied, then it is quite simply a crime (like the introduction of CD ;-).

Perhaps the world just works this way, and a newer system which allows greater profits wins every time. But, being an Idealist, I say this then provides us the perfect arena in which to re-examine the way our western Consumer Society works (and re-introduce the concept of job satisfaction, pride and fulfillment in knowing you are contributing to a quality product), about the concept and Myth of Progress on which our Consumer Society depends, and how we might begin to rethink our attitudes to both quality and integrity.

So, to get back to my original thought: "As I have repeatedly written since the beginning, in adopting the belt-drive they threw the baby (music: PRaT, SLAM, bass, gestalt) out with the bathwater (noise), and ignored the evidence of their senses, i.e. that with the [purely theoretical] banishment of the noise, they had lost the musical POWER. They lied to themselves, convincing themselves there had been no price, no losses." Since the evidence shows that idler-wheel drives ARE superior in terms of PRaT, slam and bass (after all, it was a cheap little Garrard SP-25 which converted me, with original tonearm, and I get e-mails all the time from fellows who remember how powerful their father's idler-based system sounded in their youth), if not, in their original form, better at high frequencies, silence and detail, then many did indeed deceive themselves and convince themselves there was no comparative loss, and in the process deceived others. The same happened just a while back, no?, when Compact Disc was touted even by owners of good belt-drives as superior in every way, shape and form to their record players. Even Digitophiles will today admit LPs have a warmth and listenability today's much better digital players lack, but they didn't back then when the fight was fresh and on.

So, thanks Bob and Richard for a chance to air out these old arguments, it's good to dust them off and air them out occasionally, and better, due to your promptings and excellent questions, delve into them further, this is much of the reason I had started the original thread (not just to ram point A up certain persons' asses ;-)), as a chance to re-examine and analyze what had happened. But, before we could get to this stage, we had to prove that something HAD in fact happened, i.e. that idler-wheel drives were in fact incredible machines, and, according to me anyway, quite simply the best LP-spinning system we have yet devised.

Fascinating look at what was going on inside the living rooms of the audio-enlightened at the time, Colin! And as I suspected, the Linns were never compared with idlers (at least not publicly), as the issue was already pretty well dead by then. But let's not forget the context: just as the industry and press combined touted Perfect Sound Forever and won over the overwhelming mass of the population with Perfect Sound Forever, so the industry and press back then touted the belt and killed the idler before the Linn ever hit the stands (and again, against a background of idlers, someone - i.e. press and industry - had to have heard the diminution in the sonic areas already listed). That perceived loss of slam PRaT and bass was dismissed by you and the public because you relied on the expert testimony of the press and industry there was no sonic price, and so though you and others heard it, you dismissed it as an unrelated aberration and moved on.

Innocent and against an audio background which was utterly unaware any Audio Battle of Systems had even occurred, other than commercial DD vs BD competition, (I used idler-wheel record changers as a kid, but not being from an audio family or even aware there was such a thing as an "audio magazine" I knew nothing other than that more pennies had to be taped to the tonearm to prevent the cartridge from skipping :-)), I all-unaware bought a Garrard SP-25 at a flea market thinking it was a belt-drive and took it home to match up to my NAD/Boston set-up.

As background to this, I had never been an audiophile until the mid-80s, and happily used my Akai belt-drive/Kenwood receiver system in what I think of as The Days of Innocence (happily listening to the MUSIC blissfully unaware of any audio losses or distortions). Then Digital came out and I was looking forward to it as much as anyone. A friend of mine was the first to buy a CD-based system and paid quite a lot of money for a new [what we considered state of the art, not being audiophiles] Yamaha/AR system with Yamaha CD player. At the Unveiling Party (he invited Everyone in the neighbourhood to hear the First of the New Paradigm), while everyone ooohed and aaaahhhhheed, I found myself offended at the cold, clinical sound which emerged, all hard edges with NO atmosphere, and I asked everyone "Do you not hear it?!?" No one agreed, and so I bet the owner of the new machine that I could assemble a turntable-based system for the same money which was superior (without even knowing of the existence of such machines, I was so angry). I researched, discovered audio magazines, discovered high-end audio shops, and was finally led to then Shit-Kicker Rega Planar 3 with its controversial RB-300 tonearm (the controversy being those who said it was a true high-end tonearm, while the price-conscious denied this). Not having a lot of money at the time, the best I could do as buy the Rega Planar 3 and keep my old cartridge. Mounting my Acutex to the Rega, I was astonished to discover tons of information, details, entire instruments which I had never heard before. Having switched my cartridge from the old to the new underlined just how much the record player was doing, and in that moment my Audio Innocence fell away and I became an audiophile, eventually buying a Grado, a Musical Fidelity A1, and a pair of Infinite Slope speakers (today Joseph Audio markets these). My friend heard the Rega in his system and today he is even more anti-digital than I am, and won't allow a CD player in his house! He started with a Revolver/Sumiko MMT/Grado set-up, and evolved through the Maplenoll Athena to a Lenco today.

By the time I tripped over the SP-25 I owned both a maxed-out Maplenoll Athena and an Audiomeca Roma, was a confirmed member of the Belt-Drives are Superior to All Club (the only alternative I was aware of being DD), and was using a variety of high-end MCs. That particular SP-25 was defective, and when I opened it expecting to repair a simple belt-drive (by this time I was the unofficial Maplenoll technician for my city), I was astounded to be confronted with a WHEEL and a host of complex and bizarre gears, levers and springs. I didn't know what the Hell I was looking at, and only knew I had no hope of repairing it...conventionally at least. So, testing and experimenting, I decided to simply throw out everything which did not drive the platter directly and get rid of the non-functioning automatic system entirely, and stripped it down to the on/off switch, speed control, and motor and wheel, a little pile of metal parts, springs and grommets sitting by its side. I had made the little fully-automatic SP-25 a fully manual machine, and in the process got rid of all the rattly/noisy little bits. In addition, I soldered a better cable to the terminals. Then I mounted a decent cartridge (a Glanz), hooked it up to the little system not expecting much, and found myself ASTONISHED. I KNEW instantly that this as a superior system (given the relatively cheap construction of the little machine with its cheap tonearm), that both my highly-regarded Maplenoll and Audiomeca 'tables were beaten, had never heard such speed, such "clarity" (razor-sharp transients), such DRIVE, such tight bass!

Those were fun days: I got to know many of the high-end audio personalities of Helsinki, and found myself marching around from high-end shop to high-end shop with the little Garrard SP-25 under my arm (it didn't weigh much), with an Audio Technica OC30 (superior to the OC9) now mounted to the tonearm (this tonearm/MC combo was admittedly bright, but the detail, transient speed and SLAM were entirely audible), and proceeded to demonstrate it in high-end systems. There was no rumble, and some were so gobsmacked they asked if I could adapt the system to their existing belt-drives. I remember demonstrating it in a system which totaled some $200K in one shop, and there was some high-level meeting happening upstairs (it was a chain of high-end shops across Scandinavia). As the little Garrard began to play, the door to the meeting room opened and all the attendees marched out and asked what was playing, asking if it was the new high-end CD player they were obviously expecting. The salesman pointed to the little Garrard sitting on the floor, and the management simply stared for a few moments without speaking, as if it were an extraterrestrial, and simply walked back into the meeting room without saying a word and closed the door. The salesmen owned a Thorens Reference (one of the biggest, most massive and most beautiful belt-drives ever made) and asked me if I could make it an idler-wheel drive.

A freind of mine who had Made Good (now very wealthy) came to Helskini to visit me, heard my little system and was astonished as well, saying "The hairs are rising up on my arms!!!" He asked how much I needed to do the research to develop the technology/'table, and I began, eventually finding a Lenco to experiment with for the proposed new company, which was abandoned as many big companies stopped production of turntables (Thorens) and cartridges (Shure), which truly seemed to be The much-predicted End for vinyl.

Which is all to say, modded, even a humble SP-25 can make the case for the idler-wheel very effectively, that the sonic price which was paid by converting to belt-drive had to have been very audible to the few who were involved in the design and promotion of belt-drives, which was why the noise issue was emphasized to the exclusion of all else by both press and industry.

As to Linn carrying the Vinyl Standard, let's not forget that just before the Digital Dark Ages and through its beginning there was an explosion of new designs, headed by the likes of Roksan with its challenge to the Linn dominance, the Rega RB-300 tonearm (which matched to the Roksan struggled with Linn/Ittok for the crown) which hit the market like a sledgehammer (high-end performance and superb engineering at a budget price which brought the high End within the reach of audio masses), Pink Triangle with its introduction of the first acrylic platter and I believe DC motor. With this explosion of designs (add Maplenoll, VPI, Sota and various unsuspended designs from the American side), came a fortuitous and coinciding re-explosion of interest in quality vinyl (anyone remember the constant "Now is the time to buy your Final Turntable before the End, they have never been better" articles?), and this contributed greatly to the survival of the High-End Vinyl Standard through the Digital Dark Ages. And through all THAT foofarah, some few British companies carried the idler standard underground and behind the scenes with small adverts at the back of British audio mags, with Loricraft offering their wooden plinths and rebuilds alongside various stone plinths.

It seems the Audio Gods were [wisely] smiling on us all along and continue to do so! Vive la Vinyl!!

Beautiful plinth Oregon, lucky friend to have you building an entire and Priceless Mighty Lenco for him!! If he doesn't appreciate it, send him over and I'll kick his ass ;-).

Hi Mario, boy that is some project you have on the go!! Grease is the word. Apply wads and wads of ugly, drippy, gooey grease until it runs out and plops on the floor in smelly unsightly piles. Then clean up the mess and leave it alone. This will reduce chatter considerably. Also, the more ball bearings there are, the greater the potential (and reality) of chatter, so I would also advise you to reduce the number to the barest minimum for safety, stability and functioning, if this is possible. I think that even with all this you will lose some focus and dynamics (micro and macro), but perhaps, given you have a lazy susan, you can make this up by making the plinth especially HUuuuuUuuGE!!

I just scored a Fidelity Research FRT-5 phono transformer with 3 inputs (2 MC and 1 MM which simply bypasses the transformer), which means that with it and my Sony TAE-5450 I can run 5 (!!!!!) tonearm/cartridge combos into my SP-8, 3 of those direct into the SP-8's excellent phono input!! Yippeeee!!!!! At the moment the best I can do is 4, which means I'd better start on a new plinth for the Garrard!! Maaaadnnneeessss....:-)!!

That IS hilarious Mario! It must've posted just as I was last posting, wish I'd have seen it sooner. Now THERE's a use for belt-drives :-)!

To take this opportunity to correct a mistaken impression many seem to have, I do NOT hate belt-drives, any more than I hate science! It is many scien-TISTS I take exception to, I have total faith in science...assuming no rules of evidence or logic are being broken, and that the pronouncements/authority of scien-TISTS don't supersede the evidence or logic of science (as is often the case today); just as I take exception to many fanatical belt-drivers (which only three years ago meant 99.999% of ALL turntable users). People are a thin-skinned lot: if you say a thing is GOOD; then they take it to mean the other thing is consequently BAD and take offense. Again nowhere have I ever written belt-drives cannot make music or are BAD, only that idlers are incredibly GOOD, to me it is simply a matter of which is the superior system, period.

So, there are some belt-drives and belt-drive designers I admire, who think outside the box, as it were. I LOVE the humble AR-XA and if I were forced to live with one for the rest of my life, then I'd happily do so, and mod it to accept a Mayware and mount as Decca to that (a Totality which is mind-boggling). A brilliant design, one of the best suspended 'tables ever made, the suspension really works! Bill Firebaugh's Well Tempered record player is brilliant, truly original thinking and effective design, don't be surprised anyone if some day I buy one for my collection, out of admiration for the design. Another brilliant design was and is the Roksan record player, with its brilliant solution to speed stability and stylus drag: a motor which rotates about its axis, held in place by a spring to prevent the belt from stretching and then contracting! I've heard them and admire them, and if I were a belt-driver I would have owned one, had I not stumbled on the little SP-25 first. Then of course, the fabulous Maplenoll: what could this design not conquer were it to hit the market today?!? Imagine, a turntable which sold rather cheaply with an air-bearing tonearm AND an air-bearing platter!!! Now in my experience this 'table had dynamics, PRaT and bass and SLAM coming out the ass. There are a couple of designs now on the market I will likely buy in future, on that thoretical day I have money to burn on pure indulgence. One is the Opus Continuo 'table from Scandinavia, and there are others.

The problem is, the fundamental assumption on which all these designs were founded was and is incorrect. In fact, if many of the Sacred Cows of Western Science were investigated, we would discover they are indeed built on at least one of these unexamined assumptions, and in many cases a whole host of assumptions piled up one on top if the other like a house of cards. With respect to vinyl, the designers trusted the research/conclusions which had gone before, and built for the prevailing paradigm: that the belt-drive was superior. Ay, THERE's the rub.

Anyway, for the moment I am having great fun restoring an Elac record-changer, an idler-wheel drive of course. These are great machines, very well-built, and I actually used one as my main machine a few years back, and laughed every time the record player turned itself off, and sometimes - GASP! - I even stacked records on it and let them fall one after the other while I relaxed on the Listening Couch, Yippeee!! I think I'll mount a decent cartridge on it, and take it out and play Crush the Belt-Drive. Lighter than my Lenco too :-).

Hi Steve, happy to see you're still here!! If your Dual is indeed in good trim, meaning the main bearing has no slack, then I would say the Elac would be a sideways step. That said, Elacs are very well-built, and seem to weather the years better than Duals (while I have come across many Duals with ruined bearings, I have yet to find an Elac with one), and the Elac is all-metal and simpler in its construction that the Duals. On the other hand, the Duals may have better tonearms (they LOOK better, but don't underestimate those clunky-looking Elac or Garrard tonearms, with their ring-bearing bearings identical to the fabulous AT 1005 MKII bearings), and some models do have excellent motors, like the Elacs (the Garrard SP-25s, especially the later models, had SUPERB motors).

But, if you strip down your Dual of its automatic system, solder better wire to the terminals, strip, clean and re-lube the motor, main bearing, apply a bit of Dynamat here and there, and bolt it to a plinth (don't go crazy here though, perhaps three layers would be enough, and similar in dimensions to the current plinth), you will get a LARGE improvement. If the Dual is Sacred, then buy an Elac, cheaper, and do the mods to it! For the one I'm working on now, I stripped, cleaned and re-lubed it every bit as carefully as I would a Garrard 301, and I soldered the original Rega tonearm-wire I had kicking around after re-wring mine for an improvement, but I'm leaving it in the original plinth with suspension, for now. I'll mount a good MM to it so as not to undermine it. I'll let you know how it works out. I'll post photos too, this Elac Miracord 40 is mint Art Deco beautiful!

Hi Agee, sounds like a lot of effort!! The only way I know of posting a photo is to register under a "system" here, as with mine. If you cruise the sign-in menu, you'll find "virtual systems", I think its called, and you can get back and announce its posting.

Hi Turboglo, great story! This type of anecdote is the most common sent to me, though mostly fond memories of fathers' systems backed by an idler-wheel of course, and like you speaking of the musical POWER of those old systems (and the consequent failure to recapture that power). Like you, most heard the diminution, but trusting the press reports and industry advertising, they dismissed it as an explainable aberration (though the explanation was never forthcoming, the claim being NO sacrifice was made) and moved on (with that nagging little voice at the back of their minds that something was STILL missing). Hilarious and somewhat serious: "I feel like I should be able to sue somebody!"

I suspect many have been reading my claims and reports like these over the last few years and though it strikes a chord within them, they don't want to believe it, having invested too much money backing the wrong horse (a painful admission).

Now, though I'm certain everyone understands this, I do want to caution those watching from the outside that a restored/tweaked/replinthed record changer, though it will have that PRaT, SLAM, bass and musical POWER, will not match a properly redone and set-up Lenco, Garrard or other heavy and well-built idler-wheel drive. But it WILL teach a Great lesson, and will embarrass many highly-regarded belt-drives. More on the fun side, a record-changer, properly re-done, sounds great but more than that, it allows one to give the finger to hair-shirt audiophile existence, and watch the record player turn itself off, and even allows us to stack records and relax!! Now to some this is anathema, but it IS fun!! I don't believe records are SO easily damaged, that if they are clear of dust, the cushioning of air as it falls absorbs/kills the impact, and the absence of dust ensures nothing is ground in. Or one could simply be happy that the one record ends, and the player turns itself off, like a CD player.

So, if the Dual sounds like fun and offers the occasional holiday from audiophile obsessions (while satisfying the desire for MUSIC), then why not bid on it? Elacs are every bit as good, and cheaper to boot, but they are not the Dual you enjoyed so much years ago ;-).