Thanks for the post, Mario. Mosin actually clears up a lot of my questions in the context of the paragraphs you quoted. Thanks also to Mosin. |
Trav, Don't you think there might be an "Angel of Pull"? And she has no doubt spoken to Jean. |
I agree that Mosin's work is cosmetically the best I've seen, and it seems that he has used a unique platter, which perhaps he made himself or had custom-made for him, but I would sure like to know more about the innards. Mosin, can you supply some more photos or at least a verbal description of the inner workings? |
I had my first listen to a mighty Lenco on Saturday, playing my own records on a system that is otherwise foreign to me. I was floored by the HUGE soundstage, fabulous sense of depth and pace, and yes bass response in spades. Rumble? What rumble? As Jean knows, I am putting my money where my mouth is by ordering a table. So now that I am about to join this exclusive club, can I ask if any owners of Lencos out of Jean's shop are using low output moving coil cartridges on their tables? If so, what are the results compared to the same or similar cartridges used on high quality belt-drive tables? Thanks. |
Thanks, Etch and Frankhertz. Don't need no stinkin' step-up, because I just finished modifying my phono stage for more gain, and it's working great driven by my Koetsu Urushi. (Seriously, if I did require a step-up, the Jensen would be my first choice, too.) My motive in asking about LOMCs was simply that I perceived that most folks who have Lencos seemed to be using high-ish output cartridges, and I wondered if there was a reason for avoiding LOMCs. But my generalization was inaccurate, because I've had some private responses that indicate lots of Lenco users are using Denon 103s, and the like, as you two also suggest. Onward and upward. |
Helen, If you don't mind using up about half your space, you COULD try Quad 57s in your small room. It would be like having the best, most transparent headphones ever made. |
Radialsteve, That's very encouraging news that the Lenco/Triplanar can best two such a hallowed analog ikons. I'm sitting here waiting for my re-plinthed Lenco (gloss black base with ruby red chassis) to arrive from the mighty Jean who posted it just before departure to Cyprus. My only concerns are or were regarding how the combo of a Lenco and Triplanar would work. I'm going to mount my Triplanar and Koetsu Urushi, as soon as the thing gets here, if customs will ever let it go. |
Rs, An SME V is not in the cards for me, but I will let you know how the Triplanar/Koetsu works when I finally do get the tt from UPS. (Yes, it's been more than 3 weeks since Jean shipped the Lenco to me, with many snafus on the part of the UPS customs house that was supposed to clear the shipment, and I still don't have the Lenco. Ottawa is about 600 mi from my house, and now I wish I had driven up to get the Lenco in person.) The hum you are reporting: are you sure it is a hum induced by the motor, or could it be rumble (I truly hope not)? I am not aware that motors can induce hum in MC cartridges, is why I ask. |
That was a humorous and ironic comment by "JD", but where do you see a photo of Jean? |
Coupling the bearing seems like a great idea. But somehow one has to build the plinth in order also to allow that at some time during its life the chassis may have to be removed for repair or other mods, etc. I'm sure you've thought of that. I too thank you for the reference. |
Steve, So are you saying that you personally have compared a Teres rim driven tt to a max'd out Lenco or Garrard and that the results are resoundingly in favor of the former? If not, then aren't you being as guilty as Jean of turntable Chauvinism? But if you have done the comparison, under valid conditions, I'd like to know. |
Mosin, That's beautiful, as you appear to have been told already. Can you reveal any details regarding the internal construction? In other words, how did you go about building an idler from scratch? What is the platter made of, etc? Do you have more photos?
By the way, I am sure that Jean will appreciate your efforts as much as anyone else here. |
Dear Gadfly,
Tell me more about your TD-111 and less about your personal obsession with Jean and what you think he did or did not claim to invent or discover. No one gives a darn either way.
Dear everyone else,
Jean built me a giant plinth for my Lenco. I've had it up and running for about a week. The results are cosmetically beautiful, and the sound is divine. It makes good sounding LPs sound better than ever before and breathes life into previously disappointing ones. For these things, I am grateful to those who brought idler-driven tts to my attention in the first place and to Jean for his labors and insights. |
Mario, when you say that your plinth "captures" the bearing, I can see that the bearing goes thru one layer of the plinth, but is it tightly fitted into a hole in that layer? IOW, is that how you capture the bearing? I would think that some sort of clamping mechanism might get a better grip on the bearing, so that one could tighten down on it mechanically. Did you consider that approach? Perhaps if the metal extenders on your arm pod were to penetrate all the way thru to the bearing and terminate in a clamp, that might do the trick, or one might devise wood-based adjustable clamps incorporated into a layer of the plinth. (Easy for me to say; I haven't built a plinth yet.) Beautiful execution of an interesting concept. I love the curves in the plinth from an artistic standpoint, and they may further reduce resonance characteristics, too. |
If postings to this site are truly reviewed prior to being made available to the rest of us, it is surprising that posts such as the one above are permitted, since it, and others from this same individual, do nothing to further the aim of this discussion. Socrates was often referred to as a Gadfly, but his writings and teachings were enlightening and furthered a discourse that was much more important and fundamental than the present one. Yet, he met an untimely end as a result of his efforts. Perhaps this Gadfly could be persuaded to stifle himself or write something informative, at least. |
With all due respect, Jean, the Sony ES stuff of recent years is pretty good for solid state, but those earlier efforts to me always sounded artificial, closed in, "gray", and the epitome of what one means when one refers to "transistor sound". Perhaps I hooked them up to the wrong speakers. I'll keep an open mind.
Just to stay on topic, long live Lenco and idler drive! I'm waiting with curiosity for the first new megabuck idler. It's gotta happen. |
Teres is not quite there yet. They make a true direct-drive, the Certus, and have recently been marketing their accessory motor, the Verus, which can turn certain belt drives, including their own tts, into rim drive. But so far no one has come to market with a complete new rim drive table, let alone an idler drive type. I would love to see it happen, just for historical interest and so I could sit back and see how the reviewers handle it. |
Jean, Now that I think of it, I do recall a good feeling about the Sony TAE products. It's the earlier and maybe the later ones up to the SE line that I did not like at all.
Wouldn't you consider the Loricraft tables to just be latter day copies of the Garrards?
The Teres motor for Garrard is just their Verus set up to work on the inside rim of the Garrard platter. |
Chris, How do you envision your replacement Lenco motor? Would it drive the underside of the platter directly with a vertically oriented "rim"-drive wheel, or would it drive the platter via the Lenco idler mechanism or some facsimile thereof? Anyway, I for one would be interested to learn more.
By the way, why was/is it necessary to develop a remote mechanism to flip the Verus motor against the inner rim of the Garrard 301 then away from contacting it when the motor is not in use? Would it not be sufficient simply to turn the motor on and off and let it lean on the inner rim at all times?
Thank you for having the guts to introduce a paradigm shift into the competitive belt-drive marketplace. |
Chris, Since you have already stimulated responses from some Lenco-lytes, let me add another possible bone of contention: "We" tend to think that the Lenco drive system, where the underside of the platter is in contact with the idler drive system, not the inner rim of the platter, may have some inherent superiority over conventional rim drive. (This may be correct thinking or it may not be; I'd be interested in your comments.) Rightly or wrongly you might have a hard time converting "us" to rim drive for that reason. Now, if you can conceive and execute an idler drive system that is quieter and utilizes a motor that is superior to that of the Lenco, you may have something. As I suggested earlier, there may be a way to mount your drive wheel in a vertical orientation such that it can directly contact the underside of a Lenco platter. There are attendant problems related to how to maintain the proper and constant pressure against the platter in such a set-up, but not unsolvable ones. |
I tried to verify this via the internet but could not find the relevant information plainly stated. However, is it not the case that Quartz-control is a subset of servo control? IOW, quartz control is a servo using a quartz-based oscillator as a reference. If true, it would be of interest to know the reference used in the servo-controlled tt you are enjoying. |
Chris, I think I speak for most of us when I say that I admire your guts in bringing the Verus to market, and I am happy for your evident success with it. As for driving a Lenco with the Verus, have you given any more thought to either orienting the Verus horizontally or mounting the drive wheel horizontally within the Verus chassis, so one can drive the underside of the platter of a Lenco, a la the original design? As someone else noted, some (but not all) Lenco platters have vertical ribs spaced at intervals around the circumference of the inner side of the rim of the platter, which would prevent classic rim drive. (I've got two platters, one with and one without the ribs.)
PS. When driving the Garrard 301/401, does the Verus sit on the underlying shelf or is it isolated in some way from the shelf and the chassis? |
I agree with Mosin that mating a Verus to a Lenco may well result in a bull with teats; I was just inquiring about Chris' future plans. However, I don't think it's crazy to mate the Verus with a Garrard, since the Garrard at least was designed for (inner rather than outer) rim drive. Whether the result can still be called a "Garrard" is another matter for debate, if one cares to debate such a semantic issue. The question is whether you get a better sound. |
Mosin, I apologize; I am afraid that each of your responses engenders further questioning, and I am sure you don't want to play host on this thread. However (a big however), I am very interested to know more about what you did to improve on the Lenco bearing/spindle combination, as I agree that this is a weak link and that "a chain is no stronger than its weakest link". (1) How did you extend the spindle length? Did you make or have made an entirely new spindle? (2) Are you familiar with the bearing upgrade supplied by Joel and described on the Lenco Lovers site? Have you seen or tried that one? (3) Is the silicon nitride ball commercially available, or did you have that made as well? (4) Finally, when you say that your mods changed the performance "measurably", what measurements were made? Thanks, and I will not bug you further. |
Jean, What about the Denon DP80 and the earlier DP6000? One can defeat their speed correction mechanism easily and try them both ways. Plus I think they compete with any that you mentioned as regards quality of construction and thoughtful design. (The DP80 has the DP100 type split platter to isolate platter from motor.) But would any of these tables run at anywhere near a stable and correct speed without the correction systems they employ? I dunno but don't think so. |
So, Jean, where do you get the ceramic bearing, and how can Lenco lovers get one too?
And what's this about an acrylic layer on your giant super splendiferous plinth? |
Thanks wbw, Perhaps Jean can comment as to the source of his ceramic bearing. It may not have come from "Joel". |
Hxt1, Which slatedeck are you using, the one made in the UK or the one made in Pennsylvania, USA? Neither is "cheap", as far as I know. |
John, If your explanation of the cause of the sonic difference between Garrard and Lenco is correct, then then replacing the stock Garrard platter with a heavier one that does have its additional weight concentrated on its periphery (a la the Shindo platter) should go a long way to help the Garrard. Have you had the opportunity to audition such a table (in a Giant CLD plinth, of course)?
Hxt1, Thanks for your response. Do you mean to say that you are using a 1" thick piece of slate as a top plate on a birch ply/MDF plinth? This sounds like an interesting idea. I read your post on L-L forum, but was hoping for a photo. Yes, the UK guy who makes slate plinths was also very combative with the US guy who makes actually a much more elaborate product, based on the supposed inferiority of Pennsylvania slate (which I have on my own roof that is now 37 years old) to Welsh slate. Needless to say, the issue was not resolved. |
I was worried also about (i) how to bolt my Triplanar onto a slate surface, and (ii) whether the slate surface of the tonearm mount can be made perfectly flat and plane parallel to the turntable chassis. If I did it, I would use the "Reinderspeter" (4mm-thick flat steel) top-plate that I recently purchased, and that engenders another question (mentioned by Hxt1) of how to affix the plate to the slate surface, which again has to be as flat as possible. (Do you have an opinion on how to do this?) I am anxious to see the results of your own efforts to incorporate slate in a plinth. |
Hxt1, No need to apologize here for what you may have written on the LL forum. The tete a tete between the Welsh and Pennsylvania slate deck makers on the Vinyl Asylum was pretty hostile and revealed two fairly closed minds. I am sure you slate-ers can all just get along. |
Mosin, Yes I remember quite well the details of the argument between the Welsh and the US slate plinth-makers. The photo of the slate roof going to seed was a real hoot for its irrelevance and scare tactic. And I agree, from an empirical reasoning, one would think that a soft slate might actually be superior for plinths, even assuming that Welsh and PA slate differ appreciably in that quality. Personally, I don't have a problem with the price of these products; one always has the option of not buying and of DIY.
What struck me about Hxt1's idea of putting slate over MDF/plywood is the similarity to Jean's recent brief mention of using acrylic on top of an MDF/plywood plinth. There is a lot known about the properties of matter that relate to absorption and reflection of transmitted energy between dissimilar materials. One needs to know the values of certain constants for each of these materials to figure out whether these expts have potential. OR build and listen. |
So, Mosin and Hxt1, based on your personal experiences with building from slate, it would seem that the prices of the two commercial products are not at all out of line. Would you agree? (Of the two, I favor Jonathan Weiss' plinth, because it is far more massive than the one made in Wales, but I was not so satisfied with the way they treat the tonearm mount. It seems to just sit in a hole in the top deck and may not be well coupled to the platter bearing therefore.) |
Mario, I do appreciate your efforts, too, and I most of all appreciate Dave Pogue who was kind enough to invite me to his home last year to listen to a JN-built Lenco. I've got my own now, and I'm happy as a clam. But I also do not think that you need to police this site for posters who might either mildly criticize Jean or offer further innovations in design. I don't go along with anyone's trash talking, but I am saying that this forum should be open to new ideas. After all, we got to where we are now by listening to Jean and giving his ideas a try. Further, it seems that Jean himself is not the least bit insulted or put off by the idea that slate might be a good substance for plinth-building, so why should we? The only criterion for an acceptable post should be its civility. One could debate whether or not a few (certainly not all) of Mosin's posts cross that boundary. I think he is just a very enthusiastic, analytical, and energetic person who has lots of thoughts on turntable design and has taken great pains to implement some of them. We all may benefit from his work, too. Carry on. |
700th post on this thread. Just had to do it. |
I've been using my Sota Reflex clamp with my Giant direct-coupled Lenco. But honestly, I don't hear any difference with it vs without it, for better or for worse. I don't activate the clamp mechanism; I just let the clamp ride on the spindle. I think that clamping the record to the platter via the spindle might well couple unwanted vibration/noise from the bearing/spindle interface into the record surface. I do however hear an improvement with my Walker Audio Precision Motor controller providing the AC for the Lenco motor vs without it. Sorry, but I do. There is a big difference in relation to the phase setting on the Walker; if the phase is not set correctly, then the PMC does nothing worthwhile. Perhaps that's why there could be disagreement regarding the beneficial effects of such a device. |
Don't really know why I continue to use the clamp (as a record weight, really). Probably it has something to do with a deep-seated insecurity, perhaps some fear that if not weighted down, the LP will rise from the platter like a flying saucer. I am going to try to go cold turkey on it. The "speed controller" you are trying out - is it an AC synthesizer type? If so, does it have phase adjustment? If not, try flipping the wall plug; you may find that one orientation of the plug sounds better than the other. |
Those great speakers of the 50s have never gone out of fashion for some and are now in a mini-Renaissance of sorts, as more and more folks tire of modern, constricted, and dead sounding "hi-fi" speakers that need 250W of transistor power to make them move at all, because they generally present a very low input impedance which is anathema to any good tube amp, in addition to being ridiculously inefficient. Other good bets (besides Electro-Voice) are Altec Lansing, early JBL, Bogen, Klipsch. I plan to give one of these a try myself in a second all DIY system. |
Francois, I have some limited reading comprehension of French, because I have studied Spanish and Latin. In going through the thread, I saw interesting photos of what looks like a bearing assembly. Can you tell us whose product that is? Is it available for sale or just something that was custom-made for or by one person? Thanks. |
Jock strap gives better bass response and lower rumble. I don't like the hf response with panty hose. |
Dear Jean, I know that I sound like a nattering nabob of negativism (thank you, Spiro Agnew's speech writer), but very widely experienced analoguistas like Raul have written on this site that the tonearm/cartridge combo has far more to do with the "flavors" of the resulting sound from an LP than does the table per se. I take Raul very seriously in this instance since he owns a staggering array of tables, arms, and cartridges and seems to play with different combinations of them ad nauseam. Therefore, the experiment conducted by you and Rick is at least as much a comparison of the respective tonearms and cartridges as it is a comparison of two turntables, if not moreso. (I will disagree with Raul to the extent that I heard a huge difference when I moved my one and only Triplanar and Koetsu Urushi from my Notts Hyperspace to my giant direct-coupled Lenco.) Would it be possible at least to swap the two cartridges between the two set-ups and re-evaluate? |
I say again, it would be interesting to try to make the comparison more "scientific" by using at least the same cartridge on the two turntables, granting that swapping tonearms is just too much of a pain in the arse to ask of Rick. (I know I wouldn't want to do it, were I the owner of the SME30.) Or, you could possibly swap cartridges and listen to see whether the differences you hear and ascribe to the respective turntables are indeed due to properties of the turntables or the cartrdidges. Having said all that, the differences you and Rick describe do pretty well fit with reviews of the SME30 (neutral, analytical, maybe a bit dry compared to some others) and the Lenco of my direct experience and as described by others, too. |
Kudos to Rick also for having the good taste to choose Sound Lab speakers and Atma-sphere electronics, the very same gear that I use myself. Rick, if you want some ideas on DIY upgrades to either the speakers or the electronics, let me know. Especially the speakers can be easily tweaked, if you are using a completely stock drive circuit (in the backplate at the base of each speaker). |
Here's the thing, jejune. Rick's conclusions may have merit, but we'll never know because both the tonearm and cartridge were not alike in this comparison. I am also willing to believe Jean's claim that some of the shortcomings of the Lenco, if indeed they can be traced to the Lenco given the aforementioned variables, were due to problems with the idler arm. Any noise generator in the playback system, like an excessively vibrating idler arm or a noisy motor, is going to be perceived as a hf roll-off and/or as a loss of spaciousness and transparency. What's lost here is that for an expenditure of less than $2K, one should not expect or require a turntable to better the performance of a $29K competitor. I use and enjoy my Lenco, to the extent that I am not concerned whether or not there is something better out there. Indeed, for the amount of money that some people spend, I hope they ARE getting something better. However, I do not necessarily subscribe to the "you get what you pay for" school when it comes to audio equipment. |
Mgreene, I pointed that out, too. In at least one or maybe two reviews of the SME30 that I recall, the reviewer found it to be very neutral, almost to a fault. The fault line lies near to the phrases "dry" and "uninvolving". But lets remember that these adjectives were used in relation to other state of the art tables or to the writers' favorite table, usually high end, too. And they were used to describe relative qualities, not absolutes. So, I think there are elements of LP reproduction that you and I would like better about the Lenco as compared to the SME, but overall it is certainly not surprising that the SME30 would be superior. As Jean himself has noted, we are only beginning to see the potential of idler drive fully realized. I haven't heard Mosin's latest creation, but I will wager that it would more than challenge the SME30. OTOH, it may cost as much. |
Dear Rnm4, You are quite correct; the idler wheel should never contact the edge of the cut-out in the chassis. Further, scraping against the edge may indeed have damaged the rubber gasket that rides on the edge of the wheel. But in passing, another possible source of scraping noise could be the brake system. If the piece of metal that constitutes the brake is touching the platter, that could account for the "other" scraping noise that you hear when you only partially engage the ON switch, so as to avoid the noise due to the scraping idler wheel. Some people just remove the brake entirely. Anyway, it seems as though your table needs some surgery. If someone else built your plinth and installed the table, you might want to take it back. Otherwise, you need to adjust your idler arm and possibly to replace the rubber too. Go to Lenco Lovers website for help on those two things. |
Dear Jean, I am trying to read not between the lines but right on the lines you wrote. Are you saying that the PTP2 (or whatever) beats the glass-reinforced standard chassis, assuming similarly good Nantais plinths, or not? Oh, I now see that you say full auditioning has not been done. I've been waiting to have your results on this. One would think that a second major advantage of the PTP2 vs the standard chassis (besides its stiffness) is the vastly improved isolation from motor vibration. I've come to think that even when motor noise is inaudible on the speakers, reducing it further below the audible threshold (as I did by installing the replacement motor you kindly supplied) improves the treble and soundstaging very noticeably. |
Although it's OK to replace a 12AX7 with a 5751, the 5751 is electrically slightly different, mostly in that it has a lower mu and slightly lower plate resistance than a 12AX7. And I am not sure the 5751 is inherently a lower noise tube compared to any 12AX7 variant (e.g., ECC83, etc.). The slight reduction in gain could reduce amplification of other sources of circuit noise and thereby give an impression of overall lower noise. Sonic differences you hear could be due to the differences in electrical parameters between the two tube types. But that's perfectly fine, of course. |
"The ESS AMT4s have those fabulous Heil Air Motion Transformers midrange/high-frequency elements (said to be the best overall driver ever developed)..."
Who said that? I remember those drivers quite well. Heard them with a wide variety of ss and tube amplifiers back in their day. I always thought they had an annoying plastic-y coloration that was really grating over time. Plus, as I recall there was a very discernible disassociation between the Heil unit and the woofer in the AMT4. They couldn't hold a candle to a good ESL, in my opinion. I don't mean to sound so aggressive, but I'm just wondering. I don't doubt the sincerity of your opinion. Maybe with certain specific electronics, their coloration is ameliorated. |
Jean, As you fade off into the sunset, did I hear you intimate that you are building/have built a plinth for an SP10? While I am no lover of the Heil tweeter, I've had a longstanding curiosity re those big EV (and JBL) horn-loaded spkrs of the 50s. I bet they're great. |
