Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot II

Hi Montepilot, you are correct, I have not felt the need for any speed controllers on either the Lencos or the Garrards so far. And so far, no matter the level of performance (or cost) of any system, neither Lenco nor Garrard has found even close to its equal, without any form of filtering or controller. But, I have not, in fact, ever tried speed controllers, having tested a filter or two to which the Lenco seemed immune. I advise you first to get to know the Lenco as-is (restoration, mass and coupling FAR more important, like the foundations of a house) before experimenting along these lines. Give yourself a few months at least in order not to be duped by optimism and illusion ;-), before trying something along these lines. Both machines rely on pure analog momentum.

There has been a running theme in my various battles through the years to have the idler-wheel recognized as the best of the three systems (because I, and others exposed to it, clearly heard it), to wit, that the human ear was STILL the best measuring instrument in judging the relative worth of equipment, theories, implementations and approaches, a statement which has brought a fair share of criticism in the past on other threads (to the effect that measurements and scientific equipment was better-suited to the task) by the scientifically-inclined. From what my ears (and those of others) tell me, I come to the conclusion that speed measurements do NOT reflect reality and are therefore useless and worse, misleading, as simple auditioning makes clear the Lenco's (and Garrard, and various other supreme idlers) superior speed stability OBVIOUS. Hold in your minds the immortal words of Daniel R. von Recklinghausen, former Chief Research Engineer, H.H. Scott, who understood this fundamental issue: "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad; if it measures bad and sounds good, you have measured the wrong thing."

Along these lines is also the admirable statement by the musician/pianist BYRON JANIS - and thanks to Dave Pogue for bringing my attention to an interesting discussion of acoustics by Mr. Janis, in the article "The Sounds of Music: Want a concert seat with good acoustics? So does the pianist", Saturday, January 27, 2007 12:00 a.m. EST Wall Street Journal. Herewith the relevant passage: "The greatest concert halls we have--Symphony Hall in Boston, Carnegie Hall in New York and the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, to name a few--combine clarity and brilliance without sacrificing warmth. It is interesting that all were built before 1901, prior to the availability of scientific instruments. Apparently, the human ear was (and for me still is) the best instrument of all."

The point is is the role of ASSUMPTION in science. The main assumption which plagues science so far as acoustics and stereo equipment goes being there are no assumptions, that all is built on solid fact!! From this, in particular, it is assumed that measuring equipment and theories are built on a foundation of FACT, empirical observations and so forth, which the result of the tests developed from these theories and facts - i.e. that Turntable A has better speed stability measurements than Turntable B - demonstrates is patently false. So, for instance, scientific theory based on incomplete data led to the theory/belief that the human ear could not hear the brick-wall filters used in early CD players...but the human ear proved to be all too sensitive to this. Then then human ear could not hear beyond 20 kHz...but, the human ear turned out to be, somehow, sensitive after all to these frequencies, which is why more and more equipment measures and performs up into the Stratosphere of frequency response. In all things, the human ear is the measure of a theory or a piece of equipment intended to measure what the human ear is supposed to be able to hear (or be sensitive to in ways not understood), not the reverse.

And ask yourselves, how many scientific theories we believe in implicitly are equally built on unseen and unidentified false assumptions and incomplete data/"evidence" ASSUMED to be complete? Go ye out and listen to a properly-restored idler-wheel drive all, and begin to THINK. And if thinking is too much to ask, then simply glory in the stunning sound of beautiful music faithfully reproduced with all (or most) of its impact and POWER intact! Try it, you'll like it!

John,
Thanks for your response and for drawing attention to the Byron Janis article in WSJ. I was able to access the article online this morning and print out. A cogent article in regards to ears vs. instruments. Now another Lenco question. Have you found there is a minimum depth you must use in building a plinth to provide effective mass for the idler drives? My builder thinks 4" is sufficient however from the pictures that have been posted and particularly your own plinths they seem to be around 6" or more. Thanks for the assistance.
Regards,

Hi Montepilot: the more the mass the merrier. Doesn't matter so much how you achieve the mass, so much as how MUCH mass. The best results I've had so far is with a combined weight/mass of 75-80 pounds, which is FAR FAR superior to a combined mass of, say, 40 pounds, much more than double the results. To achieve this mass with Russian birch-ply and MDF, I reach plinth dimensions of 23"W x 19"D x 6"H, Lenco and feet not included. Do a little research on this thread and others, the mass only become truly effective when combined with Direct Coupling, which is the Key.

Hey Jean, it was great reading of your experiences with a horn based loudspeaker system. I wondered when you would finally get around to it, persistant experimenter that you are. When I reported two years ago how my newly aquired Lenco easily bested my Well Tempered Classic, a horn based Altec A7 speaker system made the differences easy to hear. You are right, idler wheels {big bass and hugh dynamics} and horns {the added bass helps and whats wrong with even more dynamics} are made for each other. As you continue to persue horns try to integrate an active crossover as this is the secret to fine tuning these excellent speaker systems as well as providing even more dynamics.

On another note I wanted to report that I'm still enjoying the Ortofon MC 10 super I aquired from you. A very underrated cartridge provided you can load it down to 30-50 ohms. I'm presently being tempted by the new Ortofon Samba for $225 at Needle Doctor which specs out very similar to the MC 10 which it replaces.