Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot II

Was there not talk before of some kind of, uh, latex material being used in place of the spring that attaches to the idler wheel? I'm going to try it anyways and see if I can get it to work. I thought I remember reading this in the old thread.

What about using lead/sand or lead shot in equipment rack shelves? Don't we want to stop vibration getting to the plinth so it can work most effectively?

Hi Plinko,

You're correct. Many of us use rubber/latex infused waist band cloth in place of the spring. Can be purchased at most sewing supply sections in department stores.

Stops another resonant transmission path. Also, tension setting (where you tie the knot onto the post) is infinately variable.

More from me soon. Currently weighed down with massive redistribution of consumer goods.

- Mario

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!

To everyone who has been involved in the custom topplate project: They're in!!! look at the lenco lovers site for pics.

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!!

You've always talked about the importance of mass, yet you didn't do the obvious and put the white Lenco on the red plinth!? Christ-mass plinth! :-P

I sort of forgot, but will send the stylus to poor Dave in the beginning of the happy new year!

Merry Christmas all Lenco-thread-ers!

Merry Christmas everyone...haven't been on the thread for a while-been Lenco-less for quite a few months now. Decided to treat myself to a new cartridge as a Christmas pressie as its been far too long since Ive been able to spin that vinyl. So, this afternoon (yeah, Santa came early in downtown Surrey-well...I wanted to wake up on Christmas morning and welcome in Christmas with the albums Ive been collecting this year ready for when my Lenco was back up and running). Started to fit the cartridge, and unfortunately one of the connecters came off. So....down to the garage to dig out the soldering iron...and, to my dismay, found there wasnt any solder. Oh the joy of having teenage sons who use the last of your solder creating a latenight sculpture from empty beer cans and don't let you know its all finished!!
So...no vinyl tomorrow-will have to wait a few days til the shops open again. Ah well....just a few more days for the suspense and tension build up until that final moment when I gently lower the needle onto the groove...and an explosion of sound fills my room...

Wishing you all a very Merry Christmas and may Santa bring you everything you've been hoping for

Merry Christmas everyone. Hope all those idler motors are nicely oiled. Finally got my multi arm jobby out of the garage and posted an update in the all out assault pages. The arms are working a treat, I thought they may be set too close but it it all runs fine and the el cheapo air tube suspension is doing the job brilliantly. Initial sound tests revealed..... major rumbling! Oh dear. After minor panic I remembered that the platter etc had been sitting upside down for six months and all the oil drained out and I forgot to earth the mains. What a dope. Must be going senile. The MG-1 arm is a treat to use with very low background noise levels but has to perfectly level. There's plenty of fine adjustment and it's been great fun to use and is in a different league to the Grace 707. Still haven't resolved the air supply arrangement yet and I think it's going to take another or much bigger pump to prime the surge tanks and regulator properly. The sound overall is very clear & natural with either arms and various cartridges so its promising. There's obviously going to be a lot more tweaking. There's a terrific drive and harmony to the sound overall. The bass is quite thunderous and I've had to roll of the subs so no issues there. Now to get my head around all this valve stuff and build some proper amps to drive this monster.
Happy holidays everyone.
regards

peter w

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!!!

Jean and fellow 'Goners, hope you had a great Christmas and I wish you all a grand New Year!

Now, if this guy with the EMT 948 really is thinking about selling his trusty plattenspieler, let me be the first in line to buy it. I will even throw in a Lenco or two or three or four. How about a Garrard 301? 401?

What a fun thread!

Cheers, Steve

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!!

News from my part of the world- The Great Northwest. The mighty Lenco has just demolished a Nottingham Spacedeck and will soon do the same to a Well Tempered.
A toast to Jean Nantais and his quest to bring us out of the 70, 80, 90 dark ages of the belt drive and into the Enlightened Age of retro idler wheel Lenco-ology.
Happy New Year Lenco lovers!

I shouldn't let the year 2006 end without adding to the Great Tradition of Accumulating Evidence of how idler wheel drives crush belt drives. I'm the proud owner of one of Jean's latest creations, a beautiful piano black Direct Coupled Glass Reinforced Giant Lenco. I've tried this Black Beauty with a couple of different arms and cartridges and it's taken me a while to mount the SME V/Koetsu Rosewood Signature combo that I used to have on my previous table, a VPI HW-19 Mk IV tricked up as close as possible to the TNT level. Now I can make the direct comparison.

And the winner is...no surpise... THE LENCO!! It's not a close call. The most dramatic and obvious difference is a HUGE increase in bass power and refinement. That bass improvement is just the most easily noticeable aspect of an overall increase in dynamics. I had no idea my sweet little Koetsu was actually a thundering monster at heart! The more I've listened to different material, the more I'm appreciating that the Lenco is bringing an all-around improvement in clarity and detail. I'm hearing the distinct sound of different instruments in places where their sounds used to blur together. Words in songs that I couldn't quite make out before are now easy to hear. Transients are faster. All the Koetsu's best qualities of lushness combined with detail are heightened, and a level of PRaT has appeared that was nowhere in sight before.

Maybe even more dramatic than what the Lenco does for the Koetsu is what it does for the humble Denon DL-103. Jean isn't kidding about the Kundalini Effect - the Denon on the SME V produces a level of PRaT that induces higher levels of consciousness!

Now to invite my skeptical audio store buddies over for a demo that will rock their worldview. Happy New Year to Lenco Renegades all!

Hi Folks
Hope there aren't too many heavy heads from New Years celebrations. Having finally done all the tweaks and setting up of the Multiarm jobby I can only say Jean, you need some kind of award for services to audio & d.i.y.ers everywhere. Bolson & the many others who have already got their giant Lencos going already know what I mean but I still wasn't prepared for what I heard. Once the air flow to the MG-1 arm was sorted I nearly fell off my chair at what was coming out of my little system. The drive, harmony & cohesion gets you first. The monster Lenco motor is obviously doing more than just contributing perfect pitch/speed control. Much as I love my belt drives there is no comparison at least that I've heard so far. What I love most is the silken background, its not an abscence of noise, its almost heavy with the acoustic of the recording space - good recordings are almost palpable. The MG-1 arm & Denon is a gorgeous combo. The best arm I've used by quite a measure and dead easy to set up & use. A real bargain and very nicely built. Thanks Ada Lin. I'm now running two 20l/min pumps with a single 1 litre surge tank which it obviously needed because it transforms the arm's performance. The feel of the arm gliding across the main tube is lovely.Thankfully the base is also doing a great job of isolating the turntable. I got my eight year old to jump up down in front whilst a record was playing and the needle didn't budge. Feeling brave I did the same for the same result. Not bad on my wobbly old wooden floors. Must be the same principal as a Cadillac, not so much ride across the bumps as steamroll them flat. At any rate given the turntable and base weighs 160 pound I won't be moving them any time soon. So, finally electronics that don't get in the way of the music. I still shudder every time I think of the Lenco sitting in my garage for years collecting dust because I thought it was a piece of junk and wanted to throw it out! Thank God I found the Lenco thread first. Roll on 2007, year of the Lenco Juggernaut.

Happy New Year All!

In the four months of this "Da Baby Thread" -
217 Posts - 21,701 Views.

May all your contributions be posted quickly in the coming year - a year shaping up to be filled with innovation and discovery.

Sail on, oh ships of Lenco, oh fleets of Idlers.

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!!

I found a post on the Hi-Fi World forum that says that people are liking Singer Sewing Machine Oil on Garrard motor and idler wheel shafts. Mobile One on the main bearing. I hadn't seen the Singer oil mentioned before (supposedly recommended by Loricraft) - I am going to try it.

Mike

How can the Lenco sound so good? I want to be able to explain this to sophisticated audio friends as I demonstrate my new Lenco That Jean Built. Some people will more readily believe their ears if there's a clear, plausible explanation for what they're hearing!

As far as I know there are only two things that determine a turntable's sonic quality, speed stability and the absence of any extraneous vibration where the stylus meets the record grooves.

It makes sense to me that the Lenco's 1800 RPM motor will have a momentum that minimizes motor speed imperfections as opposed to a motor turning much more slowly, and that an idler wheel provides a firmer connection to the platter than a belt drive.

I suspect belt drive turntables got the jump on idler wheel drive machines because they often had less vibration, especially after they began to be designed with the motor separated and isolated from the body of the table itself. It's taken the kind of experimenting being reported here to demonstrate that massive plinths, direct coupling, motor tuning and other techniques can reduce vibration in idler drive systems down to a level comparable with good belt drive systems. At which point the idler drive's inherently superior speed stability makes it the superior alternative.

Have I basically got it right? Are there other factors that explain how wonderful my Black Beauty sounds?

Bob

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.

Jean, what about my comment that vibration is the other killer of turntable sound quality, aside from variations in the speed of rotation? I used to be able to FEEL the motor vibration in my old Rek-O-Kut (and I confess I never did a thing to tune or even lubricate the motor). I think its plausible that belt drive turntables came to dominate partly because they introduced less vibration where the stylus meets the grooves, especially after they began to be designed with the motor separated and isolated from the body of the table itself. It seems to me that this explains why the vibration-killing techniques you've been developing - massive multi-layer plinths, direct coupling, glass-reinforcing, motor tuning, etc. - are what have allowed the inherently superior speed stability of idler wheel drive systems to come through and Crush the Belt Drives. (I realize that saying belt drive systems may have been superior in any way is asking for it! But one of the many things I've liked about this thread is that it's non-ideological. The enthusiasm for discovering how good Lencos and other idler wheel drive machines can sound has been based on HOW GOOD THEY SOUND, not on an ideological belief in their inherent superiority in every respect.)
Bob

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!!

That's fascinating! You're asserting that when the new LP-12 was becoming all-the-rage, the then current production Lencos (at least the GL 78) actually had better rumble figures, as well as superior speed stability! If so, there goes my speculation that belt drives became dominant because they actually had something to offer - less vibration, to compensate for their poorer speed stability.

If that's true, then I can only think of two explanations. One is that the tonearms that came on the Lenco, Garrard, etc. weren't nearly as good as the newer designs people were putting on the LP-12, and this disadvantaged the belt drive machines by comparison.

The other is that turntable companies knew that belt drive turntables were inferior, but favored them for the sake of making higher profits, and deliberately misled consumers with advertising proclaiming the superiority of belt drives. And audio reviewers were taken in by the blitz of hype and/or subtly bought off with ad revenue and free samples. I hope this wasn't the case.

But if it was, it wouldn't be the first or only time companies have acted like that. I have a friend who was once a designer for GM. He was getting assignments in the 1970s to do things like take door handles that bolted on and redesign them with plastic plugs that push/snap into place (easier to assemble) and eventually break (so GM could make money on selling parts at outrageous markups). At the same time, Japanese automakers were going all-out for quality. The U.S. car company "cheapening" strategy raised profits for many years, but eventually caught up with them. My friend quit GM, by the way, and turned to making high-end bicycles.

If I had read Da Thread from earlier on, I would have known your views on this, Jean. But now that I see what they are, I suspect your ultimate objective is to force those degrading-for-profit companies to eat their belt drives as they're confronted with a surging demand for ilder wheel drive turntables. Bob

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!!!

Hey Jean,

The stock Lenco has a sprung suspension which you wisely recommend defeating. I know first hand that the Lenco is no great shakes with the suspension engaged. Now the Lenco is quite susceptible to foot-fall without a massive plinth, so it's no wonder that the suspension was regarded as de rigeur back in the day of stock, lighweight plinths and dancing in the living room. But the heavy plinth is pretty crucial, by your account, to the superiority of Lenco/idler performance over belt drive. Maybe LP12 belt drive plus sprung suspension beats Lenco idler plus sprung suspension.

My point is this: possibly *you* discovered the combination of idler/nonsuspended/heavy plinth design which is what really makes the Lenco and its similar brethren so superior (as the Lenco Green Monster you made me proves nightly). Perhaps, back in the day, the LP12 really did trounce the competition, suspended and lightweight as it was. If that's so, there was something more than noice reduction theory and cost efficiency that led to the rise of the belt drive.

And one would think there would be more than just theory. After all, Ivor the Linn guy made his case back then by the same sorts of emprical means you recommend -- indeed even more extreme. He went aroud to Hi Fi stores and challenged the staff to put his TT at the front end of their cheap rig, and test that combo against their own best TT in front of their best rig. LP12 reputedly won enough of those battles to become the reference deck, and solidify the belt drive as the system of choice.

What say you, sage of the platter spinners?

"Perfect Sound Forever" does make the point! Of course CDs do have advantages of size and weight, click-the-remote convenience, lack of wear, programmability, etc. that helped them take over the mass market. But "perfect sound"? NOT!

Still, I'm not yet convinced that the LP-12 was an inferior machine promoted as superior. It would be fun to set up a listening comparison between a stock Lenco, with its not-so-good arm and sprung suspension, and a Linn LP 12 with one of the better arms used on it at that time. If the Linn belt drive really was better in some ways, it's really important to acknowledge that. It would take nothing away from the GLORY of the modern Giant Direct Coupled Lenco!

From what I've read of him, it's hard to believe that Linn's founder Ivor Tiefenbrun would have ever pursued a cheapen-it and convince-them-it's-better strategy. Here are some quotes from an interview in Stereophile with him a decade ago. Actually, he sounds a lot like...you, Jean... a true lover of music, an unconventional thinker willing to buck the herd, calling on people to listen to the evidence of their ears, taking his new turntable around to audio dealers and challenging them to compare it to their best.

* * * *

When I grew up, we had a hi-fi system in our home. My dad was a hi-fi enthusiast. When I got married it was natural to put a hi-fi very near the top of my list of things I needed.
I rented a two-ring gas cooker for a fiver just to do until we bought one, and bought a clothesrack to hang my clothes on. We moved into a completely empty house without a stick of furniture. I went out and bought a hi-fi system that cost the price of a good small car. My wife was utterly appalled. She said, "We don't have any chairs to sit on." I said, "We don't need any chairs. We've got all we need—we've got music." You can do lots of things to music: you can dance, make love, relax—you have a bed, you have a floor. If we had to start again, we'd do the same thing.
* * * *
People felt I was some kind of charlatan. The funny thing is that most marginal, or even nonexistent, improvements were welcomed, and yet here was a very large one that was easily demonstrable. But people actually didn't even want to listen. When they did, of course, they were flabbergasted.

It seemed obvious to me that the quality of the input signal was crucial in the performance of the total system, and that getting information off the record was substantially the task of the turntable; it was a platform for both the record and the arm and cartridge combination.... People said to me that turntables can't alter the sound because all they do is go 'round and 'round. I would say, "Well, my speakers just go in and out...."
* * * *
I took it to shops, knocked on the door, and asked if they wanted to listen to it. Most people told me it made no difference and so they didn't listen. Some said they would. Most heard a difference. Some thought it important, some didn't. And some said, "That's real exciting—how can we sell a thing like this?" And I said, "The same way I'm selling it to you. Play it for the people and let them hear for themselves what it does, and let them decide if it's worth it to them. Let them decide whether we deliver the performance."
* * * *
...there were times when a supplier would change something, which meant that we couldn't make the product unless we compromised performance. And a few times, because we refused to do that, we jeopardized the whole company.

There was one point where we didn't make anything for two and a half months because we couldn't solve a problem with motors. Eventually, I managed to persuade the supplier—I think I bought a couple thousand motors a year from them at that time—that they should change their motors to accommodate us....sometimes it nearly killed us. But being Scotsmen, we "die in perfect squares." We never take a step backward.

"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!!

Thanks for the full reply and the history. For those of us who have come into this thread more recently, and now don't have access to the early years of the conversation, this is really interesting background.

You and some of the other early pioneers of the idler wheel revival obviously had to put up with more in the way of dogmatic rejection and personal attack than I realized. But as I said in what was probably my first post here months ago, "Reality bats last." That means you get the last laugh. Bob

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.

Well I have to admit – I did it !! I helped the idler drive tts die. But in my defence I’ll say you had to be there ………it was a different time ………

Since the 50s I had listened to records on a typical British radiogram, cheap idler drive tt, full range speaker and valve amplifier. Through the 60s this kept me alive, playing Kinks and Who 45s at full blast, teenage rage satisfied. But it rumbled like a train.

Time passes, and when it comes to buying a hifi the last thing I wanted was something old or looked it. The early 70s saw the hifi industry go mass market. Adverts for hi-tec Japanese products filled the magazines, old fashioned looking British and European gear just could not compete. One or two like Quad and SME survived because of reputation and high quality. But Japanese tts had SME-alike arms, looked great and were affordable, what’s not to like?

In 1974 I was given a Garrard 301 with valve amp in an old cabinet that my brother in law had found at the local dump. It moved around the garage for a while, then one day I tried it out into a pa speaker using the Leak arm and cartridge that it came with. I didn’t finish an lp side because the cartridge was hopping around a lot, but one section of the disc played ok. I later reported during one of those late night hifi conversations that the bass was like concrete, hard and unyielding! I knew the 301 would never get to the lounge :) so when a friend said 301s fetched good money in Japan and he knew a guy that exported them. ?? £70 was a lot of money in 1975 when you’re setting up home, so bye bye 301.

I snagged a second hand TD150, fitted an SME 3009 and thought I’d never need another tt. Problem was at parties when we would listen to the old 60s 45s they didn’t have the same bite I remembered. I figured it was an age thing.

When the Sondek came out in 74 it did not cause that much of a stir. The doo doo didn’t hit the fan until an article came out in 76, one of the reviewers had been Linn-napped for a weekend, and forced to listen to records until he got it. (BTW rumble figures from back then could be quoted in several different ways, the Linn was definitely quieter than a stock L75.) It’s as well to remember that in 76 the Linn wasn’t being compared to idler drives because there weren’t any to compare it to. I know a few still existed, but a stock 75, while it has something, couldn’t hope to be in the same ball-park as a Linn/Grace/Supex. It won’t even work with a decent cartridge for goodness sakes. No dealers would have an EMT on hand to use, and the SP25 would have self destructed at the thought of it, after the crowd stopped laughing.

The manufacturers weren’t conning us about idler drives, they were conning us about direct drives. And these are what the Linn found easy to beat. The Linn bearing was the jewel in the crown then, and still is.

Linn were fighting the same war that is being waged today, and we should thank them for that. If the vinyl high end had not existed in 1985, then vinyl would have disappeared completely by now. It’s not their fault they didn’t know about idlers, no-one did, or more importantly wanted to! The unfortunate result of Linn winning the war then, is that today the collective conscious as regards vinyl has a belt drive bias. Again you can’t blame people for that, we all signed up for it, and having paid our dues we think it must be right.

So having stated that the new (direct drive) technology was a mirage, and belt drive done right is where it’s at, they did all they could do. Think about it and you’ll see that the flag has been kept flying, long enough for us to re-look at an even older technology.

Like it or not, if they hadn’t done that we would not be having this conversation.

PS I like playing my 60s 45s on a Lenco.

My own limited experience parallels what you're saying, Jean. When I "upgraded" (I thought) from a beat up old Rek-O-Kut to a VPI HW-19 Jr., I was disturbed to find the VPI wasn't as good in just the areas you emphasize - PRaT, SLAM, bass, and gestalt. I had to spend a couple of $k more upgrading the table, arm and cartridge to turn the VPI into the better sounding machine, and even then the Rek-O-Kut beat the VPI in sheer dynamism. And then just recently I've had the experience of transfered my Koetsu Rosewood Signature from a VPI Mk.IV to the Giant Lenco. It was like going from John Denver to Pavorati! I've heard (maybe here in the thread)that Koetsus were made for idler wheel drives in the sense that Sugano listened with and "tuned" his cartridges using a Garrard turntable. Now I believe it.

You're getting into some heavy reflections in your analysis of how things went so wrong: the duty to validate Fundamental Assumptions, the need for a deep reexamination of how our Western consumer society works, the nature of progress. Those are reflections I completely agree with that apply far beyond the realm of audio. For example, the most basic assumption of most economists today is that economic progress means increasing GNP. GNP (slightly oversimplified!) is essentially the rate of flow from resource extraction through product production to the garbage dump. This is completely wrong. The object isn't to maximize the rate of flow, it's to maximize stock quality - the quality of goods and services and the quality of life. To the extent that that can be done with REDUCED flow rates by making quality things that last longer, using energy and materials more efficiently, etc., the better. And any society that narrowly maximizes on short-term profit to the exclusion of non-economic values like honesty, integrity, and fairness is blundering down a self-destructive path. So the idler wheel story is a case example of the bigger story that we need to see. But, Oh My, this is getting far too far afield from building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot!
Bob

Amen Bornin50
Can there be anything else left to say?

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!!

This history class is great! Thanks Jean and Colin.

I feel toward this conversation something like I felt when I discovered jazz. I just played rock 'n roll back in the 1970s, with no awareness at all of jazz. It was wonderful to get into jazz later and begin to discover all I'd missed. Similarly, I just played music back in the 1970s (on some decent audio gear I blundered into), with no awareness even of the existence of high-end audio. It's fascinating to hear these tales-of-the-times and begin to discover the developments and controversies I missed while I was just innocently listening to music.

Hi Lenco lovers!
Just completed my second L75 which will be presented to a friend this Friday. Please have a look in my "system".
Viva le Lenco

Hi Oregon,

Nice Nice Nice. You have a lucky friend indeed! What’s with the seam around the plinth about an inch down from the top? Is this top layer a separate – affixed after the rest was bolted together? Or are these cooling vents for the hot-blooded Lenco?

What wonderful reads on this thread for the past week. Great contributions, especially on the early formative experiences and wide-ranging, full-breadth examinations on the state of our physical art and science. Certainly seems that the momentum of old has taken hold.

With no wish to interrupt this great flow, I must proffer a more pedestrian, “mad scientist” question that’s been rumbling around my head like an idler with a flat spot at 78 rpm. Feel free to caution, put down or ridicule:

Will a 12” “Lazy Susan” (a crude turntable with several dozen balls and a 300 lb. load max), when sandwiched between two slabs of 7/8” marble have any sonic penalty under a Giant Lenco with acorn + isolation footings? We’re talking multi-arm ergonomics here.

Hey Mario, it could conceivably make it sound better a la the Symposium footers - if the bearings dont vibrate. How do you intend to dress the phono IC wires? If I understand your intent - to rotate the table to address the different arms?

Mike

Hi Mike,

Yes, that’s exactly what I’m thinking. Ideally, 18” to 22” diameter rounds – though this is a tougher cut than straight lines. “Lazy Susan” gets masonry screwed to one side then a light coat of mastic strategically brushed on the other “fixing” surface and plop the other marble round on top.

Having all these items on hand, I’ve already checked the rudiments out. Getting a level pedestal (base) is key, since we’re all accustomed to cheating (shimming or foot adjustments) to bring our tables level on off-level bases, stands or what-have-you - in their static positions. But the Lazy Susan mechanism doesn’t produce appreciable error to level in itself.

There’s about a ¼” gap between the marble in which two small rubber wedges can be inserted to secure “stops”. While a drifting, spinning Lenco might be a sight to behold, I’m not sure bringing any Coriolis effect, however slight, into play is a good thing.

Dressing phono cable for payout shouldn’t be too much of a hurdle. Traditional “corner” mounting demands a 90-degree swing for two arms and 180 for three. However, a plinth designed for this application (“thinking outside the box”, Jean once said) could well reduce this to 60/120 degrees depending on the arms and their swing arcs.

The crux question is what you elude to about rattling bearings ... with the huge sink of a Giant Plinth, footed with Acorns + isolators and that atop the first marble round, would vibration still be an issue? If so, what about infusing grease in the "Lazy Susan"?

Of course, one could also dispense with the Lazy Susan altogether and just plop this whole affair atop a VPI Scout and move to a new reality in crushing a belt drive.

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....:-)!!

Just got myself a Rega RB300 arm...time to see if I can find the nice piece of purpleheart I got about 18 months ago and get making an armboard...

Mario,
The sides are one piece of Maple. With a table saw, I simply cut a VERY shallow slit and placed some inlay. This is top secret, so don't tell anybody! The sky is the limit with the inlay. Plenty to choose from.

Jean,
A true compliment coming from the Master himself.
I will take you up "if he doesn't appreciate it..." I plan to post a photo of his ugly mug, his name and his address. We can all go over and ...
While we're at it, we'll relieve him of his fine album collection too!

That's hilarious Mario - just plop the whole thing down on a VPI :) I concur with Jean's answers above - however you might consider putting the lazy susan under an intermediate base which seperates it from the Lenco itself.

Now to coriolis effect - have you considered putting the TT in the middle of the room and beaming yourself to the arm you wish to use?

Hi Mike,

Funny you should mention the middle of the room placement… Grant and I were just talking about such an idea the other night (he’s kind enough to humor me by listening to my wild schemes). He’s at the final design point for his plinth and is considering two or three arm mounts.

Well, in short order the brainstorming on the ergonomics of multi-arm use, got around to an “Island Altar” in the middle of the room (a phono pre by necessity in the pedestal base). Well, since neither one of us are bachelors, that ain’t going to happen. But it was nice to bask in the warm glow of that religious moment.

But seriously, the more I work with this marble, the more I find it to be an excellent isolator in upward transmissions (footfalls) and I suspect, in the other direction as well. If the double coriolis or free-range Lenco needs a third, decoupled marble round, so be it. However, I’m not sure whether I have a full handle on how coupling or decoupling in the footing realm effects “focus”. At what point does isolation become overdone and promote focus robbery? And if a degree of base coupling is needed for focus, isn’t there invariably some rattler down the line?

By the way, Mike, if you’re still in the marble hunt and 1- you still get back to the NYC area to visit family or friends: 2- have patience to wait out the next time I’m in the metro area doing the same, I can drop off a couple of slabs for you. (I find that marble as ballast helps focus my ’83 Rabbit on long distance cruises.)

Thanks Mario, very thoughtful - but I am actually from DC. No telling when I will get back to NYC. I didnt even look in the rear view mirror on the way out of town :)

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 all,
I just completed a really nice DIY table based on a VPI Aries Blcak Knight platter and JMW 9 arm. The plinth is based of two pieces of mdf sandwiched by three 12 guage steel plates and topped with black acrylic. It is edged with Bloodwood attached with a constrained layer. I also have made a SAMA motor with a turned steel flywheel.I am using a Clearaudio Maestro Wood cartridge with it. Building this was a leap of faith and fortunately it has turned out very,very nice.
I am a computer neophyte but would like to post a picture of my new creation. If anyone can let me know how to do this or if I can email them a photo to post let me know. Thanks all!

Jean,
I'm anxious to hear your thoughts on the Elac. You and I have corresponded in the past about these machines and I'd like to learn from your experiences. These seem to be more attainable than the Lencos in my neck of the woods. For now, I'm pretty happy with my unaltered Dual 1219, but I'm also on the look out for a reasonably priced step up or modifications that will help the Dual.

Steve

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.