Got a New CD Player and Now I'm Bummed

I feel that the next level up for the Scout in analog is probably the biggest improvement. I spent many years with several very good turntables (Scout, Michell Tecnodec, P3, Linn Basic) but was never completely satisfied on all account in comparison with digital. And I agree - my friend's esoteric is awfully close to his Scoutmaster, Dyna 20XM setup.

If you are looking for a compact table (which I did) the DPS turntable from Germany would be my contender even if the price has gone up quite a bit due to the Euro/US$ exchange rate. Another important step as Ejlif has pointed out would the cartridge and phonostage. I find that my Lyra Argo with JLTI phono contributes as much as the table to the improvement in my analog setup.

Now Esoteric, Meitner, etc doesn't even come close to my analog setup anymore in all areas; Realism, speed, detail, top-end extension, bass extension and control, layering of the soundstage and instrument separation.

Finally, I agree that the place for your turntable is not ideal and would be the first thing to change; the compact 60lbs DPS table may even be too heavy on that shelf anyway. If you change the location, you can also consider several other good tables: Galibier, Teres, Verdier, etc.

Moreover, I have a bad feeling about enclosing the tt on five sides (top, bottom, right, left, and rear); the tt radiates noise and vibrations into the air around it and the enclosing surfaces may also be resonating due to that effect. Better to mount the Target shelf directly onto studs in your wall, out in the open. But don't forget about the motor controller idea either.

It's not really the sound emitted from the turntable that is important but the sound coming from you speakers that will resonate inside the cabinet. Enclosing a turntable on several sides, or placing it in a corner is always a problem. Just play a constant sin tone in the range 40-100Hz and listen in the corner vs. open space. The sound volume is usually quite a bit increased close to walls or corners.

Also, I agree mounting the target shelf to the cabinet seems to defeat the purpose of the wall mount. It would be much better to mount the shelf to a wall as Lewm suggested.

If you look closely you will see that the Target shelf passes through the back panel of the entertainment center. It is bolted to a piece of 5/8 birch ply that is screwed to wall studs. The table is literally floating within the entertainment center, immune from footfalls and airborne vibration generated by the speakers. Also, I've replaced the MDF shelf on the Target with a Symposium Svelte Shelf".

I agree, that is a very nice solution. However, my guess is that you will still get increased sound pressure levels inside the enclosure and are therefore susceptible to airborne vibration. You could measure the sound pressure level using a SPL meter inside the unit and at several places around your rooms to compare. Try several frequencies to check.

As for the analog-digital comparison: I agree my friends Esoteric beats his Scout on several levels as well. That is not true anymore when you step up to a more top end table - my compact DPS with Lyra Argo and JLTI phono does pretty much everything better than the Esoteric. The differences couldn't be more pronounced in my system. But then my SET based system may just resolve these differences more as Paulfolbrecht indicated.

Dougdeacon, I complete agree with your assessment on the Scout. For the
price it is an excellent table but the next step (as I mentioned already above)
bring huge improvements in analog playback.

Just a quick comment on one of your points as I think there is a way around
point 2:

2. The Scout is driven by a rubber band (in effect). No
drive mechanism containing elastic torque couplings can maintain constant
speed when faced with a variable load (ie, stylus drag). That is not an opinion,
it's basic engineering. My platter weighs more than your entire TT. It has
several times more rotational inertia than your platter. Yet if I switch to an
elastic belt like yours my sonics go instantly downhill. Transients are dulled,
dynamics are softened, bass is limp, mids and highs are smeared. All the
tweaking in the world will not eliminate the flaws inherent in an elastic drive
train.

I generally agree with the statement about elastic belt drives, but I do need to
add that there are implementations that get around most of these problems
without resorting to sheer mass: The DPS table features a friction bearing so
that the motor continuously works against a large constant drag. This
simulates a much heavier platter and also makes it immune to the variations
in the neglible drag of the stylus. This is a very different situation from the
one where the stylus drag is dominating. A very well know tonearm
manufactures has mentioned the DPS 3 as one of the 5 best tables around for
a reason ;)

From my experience the DPS is the only table I listened to that was on par
with some of the high mass tables like Thom's Galibier tables without the
heavy and problematic mass loading. I would not be able to put a 150 lbs
large monster in my small place - the 50 lbs of the DPS are enough. A high
mass table like Teres or Galibier may in fact be problematic for Dodgealum
on his wallshelf as well.

Overall I agree though, to beat the Esoteric in all regards you need to resort
to different table than the Scout. As mentioned above, a friends Scout is very
good but now quite on par with the Esoteric in my experience. Aside from
Teres, Galibier, and DPS, I would also look the TW Akustik Raven One,
Loricraft Garrard, Amazon Model One, although I don't have as much
experience with these last three.

Good luck!

One table I forgot to mention in my previous post:

Frank Schroeder has designed a new table which has an interesting idea for using a tape drive. I think it will be marketed by Artemis. Soundwise it is little of an unknown although you know what to expect from Frank's products.

Lewm, the analog of a friction bearing is not strictly correct. The effects are similar when considering the influence of stylus drag though - both act as a low-pass filter for vibrations and speed variations.

As for a freely spinning platter vs. a constant friction - the latter has actually some nice advantages - motors work more consistently against a constant force (just imagine yourself on a bike peddling downhill vs. peddling against a slightly well defined force. Downhill the change of load makes it difficult to keep speed constant). Of course as always, whether the design will be successful will really in the details of the implementation.

Also, a nice discussion of friction bearing vs. high mass platter by Frank Schroeder can be found here:

Discussion of Friction Bearing by Frank

Dodgealum, sorry if we take the thread somewhat off-topic, but I am hoping the discussion of low-mass and high mass designs may aid you in the decision to find the right turntable.