Micro SX-8000 II or SZ-1

*****************************************************
I am considering now buying a second SX 8000 II because it should be the best solution for the inertia function. Means: the RY-5500 II motor unit drives the first SX-8000II, and the SX-8000 II drives the other SX-8000 II as shown in the system of Syntax on the two RX-5000. Based on the platter if it is 1:1 (same size) the speed should be no problem and the SX-8000's platter (or 1500, 5000) is heavier then the HS-80's small plate -this should lead to a more stable and wider sound stage. Also another four tonearms could be mounted on the second SX 8000 II. The first SX-8000 II absorbs variations from the motor then driving the second SX-8000 II. Sound will have an 30% improvement in comparison to the one set SX-8000II + HS-80.
*****************************************************

Thuchan, had the configuration that you proposed with 6 arms and used a second platter as inertia buffer. I can testify that it did not make sense. The 8000 is fine-enough itself and the actions-result ratio with what you willing to do it very low, in fact there is none. I do not know what you are trying to accomplish (OK, I know) but I assure you that I was there and it was not worth it. Sure, you can do whatever you wish...

Thuchan, the mater is not in the bearing’s type but in the self-damping characteristics of platter. The 8000 has fine platter that is good enough itself, particularly if you have white platter. The 5000 has very ringy platter. It might be addressed by many ways (I did it is quite successfully with my 5000s) but the flywheel has absolutely no benefit for elimination of the 5000s problem. The fly wheeling helps with stabilization of speed but it never was Micros problem. The moment of inertia with 5000 relative to the torque (if the belt it properly hangs) is very good with those tables and stability is never an issue. Micro use to make a very own flywheels for 8000 but looking deeper into the subject I recognized that was all BS and it more serves the owner ego then the purpose of sound reproduction. Anyhow, I do not think that flywheels are a fruitful direction to get improvement with Micro tables. If you are looking for improvement then work with your speaker and amplifiers. The Micros are one of the most bass-capable turntables ever made but your bass is severally compromised with your SS amps and with 4th orders band-pass woofer in your speakers. Addressing it will produce more result then attaching Jupiter to your Micron as a flywheel.

Thuchan, I am not preconditioned by anything and partially by any “church”. I based my judgment upon my experience, it well known.

Dertonarm, I am sorry but you are wrong. There is no such a thing as “proper aligned flywheel in opposite position” and there is not such a thing as “free of horizontal force”. The situation when the horizontal bearing is free from any force is the worse situation as the microscopic bearing beatings become the subject of belt slipping or “wind blowing”. The best configuration in belt drive is the situation what the platter with it’s microscopic horizontal bearing beatings is biased by a small belt force.

Here is no minimization of bearing noise if you remove the “belt bias”. You might accustom to light plastic TT but in case of Micro the belt bias is absolutely negligible coals to the platter momentum. If you once try to hold the 8000 platter then you would not daydream about its impact by a few milligrams of belt tension.

Also, Dertonarm , your comment about the result in sonic terms: “increase low level detail, ambience and dynamic transient resolution” is a celebration of typical audio BS. I can give you $10.000 if you will be able to increase the low level detail, ambience and dynamic transient resolution with any of my Micros by applying the flywheel. Now, how you are you willing to bet? How about to put your actions behind your mouth?

Kipdent, I had HS-80 flywheel a few years back. A friend of my got it and you used it with SZ-1. He also reported an improvement, but he (how ironic it is!) reported absolutely different improvements. So, I got HS-80 and tried to use it with 5000 and 8000 and with all my desire I was not able to recognize any single difference beside making the Micro’s motor to run a bit hotter.

Now, Kipdent, let me to give you some points that you might consider before recognition of impotent of ambience and transients from flywheel. You use threads, I use belt. There is nothing wrong with threads but threads are very sensitive to proper tension. 1 mm different with threads is the same as 10mm difference with belts. The tension is important and to be able to say anything further I need to know what the tension you use. How long your platter will spin after you stop the power on the motor? Another point – you lay records directly on the metal platter. This way of doing the things has A LOT of problem. The “yellow” platter was made by Micro to accommodate the very cheap, bad sounding, SS amp from 70s. The “yellow platter” if it played with no proper TT mat has a LOT of colorations. You might want to review and then reevaluate you feelings about ambience and transients.

Dertonarm, I passed the period in my life when I was trying to educate people. You stopped react because you lost your anger, I stopped to educate when it not worth it because I got wisdom and experience to deal with currently angry or formally angry audio people. I shared the facts, now to interpret them it is totally up you and others who have interest Micros. I would be worth to mention that I shared them not because my desire to argue with you or because my interest to educate you but rather to prevent you and you-like to spread disinformation and urban legends. If you have no sonic or mechanical insight on the subject then you probably shall not make the statements where you put yourself in a position of being a faulty authority on the subject.

Radicalsteve, applying a damping material inside the platter does not work, I have tried it. Using different TT mats do work very fine, try a sorbothane mat atop the Micro with a layer of very hard rubber atop of sorbothane. I can’t give you specific as too many variables involved but even a basic hard rubber later atop 5000 will do very fine. The 5000 is very simple and extremely good performing TT as is. People invent the false differences about turntables presuming that many logical concussion about TT design leads to sonic differences. In reality the methodologically properly to evaluate the differences in sound between two turntables is a quite complicated task… Anyhow, to ask for intellectual honesty and rational sense is mostly too much to ask from audio people.

Thuchan, you are talking about “environments” and the system setups, which is very primitive and incorrect way to understand what I said. T_bone the derivation of Japanese listening audio preferences from phonetic structure of Asian language is not a fact but a proposal I made a few years back, when I was arguing this point at my site at that time. There are plenty research done how different culture process sound and reflect with spiritual and ecstatic responses. I have my own views as well but it is not the point that I would like to advance in this thread. I mentioned it in context of Dertonarm proposal that Micro was made by God to use with strings and his bringing the “Japanese magazines” and experience of Japanese crowd to back it up.

I am well familiar with cult that took place at that time around strings, and the zillion techniques ho to soak the different material strings in different marinades in order to get improvement in the strings theory. Yes, there was a fashion to it in at that people, as anything else in audio the fashion was based not upon a lucidity, common since and listening experience but upon a foolish artificial idea. You can even find at that time people traded the “secretive” samurai ways to tight the strings… It is ridicules! I belt from a slow torch motor is too hard drive to a platter but a knot on the strings is invisible! Wonderful theory!

The true is that when people use light TT then how you drive of TT affect sound. In case of use heavy platter and proper balance between platter and stator the sensitively of TT to external forced become much negligible and many of fantasies that that people apply to TT logic is not applicable to TT with heavy platter and proper mass distribution. People are accustomed to endlessly tweak the TT searching the differences. The best example of it the Walker’s turntables (and many others) with zillion adjustments and each of them changes the TT sound. That is ridiculously-stupid thing to do and it is more celebrates ignorance people who make and use those TTs. The whole point of Micros that they are insultingly simple, have own “default” sound proper sound and, trust me, it is VERY difficult to change how they sound. This is the whole point – the “default sound” (or better to say the opportunity for the default sound ) is built into the design that illuminate the need to do those endless experiments trying to change the TT sound. Micro-Seiki topmost turntables are an opportunity do not do that entire BS that you guys do, I have no idea why you do not USE this opportunity.

I did look at the playback installations of some of you and I kind of confused what the hell you do in audio. Some of you have 5-6 turntables with 10-15 tonearms, which is a strong induction in my mind that a person can be disqualified to make comment about sound. After all audio is not about accumulation and cataloging the differences, if somebody do not know what they do in audio then they do not know. A good performing turntable, perhaps two, with 3-4 tonearms/cartridges is an absolute maximin that a person needs to address 100% of all tasks of records playing. If a person can’t do it by those means then person is clueless about ether sound or what he does. The heavier Micros are a good platform to render this task. It has good default sound, it allows use multiple arms and it is very difficult to screw up with this sound….

I do not think that I need to advocate the heavier Micros for this people in here as it looks like there are plenty Micro users in this thread but I wonder why the heavier Micro users are not set yet that make them to do further actions with TT. In context of this thread it might be mentioned other changes that people might make with their playback it order to get truly better sound, why to keep pondering that poor Micro, leave your Micro-Seiki alone. Work on other aspects of your playback, it will bring you more true results.

PS: I intentionally did not go into addressing the fantasies about of “SET amplifiers, LCR RIAA triode SRPP-preamplifiers, big string driven TTs, complex super sophisticated horn speakers”. It is not the subject of the thread and the participants apparently too lightweighted to understand the subject less superficial.

**** As some know here, I am shortly moving to the SXC-8000 Mk1 with vacuum platter, and so it will be interesting to hear the differences.

Radicalsteve, so you were apparently the person who got the 8000 MK1 from this site a few days back. Congratulations, it was very good setup and it was not overly expensive price. You will need to re-service it and then pretty much forget about TT to the rest of your life. That TT will easily succeed over many today’s TT that are being sold for 7 times more then what you paid. The MK1 is considered less desirable then MK2 and cost less but I like MK1 more – it more flexible with organization of space. You got the best deal of all as you have the white platter. Most of the MK1 come with yellow platter and most of the MK2 comes with white. The only thing that you would need to decide for yourself is if you willing to use the vacuum hold down. The vacuum hold down is tricky you might play with it. If you decide to use then you can make a very-very thin but hard cut of leather that you would place between the Micro’s levees. It will not screw up the vacuum but it will create a decupling layer between record and metal platter.

*** What is here disputed about the Micro Seiki skeleton TT's was already done so widely and brought to conclusion by the later 1980ies. Micro Seiki introduced the Hs-20 and HS-80 to further improve the performance of the RX-1500, RX-3000, RX-5000 and SX-8000.

There is no such a thing as conclusion was reached in later 1980ies. Do you remember your setup in the later 1980? Would you go beak to that sonic result? Leaving aside on psychological moments of being younger… Besides whatever Micro Seiki or any other manufacture produces it is just what they produce. Micro Seiki is just a machine shop and they will cut anything they want you to buy. To make a final judgment about sonic benefits is not Micro Seiki responsibility by my responsibility, and yours… I made my experiment and I concluded that there is a certain patter mass after which any further increase of inertia moment becomes irrelevant in practical terms. The conversations about the minimization of wearing I juts discard as completely off the wall.

**** The improvements with inertia units by Micro Seiki or custom made devices are sonically apparent to all audiophiles who care, whose set-up is capable to show it and whose hearing isn't deafened by dogmatic prejudice.

I do not know. I do not hear well after my surgery a few years back and I do not have the capable set-up. After my wife and I had 6 childrens she does not allow me to pay music loud. But I have my amplified Radio Shake headphones that I think make me able to hear a lot. I did not hear any inertia improvements with 8000, but might be my hearing aid had weak butteries that day….

*** This - for once in our audiophile world of often nebulous results and experiences - is fully backed up by applied science and simple mechanical laws found in every middle high-school physics book.

It you care about the applied science, not the lever that people like to demesne at those internet forums then look for papers that represent of belt simulation as filtering devises, what the horizontal force on the palter acts the modification of the filter’s Q. The free-standing, or the latitude-neutral platter acts as the second ordered but the properly belt-biased palter more move the filter to the Bessel Q. You need to get a proper relationship between the patter mass and bias from belt and if you hit it then there is not father improvement, you might have twice more mass and inertia but it will just reset the need for different tension, nothing else. Sure it works staring from a certain mass of the platter. The 8000 is in the Zone of the right mass…. It is possible to do the same with lover mass but then you will need to make the shaft longer, the way how it is done in EMT 927 but this is a whole another story….

*** I would never use a belt - not on a Micro Seiki nor on any other "belt drive" TT. A belt is always a source of instability and in worst case much more than a filter.

Come on, it acts as filter equivalent no matter what you do and an no matter what coupling topology you use between two axis. Also, I disagree with your comments about belt. Starting with some palter mass it become irrelevant what you use if the tension of your drive is properly applied with respect to marital of the belt/string. I used what imaginable to drive heavy Micros: magnetic tapes, all possible string, many different types of belts… you name it. If methodologically properly each of them used then with the proper mass of palters there is no difference what drives the platter. I might talk about some VERY negligible differences but it is so minor that absolutely discard it as contrived differences and I have a firm believe that no one would recognize them in practical trims.

*** The RX-5000 and SX-8000 were designed by Micro Seiki to be used with string for best results.

It was not what Micro Seiki designer told me….

**** With a string, fairly low tension and symmetrical positioned inertia unit we are looking at a kind of slip regulated drive. In other words - the inertia providing the speed stability and the low tension string applied without horizontal force is just preventing the platter to get slower. Its a tricky idea and it only works with fairly heavy platter (= high inertia) and force free low tension string drive. No belt - no tape - no high tension and no horizontal force vector.
There were papers in japanese magazines floating around by Micro Seiki engineers in the early 1980ies addressing this principle.

And there was zillion pares advocating opposite as well. All those people who write those papers know very little about sound. If you so love the Japanese magazines then go to Japan and listen their funny rice-paper sound. I hate the Japanese sound, it derives from non-morphemic tone of Asian language and I do not value it too much in my reference scale. I wrote about it a lot in past. The Japanese magazines write the same as the US magazines do. Our writers say that on their tonearms they can clearly hear sound of tide on Atlantic Ocean but they have their paper-made TT sitting atop of TV or hoods of working car. Do I need to pay attention to the “writers” or to my own experience and my own definition of success?

*** I like the " intrinsic " performance of the 5000 but as you know it is a unfinished product where we need to add to the unit : footers or some kind of damping platform, a TT mat and a platter damping. I address all those factors trying to have a better Micro performance and IMHO I have success about…. The Micro TT's are very good units but not perfect and like almost anything else in audio needs some kind of "help".

Yes, you are right, but it pretty much it. BTW, Micro did BA-600, a pneumatic platform for 5000 as well as own Micro mat. Still, the isolation platform I do not consider as a basic past of TT, it rather a consideration how a given TT system is installed in a given environment. Also, I do not use 5000 but 8000, so have less “problems”….

*** I can tell you that thank's to all those tonearms that I have on hand I can obtain almost always the best quality performance of any cartridge I try/test that if ( with the vintage and today tonearms designs. ) I owned only two tonearms maybe I can't do it. This is my approach on the subject, which yours? how do you know ( with 1-2 tonearms. ) that what your cartridges show is the best that can achieve?

It is evolutionary thing; I use to run 6 tonearms and now I am removing the tonearm #4, living the 3 tonearms/carriages that I really use: mono, stereo and dirty stereo. I do not look for “best quality performance of any cartridge” – I know what I get, I know what efforts requires to get what might be gotten from sound, I know what kind reimbursement I get for my efforts. We all adults and we all know not mitigate our efforts per amount of gratification we get for the efforts. Knowing what I want to get from audio I do not find that relentless pressure of “best quality performance” interests me. If I want “best quality performance” then I shot doe my phonostage and tune on my FM tuner. Also, let me give you a tip: the “best quality PERFORMANCE” has absolutely nothing to do with a topology of quality of your or my turntable.

**** Fm_login when you went from two to one TT and 6 to 4 arms was that upgrade or had you decided what arms/carts are best for you? In your opinion do you gain most analog experimentation from step-up/phono?

My setup is openly-known and my evolution with it publicly narrated. My latest evolutionally position that “an ultimate” turntable must have 3 arms/needles: one reference stereo, one reference mono and one “second type” stereo for dally use. I do comment about the specifics of the arms/carts/step-up/phono. Sure, I perfectly understand that it might be use from more arms/carts but there is celebration of result and there is a self-glorification of means to get the result. I very much know the difference. I have a few 5000, arms and cartridges that are sitting as a dead ballast in my storage – I probably need to get rid all of them. I wish people do not ask pictures when they buy audio as to lift those Micro tables is do dams difficult….

T_bone, where did you see me said that 8000 does not need isolation? Well, I know that “those” people understand only imperative sentences and do not use own minds….

Anyhow. I have written today a large conclusive post and posted it, withdrawing myself from this thread. For whatever reasons the post disappeared. I saved it and I will rep-post in at my site as I think it does a good conclusion for this whole thread.