I use my outer ring all the time, but the turntable was designed for it. ..VPI Make sure you won't hurt your bearings with the extra weight, and too that the motor is strong for the task...make sure your arm is adjustable for the added height you'll need to clear the ring.
|
I recently bought the periphery ring for my VPI Classic 2 and am glad I did. Flat records, more dynamics, better bass. |
If your turntable sounds great you don't need one.All the top turntables do not use them i would pass. |
Never bought one out of fear I'd snag a cantilever. Invested in a flattener instead. |
I have one and always use it on my VPI, would never go without it but like stringreen says, our tables are made for it. Slaw makes the argument for a record flattened instead, which I believe satisfied the same need to keep the unipivot arms stable in the vertical plane, which really allows these arms to shine at their best. Enjoy the music
|
I use a TTWeights ring on my older acrylic-lead VPI TNT platter that is unfit for the VPI ring, I wouldn't be without one. It flattens all disks, including those you don't think need flattening, and adds flywheel, which is always helpful. It's also quicker to place than a VPI screw. If I didn't have the TTW ring I would buy one from Waynes Audio, the only one currently at a reasonable price. No connection.
By the way, I solved @slaw "snag a cantilever" problem by placing a small O ring on the arm lift and placing the arm just to the left of it. I can put down the stylus with my eyes closed, Would use it even without a ring. |
useful
but pain in the ass to use |
@melm , great idea, will give that a try even though the VPI ring sits very flush to the album on a 12 inch VPI platter that is made for said ring. Enjoy the music
|
Right now I use one always on my VPI HW-40, but I rarely used the one I had on my previous VPI Prime. The reason is difficult to explain, the one on the HW-40 is easy to use, whereas the one of the Prime was finicky, wouldn't always seat cleanly or easily and was just generally not quite as easy to use. I also have a Technics SL 1200 GAE, which of course does not have a periphery ring so I have the perspective of comparison. I also have used the vacuum hold down system employed by SOTA. The advantage of either the periphery ring or a vacuum hold down is that these hold the record snuggly against the platter. This flattens the record of course, but it also reduces or eliminates any resonances that might be induced in the records themselves. Is there an audible benefit? In some cases yes, and the effect can be quite noticeable. There are many times, however, when there is no appreciable difference in sound. In my experience, the cartridge plays a role in this with some being much more sensitive than others. Another factor is that stereo records are more likely to benefit for either a periphery ring or a vacuum hold down system than mono records. With respect to the trade-offs between a periphery ring and a vacuum hold down system, the periphery ring is a passive device with no moving parts and nothing to go out of whack. On the other hand it is helpless to cope with a record that is manufactured improperly such as one that is out of spec undersized. The vacuum hold down system is easier to use at the expense of being more complex. Either is able to do more than a record flattener alone can do and neither has the potential to damage a record.
|
I had two different rings from TTW to use with a VPI Scout and then a Classic. I also had the TTW 2.2 lbs. centerweight. Both looked nice, and were reasonably OK to use, but non of the TTW stuff ever made an appreciable difference in the sound for the better--sometimes it made the sound a little heavy compared to lively--lacking dynamics. Never used the VPI stuff with their TT so I can’t speak about them at all. The TTW was beautiful and well made...BUT, a lot of money for zero performance increase. Really warped records did track better.
I have a Lenco 78 totally rebuilt now with at least as much, if not more upgrades to it than a Jean Nantais Lenco. I have an Artisan Fidelity chassis and copper platter on top of the Lenco’s platter. I now use NO weight or ring--the sound is both extremely dynamic, transparent, and defined through all frequencies that matter. I also have very few records that would benefit from being flattened--maybe 5 out of 1200.
Bob
|
I use a peripheral ring on my Technics SL-1200G, and the sonic benefit is clear to me (along with a Stillpoints LP weight). They couple the record better to the platter to drain away the spurious vibrations in the vinyl caused by the needle tracing the groove. Prior to that I ran a SOTA Cosmos with vacuum hold down and reflex clamp, which achieved the same basic objective.
Using them brings a touch greater clarity in the subtle details of the recording, and a better overall frequency balance, IME.
Do make sure your table's bearing and motor are up to it. With the Technics there is no question.
|
What periphery ring works with the SL 1200 G?
|
Two problems. They are a PITA to use and prevent use of an auto lifter.
They have to be heavy to work and this will increase wear on the bearing and motor which has to work harder to get up to speed.
Vacuum hold down is the best followed by reflex clamping as used by Kuzma, SME and Sota. Sota sells a wonderful reflex clamp for much less than a periphery ring. |
My ring is 2.5 pounds; it shouldn't cause problems for a competent bearing. It works fine even on warped records. So what if the electric motor works harder to get to speed?
Obviously vacuum hold down will accomplish a similar result. But it seems that they are complicated and tend to break down. Reflex clamps are a PITA, more so than a ring IMO. I used one for many years before the ring.
As for an auto lifter, it may or may not fit. It would fit on my TT. But when I want to sleep to music I go digital. |
My experience has led me to believe, using my two different tt designs that using an effective mat without a center clamp/weight let's the music becomes free with greater inner detail. Aforeunnoticed small details are heard. Bass sounds full, more real like it does live. |
@billstevenson I made my own that fits the Technics, a constrained sandwich of stainless steel/acrylic/stainless steel. It only weighs about 1/2 pound, but it is enough to ensure good contact with my acrylic mat., in combination with the center weight. It's handy to have access to a CNC shop!
|
|
Yeah, Ralph Karsten was encouraging me to make more (he'd like one, too!), but I am busy enough running a company. And I think the cost would get high, in the end, too. It is the perfect vanity project, though. My employees humor me with my nutty audio passions...
The design was inspired by one that had been marketed for awhile, but was discontinued some years back. I don't recall the name now, though.
|
Aside from flattening the record and treating resonances, I like an outer ring for the added mass for extra speed stability.
I had an outer ring that would stick to the platter and thus be difficult to remove and put back. I realized this was because my turntable was being warmed by my amps, and the heat expanded the plastic platter more than the metal ring, causing a tight fit. Notably, when cool, the ring was easy to use.
Obvious solutions were to move the amps away or bevel the inside of the ring.
I was able to use an Expressimo autolifter by reversing it and placing it at the rear of the arm where it would be triggered by a thumb screw on the counterweight.
|
According to VPI, their motor is up to the task of spinning the platter with the outer ring, but if it's a concern, it's easy enough to give the platter a little spin before you engage the power to the motor. |
The weight concern to me is more about distribution. You have to have some clearance built into the engagement interface of your ring (due to the variation in LP outer diameters), and that allows for eccentric placement - - in fact, challenges you to do anything other than place it with some eccentricity (perfection never happens). With the Technics' powerful DD motor and servo, I have no real fears of it being much affected by an uneven weight distribution. But with a low-power belt drive TT, I wouldn't rule it out as an issue.
I have encountered enough outer diameter variation that I am contemplating making another ring with a larger clearance to deal with the "super sized" ones. It's an issue.
|
There is a balance between the weight (mass) of the platter and the torque of the motor. On some tables adding mass to the platter with worsen wow and flutter. It does not matter how tough your bearing is adding mass will always speed up wear. If you have a suspended turntable it is a total non starter as you upset the balance and tuning of the system. Reflex camps are much easier to use than peripheral rings and press the entire surface of the record into the mat and not just the periphery. Vacuum remains the best. The compressors used are very reliable and quiet. The best system for the money is handily Sota's. |
I do not find a reflex clamp sufficient on its own, as some records don't simply respond flat. Just tap them and you can hear the "play" and opportunity for vibration mischief. I would agree that a well executed vacuum system is ideal. It's too bad my SOTA Cosmos didn't sound as good as my new Technics... |
@jbrrp1
My clamp is a 2.5 lb sandwich of plated copper with a sliver of some sort of soft plastic in between. It sits about .01" above the disk. Made by TTWeights, it was NOS when I bought it about 7 years ago and was an old and discontinued model at the time the company closed. It is always centered perfectly about the spindle and has worked without a problem for a large variety of recordings over the many years. I use it with a simple center weight. Both the ring and the weight go on faster than the VPI screw ever did.
I have never seen a reason for mounting it with any eccentricity at all, and have never seen a record with which it does not work perfectly, Perhaps you might want to revisit your design. |
