Chakster from the text you quote, it seems that the new product is a “real transformer“ in that it has a primary and a secondary that are discrete from each other. This provides the mentioned galvanic isolation. What you have been using sounds like an autoformer. An autoformer has certain advantages over a transformer in some applications, but probably not for simply stepping down the voltage.
I use a 50 W step down transformer that I purchased on eBay it is conveniently small. I have one each for my L07D and for my Dp80. Even 50 W is overkill.
|
I use ss300 on my TT101. If the dp80 was in regular use, I’d buy an ss300 for it,too.
I’ve been in Tokyo this whole time, visiting our son. When I get back home I’ll check the condition of the Dp80 platter.
|
Just speculating but SFTG reads like the prefix of a Technics part number. |
Bima, my dp80 platter could well be just like yours. I haven’t closely examined it in years. So my own description may have been inaccurate. My mat is definitely OEM, has “DENON” inscribed in the rubber on the underside, like yours. It’s thick with concentric raised ridges on the top side. |
At the very least, get the TT101’s out of the garage. The moisture and changes in temperature and humidity that might occur in the garage would be bad news for the circuit boards in the TT101. Put them in a dry location with a stable room temperature suitable for humans. Not in Siberia.
|
I own both but cannot compare them, because different plinths, tonearms, and cartridges. And they are connected to two entirely different systems, one feeding Beveridge speakers (TT101) and one feeding Sound Lab 845PXs (DP80). And, the DP80 sits idle in favor of the SP10 MK3 and Kenwood L07D.
It would be a close call. These days, I am biased in favor of coreless motors, so the TT101 gets the nod from me in my Beveridge system. That said, the motor of the DP80 was state of the art in its day, as noted above, and probably on par with any motor still being made for DD turntables, as far as that goes. It's a little smaller than the motor used in the revered DP100 and DP308, but it's as big as it needed to be for driving the DP80 platter with precision. Peter knows more about DP100 and DP308 than I.
|
One other thing is being overlooked here. For a period of time I owned both an SP10 Mk2 and my DP80. I had both of them serviced by Bill Thalmann at Musical Technologies in Springfield, VA. (It's only about a 25 minute drive from my house in Bethesda, MD.) On the DP80, I needed a new controller chip to make it run perfectly (which I was able to source via Alibaba), and Bill noted that the circuit uses some transistors that were over time shown to be unreliable. He replaced all of the suspect transistors with modern superior equivalents, and he installed the new controller chip. Bill also re-capped both units. I mounted both turntables in slate plinths of similar weight and shape. In this setting, with both turntables feeding the very same system, front to back, the DP80 consistently outperformed the SP10 Mk2. (Not by much, just a hair.) Bill also remarked to me that the drive system of the DP80 seemed a little more advanced than that of the MK2. The DP80 uses a true 3-phase AC synchronous motor, for one thing. I know there are further tweaks for the Mk2 (I've done them all, JP's chip and Krebs mod, for my SP10 Mk3), but, as it was, I consistently preferred the DP80. That is one great and under-rated turntable, a steal at current market values in my opinion. It's worth the cost and effort to have a competent tech evaluate the running condition and then bring it up to spec, any time you buy a "new" vintage DD turntable.
|
I own a Dp80. It is perhaps too simple to say that the platter is spring loaded. The platter is two concentric pieces,an inner piece that is about the size of the record label or a little wider in diameter, and an outer which goes all the way out to the periphery. The inner and outer platters are linked by flexible thin metal fasteners that act sort of like a spring to decouple the two sectors . This was Denon’s way of isolating the platter from the bearing, since the playing surface of the LP is almost entirely supported by the outer platter. So if you used a solid platter mat, like a copper one, the dissociation between the two pieces of the platter would be abrogated. I don’t actually know whether that would be so terrible, because the mat doesn’t couple to the bearing in any case. I would not hesitate to try a copper platter mat or some other solid mat, if that is of interest.
|
Nothing wrong with DK300 but I would replace the mdf arm board with brass or aluminum |
I hasten to add that while the slate plinths I had made are beautiful and professional looking in appearance, I did not try to achieve the boutique look of an OMA plinth, with its logo engraved into the slate. And my tonearm mounts are rather crude although effective. |
I think my slate comes from the same site that supplies OMA, but in any case it's Pennsylvania slate that we both use. The company is Structural Slate in Bala Cynwyd, PA. They cut the slate to my dimensions and honed both sides to make them flat. They do not do water jet cutting. For that I used a company in York, PA. You called it "graphite"; I do not believe the two (graphite vs slate) are the same. I made three plinths using these two companies, one for Lenco, one for DP80, and one for SP10Mk3. Actually, four plinths if you count the first one I made, for SP10Mk2; I sold that along with the Mk2. But that was the learning experience. |
Mine is in a 2-inch thick piece of slate that I sourced from Pennsylvania in the US. Mine came in a DK300 plinth with a DA301 tonearm, not the 401. I think I have the pdf file needed to program a water jet for creating the hole and the 3 screw bolt holes in slate or other, if you need it,
|
