I would like to address the DD and vintage TT discussion.
First --always first, to me-- is musicality. I don't care if it's new or yesteryear: if it sounds exquisite, involving, and *Musical* (think of the origin of the word: Muse...) it's for me; if not, out it goes. I want "the gear to disappear."
Second, and slightly technically:bands as drive mechanisms are susceptible to heat, humidity, and sonic vibration, in short to ambient fluctuation and vibration. In a non-listening environment there is continual vibration in the air. We don't feel it because we are accustomed to it. A band drive table has no such luxury: it feels everything, and that *is* transcribed to the table's sonic output. Has to be. Isn't the 'room' abuzz with extra vibrations when music is being played? DD, particularly in a solid plinth that is designed to isolate the TT, eliminates a great deal of ambient interference.
Third: what kind of mechanism is used in cutting recordings? If memory serves, DD is the method of choice. If so, is there something to be said for keeping the reproduction and playback technologies parallel?
Ears are the determinant. We all hear differently: this accounts for about 35% of the variations of opinion on the Gon, as far as I can tell, yet this goes unmentioned. Many people haven't tuned their rooms to an extent sufficient to allow hearing differences in interconnects, let alone turntables, with all the associated esoterica involved in setup, arm and cartridge selection, wires used, and general complementarity of components (I don't use the word synergy for a number of reasons --another discussion) it's very hard to compare one TT with another, particularly in different systems and rooms.
That said, there are great TTs from the past. Alber Porter has proved that to my satisfaction in his threads on Agon. There are also great tables today. Pick your preference, or try a little of each: all it can do is better inform your opinion(s) and we will all benefit from that.
One final point: a great friend and respected audiophile observed that a Technics SP10 Mk whatever in a modern plinth with a contemporary arm and cartridge is not a vintage component. I agree with him: it's a pastiche, or a marriage of parts. That's why there's something to be said for incorporating the best of what's passed and what's presently outstanding. I wonder if we can learn to see beyond our *own* limitations in deference to the music?
Thanks to the former respondents. This has been an interesting thread. |
Dear friends: +++++ " Also, in his earlier post that I quoted, he stated that comparing the Technics with a number of other top line tables by other audiophiles for the purposes of buying one and selling the other, the Technics was not at a disadvantage. " +++++
IMHO I think that talking about vintage/today TTs a good " road " could be take the vintage one mere like something additonal: a second TT, like with cartridges ( 2-3 cartridges ), and not one over the other because IMHO there is no absolute evidence that one is better than the other.
I think that both alternatives can live together given us the pleasure to enjoy two " different " top quality proposals. Of course that " money " is almost always an issue here.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I don't have the technical knowledge, tactile skills or financial wherewithal to push against the upward boundaries of the state of the art. So I get as close as I can by leveraging "bang for the buck". In turntables I have found that goal best served by the use of high end vintage drive systems. I'm not sure the same can be accomplished with tonearms but my EPA 100 does very well and it was already on the table. Even if this stuff isn't as good as the very best of modern product, the fact that we are even having this debate proves that they are worthy contenders.
If you would rather have a new state of the art table and can afford one, I don't mind if you buy it. That Technics SL-1000 MK II for $3000 will wipe the floor with any new table and arm combo costing that much.
Apples to apples - let's keep it real. |
We buy 'em cause we like 'em! |
What I had in mind was to compare yesterday's average analog setup ( turntable, cartridge and tone-arm ) v.s something of the same caliber that is currently manufactured.
Use of the same arm & cartridge for both tables would be inaccurate when comparing vintage to present technology in my opinion.
Also two vintage integrated will be used - one Solid State and the other tube.
Both made around more or less the same time as Lenco L-75, SME 3009 II Imp. arm and Shure V15 series carts.
Present analog rig -
Machined 67mm acrylic contoured to match record surface
Bearing: Large diameter inverted fixed spindle with polished ceramic ball on teflon thrust plate.
Motor: Belgium manufactured precision hi torque DC motor.
Moarch Up-4 tone-arm
Cartridge Man - Musicmaker III with Isolator
Phono - Consonance Ref.40
Both TT in DIY plinths |
Raul,
I agree, these are not conclusive comparisons. I also left out the qualifier where Albert wrote that his preference could have been due to the different cartridges. However, I think the overall point is that the Garrard was not obviously outclassed by the Rockport in an informal comparison of the kind that audiophiles do fairly frequently.
Also, in his earlier post that I quoted, he stated that comparing the Technics with a number of other top line tables by other audiophiles for the purposes of buying one and selling the other, the Technics was not at a disadvantage. What this says to me is that the best of the classic turntables can compete successfully with the modern state of the art as determined by a purchasing decision including factors of sound quality and cost, a point of view that I think you share considering your own choice of turntables. :-) |
Dear Jlin: +++++ " I actually preferred the Garrard [301] with Triplanar and Koetsu Rosewood Platinum to Mike's Rockport with Colibri." " +++++
this statement could be a learning one because IMHO we are comparing here two totally different " things " where IMHO ( again ) we can't make a precise and absolute comparison on the TT subject because there we have two totally different tonearms ( not only on design but internal wiring ) with two totally different cartridges.
I know very well the KRSP and the Colibri and when we have both perfectly matched to a tonearm the Colibri IMHO is the winner or at least I prefer it.
A more fair and precise comparison ( TTs ) can be do it with the same tonearm/cartridge combination where the only different " parameter " is the TT but in your example there are too many " different " parameters. The same for the Walker/Technics comparison: two different set-ups.
Both examples IMHO can't be conclusive.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I think, going for vintage Turntables has several reason's:
Price, lot of people out there can't afford the actual units or when they do a comparison, some may find, that the actual units are way overpriced for their performance. Same for Tonearms and cartridges.
But, this is NOT a general rule, Audiofeil wrote good lines about that. Most of vintage I wouldn't even touch, but when the search is done right, you can get an impressing result.
I bought old Micro Seiki, made some improvements with some Know How from today, linked it with a 30 year old Tonearm and a revisited jap. Cartridge and the result is stunning. Really stunning. I listened to endless actual units which aren't even close. |
Albert also had a re-plinthed Lenco, which, according to him, he sold only because of space. I have talked with Albert numerous times. I have been invited over. I live minutes from him. I just haven't made time to do so.
Maybe that should be my resolution. |
I think the reason for buying a classic turntable is a combination of cost and sound quality. In terms of cost, a turntable such as a Lenco idler drive can still be bought on ebay for a few hundred dollars and with modifications and a DIY plinth compete with tables costing much more - check out the Audiogon thread.
In terms of quality, check out Albert Porter's system, which is high end by anyone's definition. He had a Walker Proscenium turntable, and replaced it with a Technics SP10. Here's what he posted on Audiogon on 11/23/08:
"I sold the Walker four months ago. I made this decision after comparing it long term against my Wenge Plinth, Technics SP10 MK2.
Photographs of it here at Audiogon: http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/i/f/1193606055.jpg
And at Sound Fountain: http://www.soundfountain.com/amb/sp10plinth.html
I bought the MK2 in Feb 2007, 21 months ago.
During this period, about sixteen listeners joined me in the comparison with only one voting for the Walker."
Also on 11/23/08, he posted after listening to Mike Lavigne's system, that:
"I actually preferred the Garrard [301] with Triplanar and Koetsu Rosewood Platinum to Mike's Rockport with Colibri."
Finally, on 11/30/08, he wrote:
"Although I've only recently posted my decision, testing has been ongoing for 21 months. Nine others who heard the comparison bought this plinth plus MK2 or MK3.
Each person put their completed Technics in place and compared with their reference turntable and arm.
This resulted in the sale of two Walkers (w/Black Diamond arms), a Kuzma Stabi XL with Air Line arm, a VPI TNT with 12" JM arm, a Basis with Graham arm and a Raven.
For this many people to agree on this change means it's an excellent combination."
What this says is the best of the classic turntables - Garrard 301 and 401, Technics SP10, etc. are at least in the same category as the best of the modern tables - Walker, Rockpot, Kuzma, Basis, etc., in the opinion of a number of experienced audiophiles. When you factor in the cost of a classic table against the cost of the modern SOTA tables this makes them at a minimum a very cost effective alternative. |
Brooklyn - 5 minutes from Manhattan ( I can pick you up from wherever you will be staying or you can call for other info - I think we should confirm the details in PM ). It is going to be at the end of January and mid February. Hey Macdadtexas, I do not know about: "I'd love to do the blind listening test, that sounds AWESOME " but it should be a lots of fun and opportunity to socialize with good as well as interesting people. It will probably be a whole day event..........most likely on Saturday. Cheers and PM if interested Regards Mariusz |
I'd love to do the blind listening test, that sounds awesome. Where in NYC? I only need the slightest excuse to visit NY, the wife I am sure will come with me. To NY, not the listening session, I am sure she can find some shopping to do!! |
Lithojoe,
Will do. I will work on whatever it is I need to work on. All smiles, really. |
I would love to see a blind listen test, but we know that no one in the audio community ever wants to go there. Who told you that????????? I can do that ..............in fact I will in the near future. In january/February I am planing to have a little get together for few audiophile friends but not only. I'll have two analog setups- this DIY belt drive with parts found on 4K tables/dedicated marble/aluminum stand and this idlerwith specially design plinth. Phono stage: Consonance Ref40 RWA prototype battery powered tube phono Arms/carts: Moarch Up4 arm and Musicmaker III cart with Isolator for belt drive SME 3009 II Imp. arm with Shure V15 cart for idler to keep things vintage Speakers: Single Driver speakers of my own (modified Fostex eF206) Amps: Modified Consonance Cyber 800 monos (PP 78wpc, EL 34) Melody M300b monos ( 8wpc SET amps, 300B) I will send the info to those who would like to come over for a listen and good time. Two dates will be open - one for AC members of "NY Audio Rave" club and second for AgoN members and few of my friends. Please let me know if you are interested and forward your contact info. Cheers Mariusz |
Stormin Norman:
After reading many posts over the years, it is my conclusion that most are polite and courteous, although uninformed, and pretentious. Hidden agendas and idle chatter are the theme for the day. The learning curve is long and can be expensive. I can understand if some get frustrated and vent them on the forum. I don't believe it should be taken so personal. |
Actually after reading Audiofeil's comments about advances in engineering capabilites it made me think through how correct that is. A computer does not have 1/1,000,000 the calculating capability of the human brain and thinks only linearly no matter how complicated or detailed the programming. Ones and zeros baby, on and off. That's it. If you program 3 demensional calculations they actually work via indivdual nesting of commands interwoven. The human brain is capable of so much more, and so are human craftsman.
Anyone, and I am guessing there are a many on this board, who have been to Europe(or currently live there) and have seen the precision stonework that was done 2000+ years ago knows that humans are capable of extremely precise craftsmanship without the aid of any type of computer, or even a slide rule. There are many wonderful examples of precision human craftmanship in building that almost any mechanical engineer would tell you are currently not duplicable because the skill needed to construc those type projects no longer exists and cannot be duplicated. Motar-less construction on a massive scale where you cannot fit a piece of paper through the gaps of a 2 ton stone??? Awesome.
So I think turntables made 40 yrs ago probably are OK as compared to those made today. I would love to see a blind listen test, but we know that no one in the audio community ever wants to go there. |
You're correct.
I misused computer numerical control in my post in which the basic thrust was meant to indicate that current manufacturing processes due to computers/software allow better, more consistent, and tighter tolerances.
I am familiar with much of the equipment, undoubtedly not as much as you, so please excuse the error. |
I have to agree. CNC is only as good as the person that programs it. Calipers, dial gauges, etc are still used to measure the final product. Back to a previous post. I have several old, over a hundred years, clocks that keep perfect time. All the brass gears, bushings, etc in them were cut by hand, no CNC machines back in the day. And, on another note, Pre-war Martin Guitars, Loyd Loar mandolins, all made by hand. And comanding big prices. Why? Not just because they are getting harder to find, but because the way they were made and the way the sound. No CNC machine can duplicate that. I own a '98 Taylor, very nice guitar, but it can't/doesn't compare to a pre-war Martin.
Oh, in case anyone is interested, there is/was a '23 Loar on Craigslist for $210,000.00. Trust me, if I had it, I'd buy it. |
Lithojoe,
I never said anything about enjoying erroneous or useless information, in fact I can't stand it. I can take heat and a good argument. However, when it comes to insulting one another, I have no place in my life for that type of dialogue. I prefer discussing the topic and enjoying the memebers view point, none of which should include an insult. Isn't that the point, to gather eachothers view, and to enrich our hobby by such disscussion? Least that is what I thought.
Kind regards,
Norman |
Calipers are no match for computers and CNC equipment. That's wishful thinking. Calipers are used for measuring things during and after machining (and still used today). CNC machines do the machining. Why are you comparing the two? They couldn't possibly be used for more different things. And for the record, CNC only refers to how the machines are controlled. CNC in itself implies no particular precision, tolerance, etc. I don't know, but it sounds like you're just using words you've heard. |
Norm:
Albeit for me, witty, useless, or erroneous info doesn't cut it for most of us. If one can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen! There is so much misinformation flying around, someone has to get a handle on it, especially for the newcomers. Who by the way may not, or can not, spend the money most of us have on the majority of expensive audio crap! Happy New Year! |
Wow, somebody didn't get any Xmas presents this year I guess.
Old tables are cool, they sound different for whatever reason not better or worse, just different. If you sell new tables you don't want people buying old ones, but the sound is simply a matter of taste. I don't have an old table right now, but it's only because of space, not due to any type of belief in their inherent inferiority.
I have a good buddy with a Garrard 301 with an old Quad preamp into a McIntosh 225 (sorry it's the new version) and 30+ year old Klipschorns. That is one of the most musical experiences we get when we all get together. Very nice synergy with all of the gear. If you put on a rock album, say The Who Live at Leeds, or Led Zeppelin II, you need to strap in, because man there is some IMPACT there. Not a good system, a great one. Better than a Clearaudio Statement with associated VTL/Conrad Johnson/Soundlab/Wilson Audio, etc.....
I don't really know even though I have had the chance to hear some of those wonderful items, all I know, is that it sounds REALLY GOOD.
I love the old stuff, sounds smooth. Newer is not always better. CD's and digital don't sound as good as analog no matter how much audio dealers tried to convince us of that when they wanted everyone to buy new gear. Same may be said with old turntables, newer is not always better. Just because a material or process is new, does not make it better. I like the approach of some manufaturers such as Teres and MerrilScalia (sp?) not reinventing, but using what's there and microscopically improving.
It's all subjective. |
>>>Walker Proscenium...are simply better than their older counterparts.
>>>Any fool would know that.
How would you know? It is not like you have a Walker Proscenium at home. Ignorant, arrogant and foolish is worse than just being foolish.
How low is your IQ, just wondering, as you have a "need" to define anyone that disagreed with your viewpoint as "a fool"? |
Lew,
I disagree. I believe they knew exactly what they were doing. The tapered motor shaft for example. Infinately adjustable speed.
But, then again, to each their own. I have already said Lenco's aren't the end all and be all to analog, but then again, I don't believe anthing is.
Sorry, I'm not going to pay more for a tt/arm and cart than I did my GMC truck and Harly combined. |
Ketchup, I would say there's nothing very great about the build quality of a Lenco L75. The drive system is completely novel and full of potential problems, but it works very very well, if you perform a few mods here and there and get rid of the stock tonearm. As you say, "they simply got lucky". |
For me, as someone who wants to spend time listening to music rather than mucking with equipment, when the time comes to replace my current Linn table (hopefully not for another 20 years), I would look at new tables first to see what I might be missing.
I would go with another Linn in a heartbeat going in, but I believe it would cost me 3-4 times or more to replace my 80's vintage Linn Axis with a new Linn table today. Would a new table be that much better? |
Audiofeil,
"Any fool would know that.
Even J____.
Who doesn't have a clue btw/"
We should be kind and respectful to one another. Why do you always have to put some type of degrading remark towards someone in your comments?
This is supposed to be a kind albeit witty discussion. Insults are not needed, maturity would be appreciated.
Take a pill or something before writing your next one. |
For the record I own 2 vintage tables, which doesn't change the fact that todays's best i.e. Walker Proscenium, TW Acustic Raven, Basis Work of Art, Rockport, etc. are simply better than their older counterparts. Better materials, better engineering, tighter tolerances et.al. Old can be very good but hardly SOTA. Calipers are no match for computers and CNC equipment. That's wishful thinking.
Also, whether you agree with my views, they are devoid of financial interest and/or bias.
Any fool would know that.
Even Jack.
Who doesn't have a clue btw. |
I would not think of vintage setups in the stock form to be anything but average at best........like I said earlier - they need work, love and patience to sound their best.
Example - Lenco 75
-needed a whole bunch of tweaks, speed calibration, break removal as well as any unnecessary parts which weren't needed and introduced/transmit/resonate noise and vibration.
-plinth is the essence to successful Lenco setup
-stock tonearm is crap
-top metal plate needs some dampening
etc, etc, etc, etc.........
Sure with some work and experimentation it can sound really , really good but at what cost........(time, frustration, experimentation ). It's definitely not a project for someone who just wants to listen Vinyl without getting down and dirty. |
Don't you guys have friendly arguements with relatives over the holidays? Can't be nice all the time. |
04rdking, bless your heart. Happy holidays to all. |
Can't we just get along? It's Christmas! Go spend time with family and friends, spin some vinyl!
One thing we can agree upon in this thread, is the fact we enjoy analog playback. Whether it's on a vintage, or a new megadollar table really shouldn't matter. If it works for you, so be it.
Merry Christmas to all. Hope each and everyone has/had a great day!
Bill |
Audiofeil sells new turntables that have to compete with the vintage units. That seems like motivation for bias.
And I do have a clue. |
Sorry Audiofeil, but I've got to respectfully disagree. Precision machining, especially for something as simple as a wheel and bearing has been pretty well sorted out to perfection for quite some time. I'll grant you improvements from materials, cartridges and associated equipment, but a wheel is just a wheel and there are some great sounding old wheels out there. I'm not suggesting that a lot of new equipment doesn't sound good. A lot of it sounds great, but I honeslty can't accept the insistance that new turntables have achieved some breakthrough in technology.
And I'm playing a record right now, and as best I can tell, the sound is being generated by a needle being dragged through a groove. "Mr. Watson. Come here, I need you." |
Sorry Normansize.
That's just plain incorrect.
With all due respect to your dad, you don't have a clue.
Yes, some of the vintage tables were built well but today's best tables are simply superior.
Using your words I say to you " HA, ha, ha, ha, ha ha ha ha ... can't stop laughing".
Learn a little and then start making some noise here. |
Hello,
I would like to clarify a bit, I really think you need ultra high end flagship tables: SME 30, Raven AC-3 etc., to surpass by a meaningful margin, the great vintage stuff. Mid level current product is NOT going to do it IMO. Hence the vintage has a VERY strong value position and is great in absolute terms as well. |
Vintage Turntables have a definite place in audio and not just for nostalgia's sake. They are strong performers without question and get the whole of the musical experience very "right".
Over that last year I have had excellent examples of "state of the art" in vintage and current product. I can positively say that turntables have progressed at the extreme high end. However, not all purported extreme high end is created equal, so you will need to choose very very wisely. I feel tweaked out vintage tables will humble many contemporary "high end" tables.
This past year really has taught me MY vinyl hierarchy: Cart and Arm together as first, phono preamp 2nd, the spinner is important but is a distant third, which is IMO why these vintage tables are given "new life" their importance is deep in the hierarchy and the surrounding products are so superior.
Happy Holidays,
David |
Audiofeil, Wrong! My father is a machinist. I have seen him create some of the most incredibly precise parts, with tolerances in the ininth degree from old presses, and lathes using extremely old hand match machine calipers. You don't think that Thorens, Dual, Garrard etc, knew how to build a bearing or a race? Or that one built then, wouldn't be as good as one built now? HA, ha, ha, ha, ha ha ha ha ... can't stop laughing... :) By the way, I wear a 1874 Eligin B.W. Raymond pocket watch that has more precision in it than any turntable need every have, and it is well over one hundred years old. (It was my great, great grandfathers) No computers or sophisticated manufacturing techniques were used to build it extremely tiny incredibly precise parts. Oh, and keeps magnificent time. |
If there is NO sonic difference between vintage and contemporary turntables, then we don't need the VPI's, TW Acoustics, Avids, Brinkmann's, Teres, Basis, Galibiers, etc. This is a sad conclusion for those manufacturers.
Chris |
>>There is no reason a TT from forty years ago shouldn't sound as good as a table built today.<<
Wrong.
Computers and sophisticated manufacturing techniques enable components to be built to far tighter tolerances.
Not to mention that some of the new materials such as acrylic, rare woods, and titanium that weren't used years ago.
Your assertion "of draging a needle through a groove is essentially the same as it was when Edison did it" is far too simplistic.
Contemporary tables, tonearms, and cartridges are superior with the exception of a very small handful of examples. |
Jloveys, I can only hope that my idler project, which awaits in the everlasting projecthood limbo, will perform as well as your 124 once completed. I now have a second project also awaiting, and a stock Diatone LT-1 to play with over the holidays. I have reasonably high hopes for the Diatone, but it too eventually may have to be re-plinthed. |
T bone : I play and compare right now in front of me my TD 124 MK2 on original plinth with original SME 3009/ShureM95ED nothing modified since 1966 when my father bought it AND my VPI TNT highly upgraded/modified to extreme limit with Graham Phantom/ Allaerts Finish/Tron/Purist on seismic platform.
Honestly the Thorens rig is very very close in definition and is even more dynamicaly involving than my recent high end turntable wich is sounding very good. And I did not modified anything yet. The TD 124 IS a great piece of engineering AND for sure is in the same ballpark as the actual turntables, even NOT modified. |
Look, the basic technology of draging a needle through a groove is essentially the same as it was when Edison did it with tin foil. Sure all the stuff is more sophisticated, more refined, better sounding, etc., but those improvements are based mainly on the associated parts: carts, wiring and amplification. A turntable is still just a wheel on a bearing. There is no reason a TT from forty years ago shouldn't sound as good as a table built today. With the possible exception of some of the repeling magnets even the bearings are esentially the same. Its not magic new technology. |
And coincidence of coincidences, I just missed on a Sony PS-X9 which was up for auction... wonder when I am going to see one of those again... |
I have had 3 tt's thru here in the past year. My somewhat stock Lenco just happened to be the best sounding, most musical and involving of the bunch. Everyone that heard the 3 says the same.
Is it the best? No. Does it do what I want it to do, and sound damn good at doing it? Yes. |
The common comparison being made in this thread by people who are fans of "vintage" TTs is that AFTER new plinths, modern isolation platforms, ensuring the bearing is OK (and sometimes putting a new bearing in), adding a modern state of the art arm, wiring, TT mat, cartridge, and phonostage, the "vintage" TT now compares pretty well with what is out there. I don't see anyone saying that the Lenco in stock form smokes anything modern. There are a few TTs from 20-30yrs ago which can hold their own in stock form but they came in the "hi-fi age", some 25yrs after the Garrard 301. I expect, however, that manufacturers of console-bound tables of the 50s and 60s and DD workhorses from the 70s and 80s were not, at the time, intended to be competitive with the top-tier tables 25-50 years later. I believe it is a combination of a lack of development of motors, plus a certain set of fortunate circumstances (used tables are somewhat cheap, people can use their good arms and carts from previous tables, and for the lucky few who can wield tools with some skill, making a plinth worthy of a top-tier table doesn't cost much in terms of materials (and for the same, the pleasure of making it pays for the time). And the result is an excellent table at a lower out-of-pocket cost (usually) than new rivals, which does what we want it to do, which is spin at 33 1/3rpm all day every day and do absolutely nothing else perceptible to the stylus/record interface. |
In several replies posted here in this thread I have a strong feeling that many of us are merely driven by emotion and nostalgia towards the ownership of a vintage turntable, not because of the believe that these vintage tt's are better than the contemporary ones. Am I wrong?
Chris |
Ketchup -
The old Garrard, Thorens, Lenco, and even the SP-10 were really designed to go into a console of some kind. Some were used in your parents' fruitwood console and some were used in radio station consoles. Not everything from that period of time is revered today, just the statement stuff like Empire and the professional tools like those mentioned above.
All of the tables under discussion pre-date high end audio as we know it and they certainly predate the use of booming, self-powered subs in small rooms. I'm not sure that they needed the isolation required today.
In any event, it isn't really about absolute best performance. The vintage stuff is great because it is still reasonably affordable and you can't say that about comparable modern stuff. |
Lewn , I agree
analog is plain fun and for those who love it.
There are some who just want it or heard about its qualities - those minds are to shallow to understand it.
As to the value...................well my TTs combine cost me somewhere around 2K.
I paid almost full price for my MMF7..............the rest was scrap metal that needed a lots of work. Lenco was the most time consuming and needed the most tweaking and tuning tho. Plinth materials are as fallow:
MMF 7 - bamboo 4" butcher block and Walnut arm-board
Lenco - Soapstone top - 2" seated on combo of Baltic Birch and MDF (4 layers sandwiched )
Red Devil (DIY belt) 9 layers MDF & Baltic Birch (sandwiched) with dedicated stand/base.
Merry Christmas
Mariusz |
Mrjstark, We are in the same boat. One reason that I am tinkering with these old tts, idler and dd types, not belt-drives, is that I have heard all the best belt-drives that cost less than $5,000 and already know that my Lenco in giant plinth can equal or beat them in all respects, IMO and in my system, of course. Since I am unwilling to invest more than $5K in a modern belt-drive, the logical course is to continue to explore the limits of the old tts. This is an added factor, in addition to my innate affinity for old stuff, that drives me. However, I take with a grain of salt any single report of one tt sounding better than another, unless I've heard it myself. (This is in reference to the notion that a Garrard smoked a Brinkmann, etc.) |
