Cpk, If you beat me to it, let us know how it sounds in slate. My slab is sitting on the floor in my living room, but a little thing like needing to write a chapter for a medical text is keeping me away from installing the SP10 into it. |
Lewm, if your slab is cut then you will most likely beat me to the punch. I still have to get mine cut... |
I have a Monaco Grand Prix Turntable, with a Graham Phantom, I have a Technics SP10MkII in an Oswalds Mill Audio slate plinth (by far the best plinth material for any DD or idler drive). Both tables with the same arm and cartridge display almost identical sonic characteristics. Black background, amazing speed control, fine detail retrival, strong bass. What they both do not do is speed and dynamics like an idler. My Stainless steel Garrard Inspiration, again in an Oswalds Mill Audio slate plinth eclipses both the superb DD's, by a margin. In terms of musicality, speeed, dynamics, soundstage, and bass, I have only heard Mr Fremers Continuum, compete. Mine has a touch more groove noise in between tracks, I think? I now use the Garrard 501 on a wall shelf with Symposium rollerblocs in between. My arm of choice now after trying almost all the major contenders, is the RS Labs A1! |
I've listened to the MkII for close to 30 years now- one of my best friends bought his new. It is very nice, but at least in the case of his machine there is one flaw that both of us have noticed- the plinth does not include the mount for the arm, which is on a separate surface.
It happens to be a fact of good 'table engineering that the platter bearing and the base of the tone arm must be as rigidly coupled together as possible. The better the coupling (and overall deadness) in this area, the better, and its the sort of thing that you hear immediately.
IMO/IME, a plinth that was designed for the MkII with this in mind would yield huge results, assuming that it was in fact rigid enough and dead enough. |
Thank you Atmasphere, one of the things i am mostly uncertain was if the arm base should be coupled to the motor or somehow decoupled (ie. arm base on its own, more or less, as you see in many differnt designs). I appreciate your point of view. |
OMA slate plinth for your SP10 MK II/III is about as good as it gets! |
Silverprint, I have not done the listening tests necessary to have a valid opinion myself, but the prevailing opinion is that some coupling between tonearm base and bearing/motor is preferable. IOW, those designs you may see with the tonearm mounted separately from the bearing/motor/platter or deliberately decoupled from it seem to get criticized by those who have heard it both ways. What Ralph is saying, I think, is a little more extreme in terms of advocating a specific rigid physical coupling between bearing and tonearm. I actually cannot imagine how to do that with an SP10 or most DDs, because the bearing is of necessity surrounded by the motor assembly. Ralph, please correct me if I'm misrepresenting your view. |
Lew, you got it right. Here is the issue- somehow, you need the arm to transduce what is on the LP. In order to do that, there must be no play between the surface of the platter and the cantilever of the cartridge.
To that effect, the arm must have absolutely no slop in its bearings, no resonance in the arm tube. **Any** motion that is not caused by the LP will be interpreted as a sound if these conditions are not met. Thus, to further this, the base of the arm must be rigidly coupled to the surface of the platter. It does this through the bearing, and we are just hoping that whatever bearing we have is good enough. As far as the plinth is concerned, it has to couple the base of the arm to the bearing as rigidly as possible, while at the same time being completely dead. My work with our model 208 proved this to be a very audible aspect!
FWIW, anyone familiar with motorcycle or automotive issues will recognize this mechanical principle as it is the same one that requires that there be no mechanical play or flex between the steering and the wheel on the road, otherwise the vehicle will handle in a dangerous manner.
The plinth of the stock MkII does not take this into account- the arm is mounted on a completely different material. The plinth and the arm base thus have two different resonant signatures; any difference will manifest as a coloration.
Now, we might have the issue where the plinth and arm base are made from a single part, but with vibration the base of the arm is out of phase with the bearing mount; this is why I say ""as rigidly as possible**. As we all know, with LP reproduction we are always talking about microscopic movement and this is an area that the Technics engineers did not, at the time, have sorted. So it is my opinion that in order to get the best performance out of the 'table, that a custom plinth built to accommodate the needs of the Technics would be a very cool thing to build. It would be heavy, but cool. |
The Kaneta plinth addresses this issue but taking the motor out of the chassis and place it in the same wood block where the tonearm is mounted.
http://de.geocities.com/bc1a69/kaneta_eng.html
|
Hiho, Have you ever actually seen the Kaneta modifications applied to an SP10, other than the one in those photos? That URL is frequently cited, but there is no hint anywhere else on the internet that I can find to indicate that help (i.e., kits or assembled PS units) in obtaining the Kaneta outboard supply or the custom plinth are really available. I would be interested to read your response or that of anyone else who has been up close to a Kaneta-modded SP10. The schematic is posted, but it looks quite formidable as a DIY project. (I am quite at home reading schematics and building tube gear but have limited experience with ss devices, particularly ICs.) |
Albert,
You raised the issue of the tube power supply - I think it would be not be a wise move, as low voltage - high current power supplies and tubes do not combine.
Using a battery super power supply could be very interesting, but however one should be aware of an interesting feature of this power supply: if by any reason the +5V power supply fails, the +32.5V shuts down immediately, protecting the motor coils. |
Microstrip, Interesting reading.
I don't know how serious I am about building a tube supply for Technics. I'm just a fan of what tubes do, especially in power supplies.
Considering cost of the MK2 it's probably not a wise choice. If the supply cost anything near my custom tube crossover ($3500.00), for a bit more money you could do the MK3. |
Guys!
I have to be honest and say that a tube-based power supply for a turntable such as a SP-10 mkII or III will not be worth the effort at all. The incoming DC power from the PSU is regulated and modulated in a complex manner that will void any "tube-iness". The SP-10 motors are precision devices that operates in a different way than amplifiers. One should not treat it electrically as a piece of audio gear but rather a precision instrument. As long as the stock PSU are operating within specs then it will be the best partner for the motor unit.
Anyway, the stock PSU is much more better designed and constructed than most other audio related PSUs. If only half the worlds audiophile amplifier PSUs were so well designed and regulated then this would have been a much more sane place. This is why I am working on a SE tube amp with a super-regulated PSU. Its not over-kill, it just makes sense. |
I am frightened by the materials used on this thread. A plinth made of lead ? Please we also have to be eco/planet friendly on our hobby. One of the reasons I use VPI for turntable, it is an ecological minded industry. |
Jloveys,
Making a single plinth from lead surely is not a catastrophe. The designer of such a plinth should also think of ways to seal the lead to prevent oxidization and lead poisoning. You only have to start worry about lead contamination when someone dumps a used car battery on a dumpsite or in a eco-sensitive area. There is much more worse things to worry about such as the thousands of people dying in Zimbabwe of cholera due to an incompetent government. Walker Audio turntables are made of lead but the structures are sealed with specialist materials to protect the environment and the lead itself. There is also still people on this planet living with lead fillings in their teeth!!
Please dont get me wrong, I care for the environment a great deal but I would rather channel my rage and energy towards mega-factories the churns out thousands of gallons of toxic gasses rather than get upset with a chap in the US who wants to make a lead plinth for his turntable. |
Lonestar, Your sentiments are commendable. The Walker Audio Proscenium is built out of lead too, but at that price, not many of them are going to end up in landfills, ever.
As far as tubes for the SP10 power supply, I quite agree that that sounds impractical. Perhaps Albert has heard the optional tube power supply available for the Brinkmann table. (That's the only tube tt ps I know of.) But that PS only has to supply sine waves to run the Brinkmann motor and to control its speed. There is no servo mechanism, etc, to worry about. It would be nice enough if any of the known ongoing projects to build modern outboard supplies for the SP10 would finally come to fruition. I refer to Mark Kelly's project and to that of "Steerpike" over on diyaudio. Either of those devices, like the Kaneta, would enable one to remove the electronics from the chassis and sink the motor directly into a plinth, thereby dramatically improving the coupling of the motor to a high mass. |
I think lead would be a bad move (toxic and its not very strong, certainly not rigid)- if it were me, I would design a plinth from solid machined aluminum (like we did for the old Empire 208), and then create a sandwich of dissimilar materials- an extensional damping compound, and maybe machined steel, so that you have rigidity and absolute deadness.
I get people joking that I should make an all-tube digital watch or GPS, I have to assume any comments about the Technics power supply come with the same friendly smiles :) |
Robyatt, What cartridges work well in the RS-A1? I've got one too, largely because it is so easy to move between tts, it will facilitate my ability to compare one tt to another. But the darn thing is so unorthodox in construction and implementation that it is difficult to know what cartridge to use with it, except by experimentation perhaps. For example, what is the effective mass of that crazy arm tube with the swinging counter-weight? (It's a rhetorical question, unless 47 Labs have given the into in the manual, which I don't have.) I heard it sound great on a Lenco with a simple Pickering MM. |
Anybody aware of the SAEC SBX-7 plinth for the SP-10 mkII? http://yasshin.hp.infoseek.co.jp/saecsbx7.htm
Atmasphere, you've got a point though. Lead is not optimal - its got high mass but is 'unstable'.
I would rather go for a fiber-loaded (incl aggregates) compound that is pour-cast and then CNCd. |
What do the SP10 experts think of this Teak plinth for sale on ebay??
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Teak-Plinth-for-Technics-SP-10-SP-10MK2-SL-1000_W0QQitemZ390014496088QQcmdZViewItemQQptZTurntables?hash=item390014496088&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2%7C65%3A1%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318 |
After lead now we have tropical wood endegered species ! I am not Greenpeace militant, but if we can chose between eco-friendly or not why not choose eco.
It will just add some proudness in our small niche hobby. No offence here, just a friendly reminder. |
|
Downunder, that's one of the OEM plinths for the Technics, the same as my friend has. If you want my opinion, it sucks- the arm board is resonant and has a cavity to help the resonance. It is purely built for looks and would look good alongside a Pioneer receiver in a wood cabinet.
Funny about that. There are a few of us here that would not be caught dead listening to a 70s vintage Pioneer, but no worries about the Technics :) |
Ralph, I'll take all the Pioneer Exclusive tts you can find. No snobbery here. For that matter, there are top-of-the-line Kenwoods, Yamahas, and Denons that deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with the SP10 variants. Raul mentioned those tts somewhere up-thread from this post. But there are sufficient numbers of SP10s extant to have stimulated this revival of interest in maximizing their potential. Not so for the others. |
Lew, I was talking about a Pioneer receiver, not the table. I remember some of the Pioneer tables were not too bad, but the arms left a lot to be desired, as did that heavy Technics arm that was often found on the SP10 and SL1100s.
I always wanted an SP10 back in the old days but had to settle for the SL1100. Then everyone was telling me that belt drive was the big thing. Now DD is back... |
Ralph, sorry for my confusion. Could you be referring to the EPA-100, when you mention "that heavy Technics tonearm"? I have no opinion, but others say this is a really good unit. |
Silverprint, I own a Boston Audio Mat I, which is made of graphite. Is that the material you have in mind? As Cpk says, it does seem a little fragile in the context of the mat, but maybe a thick block of it would be much stronger. I think that stuff would be great for absorbing and dissipating energy, but you might want to combine it with something denser, for the mass effect alone. |
Ralph, your less than favorable comments on the "OEM plinths for the Technics" must have been intended for the Teak plinth. I first read it wrong, thinking you meant to reply to Lonestarsouth on the SAEC SBX-7 since that was an OEM plinth. That confused me further since the SAEC is so similar to your earlier description of a desirable plinth. To me the Teak looked like something anyone with basic woodworking skills could produce.
Like Lew, I'm also wondering about your possible reference to the EPA-100. I've read nothing but good reports on its construction and performance. If fact, with the adjustable damping feature, it could work with higher compliance cartridges than would otherwise be expected for an arm of that mass, as well as medium and low compliance, meaning it is very versatile. |
Albert, when you re-capped your sp10 mkII did you do the drive and circuit boards or just the power supply? |
Hello Lewm,
I've been a silent reader for a while... Thanks for the question. And yes, that's the material. It is available in different hardnesses-densities (the densest the harder).
My idea is to use it along with plywood using a very thick slab (about 2') in the middle of the "sandwich", in this way it will be protected, add mass with a diffrent resonace curve, and a quite dead material halfway. That slab will be also used as the base for the armboards (to be done from thick blocks of the same material, that i know is good for the purpose since i am already using it).
To further add mass I tought to make a bottom steel plate "a la" Porter, only I tought to make it bigger so that all the screws of the motor unit will go there. The "screws" will be made out of 1' brass (or steel?) tubes worked at both ends.
Now a few questions, one for Mr. Albert Porter (by chance we are colleagues... funny). Is it there any special warning/advice he can give about the center "screw"? You remove a cup and go in with the screw... but what's there (i am still waiting my unit..)?
The second question is more general. I plan to make those 6 big screws that will pass trough all the plinth and reach the bottom steel plate. Should those screws and the bottom plate have a rigid coupling to the whole structure, or should them (and the plate as well) be decoupled somehow (using a layer of neoprene around the tubes and over the plate)?
...ummm maybe this reading is too difficult (english is not my language, also), is it there a way to post some sketches here?
Well, as usual many thanks to everybody here... all informations and ideas are precious! |
Silverprint, Don't know what Albert is going to say, but in general it is not a good idea to decouple the tt and the plinth. The whole idea is to couple them as efficiently and completely as possible. Rubber grommets or any similar devices will defeat the purpose. As far as your plinth idea, I think it has real possibilities. Where and how have you got hold of thick pieces of graphite and the ability to machine them? |
Now a few questions, one for Mr. Albert Porter (by chance we are colleagues... funny). Is it there any special warning/advice he can give about the center "screw"? You remove a cup and go in with the screw... but what's there (i am still waiting my unit..)? I don't know of a center screw, only the brass rod that contact's the Technics bearing cup to drain. Nothing in my design penetrates the Technics in any way. The screws we choose go from the plinth bottom and into the factory tapped holes. Screws are original thread and non magnetic stainless steel. |
Hello Lewm and Albert and Many thanks.
Albert, I probably misunderstood when reading of your plinth on sound fountain, it seemed to me you put the rod in place of the bearing cup, working its end to suit, and felt a bit afraid of going in such mod. Having a rod touching it (with some pressure?) is easyier and safe. Thanks.
In fact Lewm answer was necessary and obvious (it appeared to my mind a couple of hours after posting...) I was so lost in finding a good way to organize the layers that I missed the point!
The graphite market is increasing for various different uses, metallury, batteries, chips (!) so there are many businesses around, big and small where the material is available. It is enough to have a look out of the audio market. Graphite is not exactlly cheap, but it seems that those company making audio products out of it are decuplicating the price of the material (at least...). I get mine from a friend in Rome, he's running a small business of fairly priced graphite audio pruducts and can cnc machine any sort of piece.
But I guess this info is not of much use: if you start shipping heavy manufacts overseas you'll probably loose the good price, I would have a look around searching for small companies selling graphite there in the US, they will very luckily have a cnc machine at hand and hopefully be willing to make a few pieces on design.
But... well, in case your planning a trip to Rome, bringing back some pieces (small) can be done!
|
Dear Silverprint, I doubt that "decuplicating" is a word in English, but it is a very good invention, and the meaning is obvious. Yes, there is a lot of decuplicating going on in the computation of the prices of audio products that derive from materials used in other applications. Sad but true. |
Hi Lewm!
True! It really seems i invented it! Funny... I am laughing of myself. Usually "englishing" latin words, specially with unusual terms, works well... well usually, not always!
If others don't get it "decuplicare" in italian means multiplying ten times. Does an english word meaning this exist? |
Olde English might suggest tenfold. 8^) |
Hi Lew, yes, I was referring to the EPA-100. My friend has used one for a while, only because he's not had the funds to replace it. He has one of those 'Mod Squad' versions, which was considerably better than the original, which he also has. So I've had a lot of exposure to both versions. I agree it is well-built, but it is also massive and the bearings are in the plane of the arm tube rather than the plane of the platter surface, which means that the arm has difficulty with warps and bass notes.
For clarity, the stock base I saw on eBay was what the MkII came with back in the 70s. |
This thread was about to fall off the first page. Mike and Albert, any time you do have anything to say about the MkII vs MkIII comparison, please let us know. My MkII is almost ready to go in a slate plinth. |
I'm on hold for testing until my preamp and phono return from Aesthetix.
I would be very interested what the MK2 does in a slate plinth. |
I never saw a Kaneta mod up close but only in Japanese magazines. The Kaneta approach make sense to me. I will not get into the power supply modification and I doubt that it's necessary. It might work better for SP10 Mark 1 since its power supply is not as sophisticated as Mark 2. Anyway, I don't know if any of you have taken the motor out of the chassis and if you do you will see it's bolted on a thin layer of aluminum flange. The chassis is in essence a box and it resonates. The ultimate mod would be to take the motor out of the chassis, extend the cables, and mount the motor onto a solid block of whatever material you think is good for fighting vibration, slate, wood, metal, whatever. I just feel that audiophiles who are spending thousands of dollars on a plinth that cost way more than the turntable itself should look into the flaw of the actual mounting scheme of the original design. It is one of the problems I have with typical idler table is that all these loose parts dangling under the platter and the bearing is mounted on a flimpsy chassis and then the chassis is bolted to an overkill plinth; the whole idea just turns me off. I just wish the idler wheel can be placed outside of the platter so the platter bearing can be mounted on something more solid. Notice there's a school of belt-drive tables refuse to mount their bearings on a box and the plinth is as small as possible to avoid big vibrating surface, such as the Simon Yorke or Brinkmann. The Teres idler approach makes sense to me. The SP10 is able to be mounted in such way with no problem. I intend to do that one day. Sigh,... when I have the time, of course. :) This is an exciting thread and it's great to see an excellent direct drive table like the SP10 finally getting the attention it deserves. Its' time to think outside of the Linn box. Happy building and happy holidays! |
Hiho, Go over to Lenco Lovers and take a look at the PTP3 top plate, made to conquer the very problems you cite as regards idlers. I'm working on that one, too. You can have a used Lenco and a PTP3 for under $500.
Do you think one could just remove the motor assembly from the existing SP10 mkII, extend the cables that go to the motor from the underslung part of the power supply, and then mount the motor in a plinth? All you'd need to do would be to craft a top cover for the tray of parts that lies underneath in the stock unit. Could conceivably be done without any fancy new electronics. Or could it? Albert, did you think of that? |
I took the motor out before. It's not hard to do at all. The motor is attached to a ribbon cable that is detachable to the pcb inside the chassis. One can get a matching ribbon cable connector and extend the cable and you can make the motor independent of the chassis. Obviously you will lose the function of the strobe light and magnetic brake. You will end up with a three piece monster: plinth for the motor, original chassis housing all the electronics for speed and on/off switching, and finally the power supply. It would look as elegant as the two piece combo but I firmly believe that's the ultimate. If you are savvy enough with electronics, you can put all the circuit boards in a customized enclosure or an amp chassis with switches. |
Correction: The three piece monster will NOT look as elegant as the tradition setup. |
the plan for the Steve Dobbins plinth for my Mk3 will be to remove the motor/platter from the Technics case. according to Steve; who has done a few of these Mk3's 'nude'; is that it further separates the Mk3 beyond the Mk2. since the Mk3 has quite a bit more torque than the Mk2, the casework is under much more stress, and limits control of resonance. directly attaching the motor to Steve's plinth design pays definite benefits. i did briefly hear Steve's own Mk3 with this design back in September in his room and it did sound wonderful.....but it was a very brief listen and i had just driven 500 miles....
in any case i am taking Steve's word for this and going 'nude' (without the casework) on the Mk3.
i do like the look of the stock Technics casework and how it integrates into my Mk2 plinth and how other Mk2 and Mk3 designs look with the case; such as Albert's.....compared to the 'nude' look. Steve is reworking his design from an aesthetic perspective for his next round of 'nude' Mk3's.
on a related note; i have put my Mk2 up for sale as those funds will pay for Steve's work on the Mk3 (and keep SWMBO happy). so i will not have both the Mk2 and Mk3 at the same time. i can still 'guess' later about how they compare but that is the best i will be able to do. |
All you'd need to do would be to craft a top cover for the tray of parts that lies underneath in the stock unit. Could conceivably be done without any fancy new electronics. Or could it? Albert, did you think of that? In theory removing the motor and installing in a more secure mounting is a good idea. Maybe I'll do that in the future. Right now I have the best sound I've ever had and with my preamp being upgraded and two new MC cartridges breaking in, I'm up to my neck in testing. |
Any update on new plinth designs or set ups in this thread?
The idea of removing the motor and installing separately from the stock chassis makes sense to me and I am more and more tempted to do that by the day. Now, I just need a way to cut a slate...
|
Any update on new plinth designs or set ups in this thread? Quite a few months have passed since my last comment and since then I've changed out my preamp, phono, cables and phono cartridges. I have two MK3 Technics, a MK2 Technics and completing yet another MK3 plinth. The plinth and electronics were equally stunning upgrades as already posted on my Technics MK3 system thread. I'll just say, you have not heard a MK3 until it's been electrically upgraded and rebuilt. A member of my group has the Steve Dobbins MK3 "nude" and was so taken with my electrical improvements he sent his off to my tech to be rebuilt like mine. |
I use the same tech as Albert, and I can confirm what he says. But Bill Thalmann would be the first to say that he is not the only man in the world who can restore the electronics of a MKII or III. The point is really that replacing the electrolytic caps throughout is a good idea when resurrecting any of these 30-year-old dd tables. Other upgrades to the parts, e.g., use of Schottky diodes, etc, are icing on the cake.
As regards the added benefits of removing the motor and platter totally from the brushed aluminum chassis to install the works alone in a plinth (be it wood or slate or whatever) is not something to be taken lightly. In the process, all the on-board electronics have to be moved outboard, of course. This makes the leads between the motor and its contol system commensurately much longer than the Technics engineers foresaw. I don't know whether this would have a negative effect on the servo system, but it might. The main weakness of the standard chassis is potentially the way the motor is bolted to it, which might allow movement or bending under stress at start up, but during play flexing should not be a problem. IMO, Albert's idea of supporting the bearing assembly with a steel rod imbedded in a heavy metal block probably mitigates any potential problem with flexing of the stock chassis. In sum, I decided against such a radical procedure. My SP10 Mk2A has been up and running in an 80-lb slate plinth for several months. Of course you know I am going to say it sounds great, and it does indeed. |
There's really nothing radical about it. It's rather reversible. The motor is just connected to one of the boards via a 12-pin connector and why do you even need to take the boards out of the stock chassis? Just leave them in there and you will have three pieces of hardware acting as a record player: the power supply, stock chassis, new plinth with motor. I know, they take up space. But making plinth just for the motor will be much easier, just cut a 6" hole on the plinth and mount the motor in it. That's it. As far as length is concern, I don't see extending few feet of cable would be a problem as long as the voltages remain the same. In fact the MK3 did exactly that by removing majority of the electronics onto the power supply chassis. Kaneta in Japan has been doing this type of mod for years. In fact I believe almost ALL direct drive can be benefited from this. I had over 30 direct drive turntables of various cost, and after examining almost all can be improved by removing the motor out of the stock chassis or plinth - most of them are either made of particle board or plastic or thin cast aluminum. They are basically a hollow box with fancy wood veneer. The Monaco turntable takes the same approach by having the electronics separately and have the motor mounted on something really solid. It's funny with the revival of idler drive turntables, all the audiophiles talk about regarding these vintage gems is the plinth. But when it comes to direct drive, it's a different story. Most people only cling on to just a few models like the SP10 or SP15 due their manual operation. And if you want the automatic operation from some turntables then, obviously, they are not good choices.
Currently, I am using the motor from a Pioneer PL-L1000 with a broken linear tracking arm so I decided to use just the motor and drive electronics. Pioneer motor and bearing is first grade with their excellent Stable Hanging Rotor (SHR)inverted bearing that is similarly employed in their flagship P-3 turntable. I installed the motor on a thick butcher block with cantilevered armboard and placed the electronics in a separate chassis. And it sounds excellent. In stock form, the motor is bolted to the bottom suspended plated that is made of wobbly plastic!! What an eyesore! I also have another unit with such mod so sometimes I tape drive one another. It's fun!
Of course not all DD turntables are good candidates. I would avoid doing this with certain brands such as Sony and Denon because they use a magnetic head to pick up signal from the platter's rim for the servo system. It's do-able but it's just more hassle. Some models have the pcb attached to the motor like the Technics SL-1200mk2, so that's not a good one. But the SL-1300/1400/1500mk2 series are excellent choices for such mod due to their detachable motor and nice dynamically balanced platter, which render them a notch above the boring SL-1200 - essentially an SL1500mk2 is an SP15 minus the 78rpm speed. But their tonearm is not as good so here's the chance to try something different.
I have a broken spare SP10, parts unit, that has speed issue so I am thinking of taking the motor and platter out and install on a new plinth and let it be driven by another SP10 acting as tape drive. As much as I like direct-drive I am also very fond of tape-drive with another turntable. I've been using these dual turntable set ups for a year now and I am really liking it.
|
Now, that's what I'm talking about!
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=vinyl&m=832368
The Steve Dobbins plinth looks great but the triangular plinth is just lovely. It would be nice to hear it as a motor tape-driving another platter since the MK3 has speed adjustment.... |
