As I posted I hear/heard several Sp-10s configurations in several different audio systems, including at least two-three SP-10s of the people that posted in this thread.
IMHO no one of those SP-10s can even the quality performance of a " naked " Sp-10. Raul, this is why I get upset with you, making a comment like that with absolutely no foundation. It's obvious the comparison was aimed at my system and Steve Dobbins system since you were a guest at both of our homes. How anyone can audition a system with everything different than yours, speakers, amps, cables, cartridge, room treatments and all the other variable. Add in the fact you traveled from another country, had a few hours to listen and without your own version or "mod" of the table is beyond me. I've ask your advice on moving magnet cartridges since you have so much experience with them but when you post something so off the wall as you have, I begin to question your test methods and the validity of your opinion. Based on what you've posted it appears Hiho is wrong, Kaneta is wrong, Steve Dobbins is wrong, Mike Lavigne is wrong and I'm wrong. Reminds me of Jimmy Durante dancing with the Radio City Rockettes when he looks into the crowd and says "What do you know, they're all out of step but me." |
Dear Raul, You were once kind enough to post photos of your SP10 with "no plinth". As I recall it does sit in a piece of plywood, but it is supported underneath the chassis by some Audio Technica or similar compliant "feet". I always thought that this was the key to your satisfaction with that setup, rather than absence of a plinth per se. As for mounting the arm on a pod that is totally outboard from the chassis and not physically associated with it, I do think that is a bad idea. But to each his own; certainly a few tt-makers now do it that way too, altho I know of no vintage tts designed that way. In your earlier photos I got the impression that your tonearm is mounted on the plywood that also is forming a surround for your SP10, thereby creating a coupling of sorts between the two. I thought that was OK. Anyway, we can argue theory all day long. As you suggest, the proof of the pudding is in the listening. I still like slate; I think it's uniquely suited to this endeavor. I think slate is way better than some of the materials that have traditionally been used, e.g., wood, marble, granite. |
Raul, do you use any footers for the "naked" SP10 or you just let its bottom cover or belly acting as support?
Any picture you can show us?
|
Dear Lewm/Hiho: I agree with you that the DD stock DD plinths degrade its quality performance and I'm still " against " any plinth with the SP-10s.
I'm still using one of my SP-10s ( with out electronic mods. )with out plinth and tonearm mounted in a stand alone tonearm-tower ( I don't either " buy " the statement that the tonearm/TT has to be in the same " house ", the ears tell me I don't have to worry about: huge improvement. ).
As I posted I hear/heard several Sp-10s configurations in several different audio systems, including at least two-three SP-10s of the people that posted in this thread.
IMHO no one of those SP-10s can even the quality performance of a " naked " Sp-10.
I like all those plinths ( especially the SD ones. ) that are just beautiful but if you don't care about how that/your TT looks and cares how to achieve the top quality performance you can/could achieve with the Sp-10s ( and other great DD out there. ) my advise is to try the full " naked " alternative ( you can always return to your today TT configuration. ).
IMHO I think that is worth to try it, at the " end of the day " why everyone already work on all those SP-10 mods ( electronics, mats, plinths, cables, etc, etc. )?, I understand that is to improve its quality performance: well what I'm saying is that after all those SP-10 mods there is more " land " to explore in favor of better quality performance ( TT neutrality. ).
Anyway I think that this thread and its posts are saying to today TT designers/builders that they have to have better products in the near future because all those vintage TT's are in many ways even better than today TT designs.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
I plan to have no cosmetic embellishment. I like everything exposed, or naked if you will. :-) Not having a spouse helps. But if that's an aesthetic issue for some people, I understand. I am the kind of audiophile who ALWAYS loses the screws on an amp or preamp because I am always tinkering with the inside, such as changing caps, tubes, etc,... so the covers are always off.
I like things neat and organize just like next guy but I just can't sit still for too long so I always end up messing up the sound. LOL. However, when listening to music I am like a zen master, completely immerse myself into it, even AM radio. I guess there's a difference between listening to music and listening to sound. The day when sound and music become indistinguishable then that's the day I stop messing around with gears.
|
FWIW, I have removed and replaced the platters from two different SP10s, a MkII and a Mk2A, in order to lubricate their bearings and in order to replace electrolytic caps in the electonic module. (In medical training the aphorism regarding procedures is "see one, do one, teach one".) I simply forgot about the flat area on the edge of the platter because it is not visible when the tt is put back together. However, as I recall, it is pretty narrow with no ridges to prevent a belt or tape from wandering off course. But if it works for you, that's all that counts.
I know all about the Kaneta modification, but he re-designed the electronics (as far as I can tell without being able to read any of the Japanese text), so his work is (probably) not relevant to the question of whether lengthening the leads will negatively affect function of the stock servo mechanism. Again, if it works for you, then I may be wrong to worry about it.
So I now finally get the picture that you use the stock chassis intact as a housing for the electronics that don't go into the plinth. Do you do anything cosmetically to cover the hole left by the motor/platter et al?
Thanks for the idea. |
You do NOT have to take the electronics away. You are doing absolutely NOTHING to the electronics nor the switches. The motor is mounted to the stock chassis and there is a bundle of 12 wires soldered to a 12-pin connector connected to one of the circuit boards. All you're doing is to extend the wires by a few feet and mount the motor to something more solid like a slate, plywood, or butcher block or whatever. The stock chassis is acting as housing for the electronics and switches, so for the Start/Stop and speed change functions you still need to use stock chassis.
Apparently you never removed the platter out of the SP10. The platter has about 1/4" flat area below the beveled edge. If I install two SP10 motors outside of the stock chassis then I can have one platter driving the next one without any speed adjustment because they are one to one ratio in diameter and I will use 1/4" magnetic tape, something thin to have no effect on speed. I have done this experiment with two Pioneer turntables before and I prefer the sound in this arrangement than in DD mode. But DD is usually a little more dynamic though. If I have the budget when I win the lottery, I would use a SP10mk3 to tape-drive a Micro-Seiki platter, since the Mk3 has speed adjustment.
Here are some pictures from a Japanese website applying the Kaneta mod so ignore the DIY electronics but the images give you a better idea of the motor and chassis.
http://homepage2.nifty.com/~mhitaste/audiotop/audio_apparatus_page/sp-10mk2.html
The cut out hole can be between 5-7/8" to 6".
|
I fully agree that nearly all production dd tables can be improved by improving their plinths. And I take your point about the suspension of the motor in the SP10. Albert addresses this issue by supporting the motor/bearing assembly via a brass rod that is imbedded in a dense metal block. I am using Albert's support system underneath my slate plinth. What do you do about the on/off switch when you take the electronics away? Also, can you answer my question; is a 6-inch diameter hole correct? I have a remaining blank slate plinth, a company with a waterjet machine, and a second MkII, so I may try it too.
By the way, how do you get a belt around the SP10 platter in order to use it to drive a second platter? The SP10 platter has a beveled edge. |
The stock 12-strand wires come out of the motor assembly to the connector is about 8" long. I would extend the wires by at least three feet. I have three SP10's so I plan to do this soon. The important thing is that in the stock form, the motor is bolted to an 1/8" cast aluminum and the motor just hangs there. Now, imagine the motor mount directly to a thick slab of slate or wood or whatever material you like to use, don't you think that's better than the stock form? If you use the stock chassis, I don't care how wonderful your plinth will be your motor is still bolted to a thin sheet of aluminum hanging there. Just spend the time one day and carefully take the motor out of the stock chassis and then examine it yourself and you will know exactly what I am talking about. It's not rocket science. Almost ALL direct-drive can be improved this way. And for whatever reason, if you don't like the sound, just put it back to stock form - it's all reversible. The reason I haven't done it sooner is that I don't have the tools to cut slate! I would suggest keeping the stock chassis to house all the electronics because everything is all there with the buttons and switches, why re-invent the wheel? Unless it's an aesthetic issue and you just want to play around, go right ahead!
I plan to have two SP10 set up this way so I can have one tape-driving the other platter so it can be used as direct-drive and belt-drive. Fun!
|
Hiho, Are you saying that for the SP10 MKII you just lengthen the wires from the chassis-bound electronics to the motor, when you install the motor only into a dedicated plinth? How long are the leads between the motor and its electronics when you get done with this mod? If it works, I am all for it. I just wonder whether it is dramatically better than just installing the whole assembly in a big piece of slate, as I and others have done. This says nothing about Mike Lavigne's MkIII set-up, of course. Despite what I wrote, I am tempted to try this with my second MkII, but I would also re-install the electronics into a cosmetically nice chassis. Six inches diameter for both the MkII and the MkIII? |
Yes, Albert, getting involved is one of the major fun of this hobby instead of always being lead by the nose by magazines and the so called experts. Glad to know the SP10 is in the "big boys league" instead of the doghouse.
By taking the motor out of the stock chassis really fires up the imagination, the sky is the limit. And this way the plinth plays an even more important role than before. Glad people are giving new life (and love) to these classic direct-drive turntables as the DD genre was getting very little press time for two decades.
I hope I will get to do that kind of plinth soon. Can't wait to see your new version in the future! :-)
By the way, for those on a smaller budget the SL1300/1400/1500mk2 series, which is essentially an SP15 with tonearm, is also perfect for this kind of treatment.
|
Hiho,
Lots of ways to do a plinth. I visited Mike about the time Steve delivered the plinth you linked to. Mike himself will tell you that these rebuilt tables will "play with the big boys" and his reference is the Rockport Sirius.
I like Steve's design and others as well. I agree the triangle design posted to that thread is unique, that's why we audiophiles get involved and do these things. |
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.... |
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.
|
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. |
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. |
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...
|
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. |
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. |
Correction: The three piece monster will NOT look as elegant as the tradition setup. |
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. |
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 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! |
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. |
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. |
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. |
Olde English might suggest tenfold. 8^) |
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? |
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. |
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!
|
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. |
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? |
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! |
Albert, when you re-capped your sp10 mkII did you do the drive and circuit boards or just the power supply? |
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. |
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, 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. |
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, 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. |
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 :) |
|
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. |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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 :) |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
