Thanks guys for all the thoughtful responses. I put alot of effort into building my player. I am very pleased with its look. I prefer keeping the original top plate because i enjoy the black lenco78 chassis top plates looks sitting atop a honeystained 8 layer laquered coating plinth but more than that with the rest of my system it sounds super! All of that great sound is the result of addressing other areas of the system (which i'm sure everyone else already knows the importance of looking at every area of the system). I think what i'll do is come up with a method of mounting the motor somewhere else other than the top plate but will still keep the top plate. The original lenco78 top plate i have "cold welded" to the wood plinth with four 4 inch screws. I think this provides the same benefits as a ptp3. That is, the internal noise has a good channel/path to drain itself into the plinth just like the ptp3. I believe if i can mount the motor directly to the plinth and separate it from the top plate that i will have made the most effective gains in the area of transferring the least amount of noise getting to the record. On another note, i have been using a maple armboard but will soon be building a slate armboard to make comparisons. That will give me some personal experience/insight into the differences between slate and wood.
++++Dear Vertigo, Due to your rigorous requirements, the only opinion you are going to come to respect is your own.++++ (very observant)(kinda true) No, i just think we audiophiles could use a little more discipline , a bit more controlled comparisons so we can make better choices, quicker progress and pass on knowledge to new audiophiles. Alot of people have quit because they have become frustrated by their lack of progress and all the confusion about what sounds better and whats the straightest path to finding a system they enjoy. We think it'll take too long and be too much work to do controlled comparisons but i think we could reach our goals much quicker but instead to save time i think its taken us twice as long to get there! Well, i guess we're audio enthusiasts not scientists but i guess i am trying to get some clarity and inject some sanity into this hobby not just radical fedeism.
In a perfect audiogon world i only wish that people would post to threads and make comments about comparisons only after having taken care to assure the quality of their comments, conclusions. In a perfect world people would comment after doing this:
One of the most important things in "controlled comparisons" is "level
matching", making sure at the speaker terminals that the amp output ,
using a voltmeter, is exactly identical. when say comparing A product with B product, why? because it can fool
people into thinking, oh, product A has "more bass, more resolution, better
soundstaging" but really , all it might be is accidentally more volume added when trying to return to previous volume level
the other three important things are : taking care to remember to change only one thing in a system at a time , doing A B A listening not just A B . Make sure the system is fully warmed up.
Do these four things and you've got a pretty good indication of the
results , if the differences are huge/negligable, more bass/less bass etc, etc and in a way that is
meaningful and repeatable to us and to other audiophiles.
++++Dear Vertigo, Due to your rigorous requirements, the only opinion you are going to come to respect is your own.++++ (very observant)(kinda true) No, i just think we audiophiles could use a little more discipline , a bit more controlled comparisons so we can make better choices, quicker progress and pass on knowledge to new audiophiles. Alot of people have quit because they have become frustrated by their lack of progress and all the confusion about what sounds better and whats the straightest path to finding a system they enjoy. We think it'll take too long and be too much work to do controlled comparisons but i think we could reach our goals much quicker but instead to save time i think its taken us twice as long to get there! Well, i guess we're audio enthusiasts not scientists but i guess i am trying to get some clarity and inject some sanity into this hobby not just radical fedeism.
In a perfect audiogon world i only wish that people would post to threads and make comments about comparisons only after having taken care to assure the quality of their comments, conclusions. In a perfect world people would comment after doing this:
One of the most important things in "controlled comparisons" is "level
matching", making sure at the speaker terminals that the amp output ,
using a voltmeter, is exactly identical. when say comparing A product with B product, why? because it can fool
people into thinking, oh, product A has "more bass, more resolution, better
soundstaging" but really , all it might be is accidentally more volume added when trying to return to previous volume level
the other three important things are : taking care to remember to change only one thing in a system at a time , doing A B A listening not just A B . Make sure the system is fully warmed up.
Do these four things and you've got a pretty good indication of the
results , if the differences are huge/negligable, more bass/less bass etc, etc and in a way that is
meaningful and repeatable to us and to other audiophiles.