Turntable and Rack vibration control


Hi,
I moved from a Nouvelle Platine Verdier to a Loricraft Garrard 301. The big change with this move was that the Verdier comes with a terrific implementation of pneumatic suspension feet which kept the TT almost floating and hence great isolation from vibration. The result was always a noise/grain free playback and super clean backgrounds. With the Garrard, the plinth is typical custom made stacked birch ply with standard steel cones as footers. When placed directly on the rack the background is noisy, the images muddle up and overall music is not well sorted.

I do not expect the Garrard to be as quiet as the Verdier but I know it should not be this noisy either. In fact the Verdier also sounded noisy when I placed it directly on cones bypassing the pneumatic suspension feet. 

I use a Hutter Racktime rack which is not like an overbuilt audiophile rack. It is more like an open frame rack with lightweight supports. It is a bit like a Rega TT, not very damped or controlled. The rack has pointy steel feet which rests on brass spike plates (mine is an wooden floor). I guess this implementation is not sophisticated enough to keep away vibrations and let the TT play quietly. 

I am looking at two levels of solutions:
1. Replace the existing steel feet and brass plate with a quality vibration control footer below the rack
2. Replace the stock steel cone below the TT plinth with a better footer/platform.

I have tried Sorbothane, Squash balls kind of tweaks, while they reduce noise they slow down the music too.
I have also tried Stillpoints and Finite Elemente footers under the rack. They make the sound thin and metallic IMO. Platforms like Minus-K are too expensive so I have not considered them yet.

I am looking suggestions here, probably footers and vibration control devices that are more musically oriented yet well engineered like Shun Mook, Harmonix, SSC or something like an HRS platform ?
pani

Showing 10 responses by anvil_turntables

I've sold my footers and record enhancers to many idler type TT owners with plinths like yours. They will completely resolve your issue !
https://www.anvilturntables.com/

You will need to isolate the motor from plinth whether attached or not, or preferably reduce motor vibration until it is virtually non existent 

Bruce
Completely agree. Multiple motors, multiple belts etc. often compounds noise.  Many manufacturers bearings produce so much friction they need either large or multiple motors to operate properly. A single AC motor operated with  reduced voltage ( only possible with low friction platter bearing) solves many issues with no loss of dynamics. Alternately motors can be isolated enough to prevent most transfer although the belt is still a conduit. Generally the more rigid the belt the more potential for noise to get to the stylus albeit at a higher frequency which is easier to nullify. Often however sound quality improves enough ( micro dynamics/shading/transient Fidelity)with thread type belts that I would still prefer this method. A good heavy platter and oil well bearing will help swamp any noise as will the platter matt. 
Also, I'm not a fan of flywheels. They add unnecessary cost and complexity and add a second often poorly designed bearing. Much better to just add more weight to the platter. Don't get too caught up in the noise issue. Its not that hard to deal with in a GOOD all around design. I would take the 300 rpm motor because I like the larger surface area and grip that a larger pulley provides.

Hope this helps


Sorry but I can't let this one go. Stylus drag is real but has a negligible effect in a well designed turntable. Generally, turntables suffer from way too much torque rather than not enough. Eliminating bearing friction is a better approach than an oversize motor. A great bearing makes a small motor act as it is HUGE. EMT's analagy is loaded with a bit of hyperbole to say the least .  Only a crap design will be hindered by stylus drag.  
Get a different bearing and replace the rubber belt with a thread and those issues will  go away. It's not the motor torque it's the compliance of the belt and the relatively high friction bearing in your deck. Idlers and directs have their own challenges. Good examples of each sound more similar than different. 
Cheers
I'm simply stating my opinion which I believe represents the least compromised design. Having said that I'm a big fan of all turntables, at any price point wether it be belt, direct or idler drive. Furthermore I have experimented a fair bit with high torque motors and found no advantage regarding dynamics and noted a few disadvantages. In my design I am actually able to run the motor at half it's torque rating which netted on the fly improvements across the board. I'm open minded about it however but after a fair amount of testing this is where I've landed. 
I'll just end this part of the discussion by saying not all belt drives suffer that issue.  It's not endemic to a low torque design.  Maybe I can offer a tweak though. Disconnect your belt and give a push up to 33 rpm.let me know how long it takes to get to O.