Turntable upgrade recommendations: SME vs AMG vs Technics vs other

@cleeds when you say regarding the SM strain gauge "I’ve heard the Soundsmith system and while it may not be to my taste" what did you not like about it?

The Russian nouveau riches have a proverb "Loot triumphs over evil".

But it doesn't work in audio!!!

$400K system can sound great but it also can sound horrible. It depends more from a person who put this system together vs money spent. This person has to have knowledge, skills, experience and taste.

When I visited audiophile homes and audio shows, I didn't find correlation between sound quality and money spent. On the contrary, for some reason the most expensive systems on audio shows I visited always sounded bad, at least for my taste.

@mijostyn, the MSL cartridges are also based on similar design principles of very low impedance and relatively high output. There’s no doubt these are great systems, but the Signature Platinum and even Ultra Eminent are in a different price league at 10k and 7k respectively. 

Another vote for a Kuzma table/arm. Last week heard at a dealer a Stabi R 4POINT9 combo. Great soundstage width and depth and very focused sounding.

Dear @earthtones  : " has been quite innovative with the Strain Gauge ..."

Not really innovative because strain gauge cartridges exist several years ago with designs by Panasonic  ans Sao Win ( between others designers. ) and those vintage designs were designed to run with RIAA recorded LPs.

 

The SS design can't mimic the necessary inverse RIAA eq because its design is " different " and that's why comes with its dedicated phono stage, you can's use it with any other phono stage. No, it's a design for other kind of LP recordings but not for the ones that comes with the RIAA curve.

 

R.

@drbond - a spindle weight goes against the Rega philosophy 180 degrees. Roy is against weight and it may impact the TT PSU which is designed to move a very lightweight platter. You don't need that to eliminate the reverberation you are hearing -  Isolation/vibration control for sure will do that, but verify that whatever you use is effective with something as light as the P8 at only 10 pounds.

 

The only thing that worked for me was the Townshend seismic platform with the smallest possible pods (AA), which eliminates the worry of where to put the podiums or hockey pucks (which I use under my phono and amp) - not individual podiums. New turntable mat - maybe - I tested a few because my Rega mat kept lifting up occasionally when changing records, but I didn't hear any improvement and most still lifted up, so I just put a couple very small pieces of double sided scotch tape under the mat on top of the platter. Plus the black mat on the Rega table is a classic.

SME would definitely be a step up, especially with their top arm, but it will be 4-8 times the cost of the P8. Good news is that if you unload the P8 you will get a good % of your expenditure back. I'd be interested to hear your impression if you get the SME keeping the cartridge and phono stage the same. If you change multiple things at one time it will be hard to tell what improvement was due to each change. I've had that happen. Oh well, there are bigger problems in the world.

 

Dear @dover ​@drbond  : In that SME review comparison exiast a very important difference that's that the 15A comes with the inferior 309 tonearm but my advise to the OP is to buy the 15 with the V tonearm.

 

drbond, you still have a very good alternative through Rega with a departure design from the 8 that's the RP10 with better tonearm too.

Even that could be not the best reference when MF made the SAT DD 100K TT he compared its quality performance against what he listened through his review with the RP 10 and this could be important to you.

 

In the other side, you can always go for the FMA 123 that still is a superlative unit and less expensive than the 223.

 

R.

@lewm - you certainly are not a cheapskate with all those cartridges. I assume you have several turntables as well. 

I like to think of myself as more "value conscious" than a cheapskate as 99% of people who are non-audiophiles would think I am crazy to have a low 5 figure total stereo investment and equal on the software (records) side.

I might have thought I was crazy if I was looking at me now when I was starting out the audio quest back when I was in college.

Everything is relative, and I guess if $70K is monopoly money to someone, that expenditure on a phono stage is reasonable with a total stereo (bad) investment of $400K or more, especially if it is a vinyl only source system like I have. For some reason, $400K for an entire system is not as shocking to me as $70K for a phono stage or $10K for a power cable.

@edgewear , The Mutech is a very interesting cartridge and it looks like a reasonable value but, I would tend to lean towards a My Sonic cartridge like the Ultra Eminent EX or the Signature Platinum. All three are suitable for a transimpedance phono stage. For those who are not aware, the Channel D Line C has been upgraded to the 3.0 series in both performance and price. A loaded one is around $7000. It can include a second MC input either voltage or transimpedance and a MM input for a total of three inputs. It also can include a calibrated RIAA circuit (ultra high precision) and an RIAA bypass for computer corrected RIAA.  It has an 16 Hz subsonic filter, a stereo/mono switch and a polarity inversion switch. With a cartridge like the Ultra Eminent EX it has 80 dB of gain!

@drbond , There is another thread on the new Transrotor tonearm. It is a beautiful arm and will fit just about any turntable. I think putting it on an Oracle Delphi would make a stunning high performance combination every bit as good as a 20/2 but with looks. Check it out!

@dover

Thanks, yes I’m really enjoying the Ypsilon Hyperions and the pre-amplifier!

Now, I’m looking at an analog / vinyl update, although the Rega P8 does sound quite good, although it does need some "tweeks" to help it: some (temporary) isolation footers (in the form of a hockey puck stacked on a practice puck) and an LP spindle weight help alot with the excess reverberation that I hear through the Rega P8, and really does improve the sound quality: perhaps Rega should institute something like this?

Yes, I’m leaning towards SME now. Since I’m enjoying the Rega with those tweeks, I’m not in a hurry, but I will be interested to hear the difference between the two. It looks like I’ll go ahead with the Ortofon Verismo cartridge with whichever SME I end up with. . .

Thanks.

Lewm, with the Proteus now out of production, you might focus on Mutech instead. While I haven’t heard it, the design brief is very similar and designer Kanda San supposedly had close ties with Transfiguration before it folded. In fact the body of the Mutech Kanda and Transfiguration Orpheus are identical. If I’m not mistaken the pricing of the Mutech Hayabusa (export model) is still around the 4K mark. Not cheap(skate), but quite reasonable in today’s market of ‘trophies for the rich’.

@drbond 

After your earlier thread on amplifiers and preamps it was great to see you have purchased the Ypsilon amps - they are excellent.

With regard to the SME 15A versus the 20/3 - the 20/3 is a decent step up in resolution, solidity, and sound staging. The 20/3 bridges the gap between the 20/2 and the 30/2. By comparison the 15A is an upgraded model 10.

from the HiFi+ review of the 15A

I have long been a fan of the SME 20/3 and, as it was to hand, I put the two up against one another to see how they differed. The four footed and pricier turntable with the mighty Model V arm delivers a more solid, assured, and three dimensional sound than its sibling. It produces more depth of image and greater resolution of reverb and harmonics, too. Essentially the character is the same, but you get more of the detail off the disc.

You have a very good system that deserves the 20/3 level of performance.

The 30/2 is up another notch but if you can buy a 20/3 new vs a 30/2 second hand I would be tempted to go with new, you never really know how tonearms have been handled, no matter how knowledgeable the owner, and bearings are easily damaged through mishandling.

Something to consider - if you put a reasonably priced good quality MC in the 20/3 you will get a better result than putting a more expensive cartridge in the cheaper deck.

By the way nobody answered your original question -

SME vs AMG vs Technics

SME has a sense of ease and grandeur - very smooth, excellent soundstaging, and quite transparent. If you are familiar with Spendor loudspeakers - the SME has similar qualities - very smooth, unforced presentation that allows you to listen into the music. Superb on classical. I have listened to the SME with a variety of cartridges - 2 of the best for me were the Soundsmith Paua and Van den Hug MC - both presenting great level of detail with musicality.

The AMG I have heard is very smooth, but I found the AMG with their own arm/cartridge underwhelming. Slow. I know someone here who replaced the AMG fairly quickly after purchasing due to lack of dynamics and energy.

The Technics - presents fairly lean and clean.

Of the 3 I would recommend the SME.

Others to check out would be the Brinkmann Balance and Kuzma M/4Point11.

The Kuzma which I have heard at length and fettled, is a very easy TT/arm to set up for folk that don't do TT set up often. The Brinkmann is a great deck - a legacy product. Some of the Brinkmann Balance owners prefer the Kuzma 4Point11 arm instead of the Brinkmann arm as a combo.

Best of luck.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@sokogear 

A 400k system should be world class.  I'm glad that people are enjoying their music so much that they want to spend it on a system!  

Edgewear, Your list of cartridges you've owned is pretty close to my list of cartridges I would like to hear.  Specifically the Transfig Proteus and the two Ortofons.  At the risk of blasphemy, I'd like to compare them to my favorite MI cartridges from days of yore, as well as to the lesser expensive LOMCs I do own, like the MC2000, MC7500, Koetsu Urushi, AT ART7, ZYX UNIverse. (Yeah, I guess owning those disqualifies me from total cheapskatehood.)  I've been looking for a nice used Proteus, in fact, since they've gone out of production.

@drbond - wow….a waiting list for a $70K phono stage. I wonder how many they actually make and how many people are on the waiting list. Also, with this kind of money being thrown around, I hope they are maximizing their listening room, which is as (or more) important as their components.

I heard that the winning system at an audio show had a van den Hul cartridge and phono stage that were around $20K total, as part of a $400K system that beat systems costing over a million dollars.

Perhaps these Swiss marketed components are not reviewed because they can’t possibly be seen as a good buy. Maybe the best sounding but only meant for those spending for what for them is Monopoly money.

it must be nice…..but I don’t think I would ever spend that much regardless of whether or not I could afford it as comfortably as what I spent on my system. I would figure out a better use for the $$$ ithrough a charity or relative.

I wonder if that makes me a cheapskate as @lewm says he is. Most people think my music hobby is extravagant.

@sokogear

To answer your question about how many people buy $10k cartridges and $70k phono stages: probably alot more than either you or I think, or could imagine. Many of these high end manufacturers are based in Switzerland, probably for a reason: lots of money from all over the world to buy their products, and the $70k FM223 phono linearizer (phono stage) has a 2-3 month wait list. Look at the new cars these days: $200k cars selling for $350 because the manufacturer can only make 1000 a year (e.g. Porsche GT3), and that’s not even touching Lamborghini, Ferrari, Bugatti, et al.  In other markets, look at Rolex watches:  a $12k Rolex new is selling for $40k used.  In that market, a $70k phono linearizer could seem like a bargain!

I think Soundsmith, for one, has been quite innovative with the Strain Gauge and the Hyperion, plus improvements like DEMS (Dynamic Energy Management System) across cartridge lines.

Dear @edgewear  : "" Comparing new and vintage cartridges in my own system over the years has confirmed the impression that no major sonic breakthroughs have been accomplished over the last 30-40 years of cartridge design. Not by Ortofon and not by others. But I’ll admit, prices did go through the roof. ""

 

I totally agree with you and is what I posted several times here and in other forums. Price gone well not gone but runned as a Ferrari Enzo in cartridges with out a true palpable benefit.

 

I never had the opportunity to listen the Xquisite cartridge but perhaps is the only cartridge through the years with a NEW design characteristic:

 

 

 

R.

How many cartridges over $7500 can possibly be sold every year? And so many manufacturers, some who only make cartridges.

 

Lyra, Koetsu, Ortofon, van den Hul, Soundsmith, My Sonic Lab, Clear Audio, Dynavector, and even Grado are brands I've heard of that have cartridges >$7500. Are all these marketing/halo effect offerings are they actually readily available?

Also....a $70K phono stages I saw mentioned? How many of those have EVER been sold? What are these things made out of?

 

Lewm, while I have nowhere near the scope of experience as Raul, or any personal experience with those 10k+ cartridges, I do own a number of modern (near) top performers like Ortofon A95 and Anna, Transfiguration Proteus, Accuphase AC-6 (same as MSL) and vdHul Colibri XPW. Without reservation these are truly great cartridges, but not in a different league than Miyabi Standard, Ikeda 9 Rex or AT1000mc, to name but a few. I seriously doubt that would be the case with those cartridges that break the 10k barrier.

@rauliruegas

 

Thanks for your direction to the SME model 15A with series V tonearm. That is about the same price as an SME model 20/3A with series V tonearm. Would you recommend the model 20/3A over the model 15A?

edge, I own both of those, too. However, as a verifiable "cheapskate", I have never stepped up to purchase a modern cartridge that is acknowledged to be top rung. For that reason, I cannot claim to know how the current state of the art would compare to the MC2000 or even to my favorite MI type cartridges. I own some near SOTA cartridges but none that is really at the top. Raul does have such listening experiences, on the other hand. So I am not about to contradict his apparent conviction that we have come a long way. (I do ask myself the question how much better can a >$10,000 cartridge get, compared to the ones I like best in my systems.) For sure, the commercial sector wants us to believe that the trend is ever onward and upward. Like you, I expect its more horizontal with little ticks upward every once in a while.

I just read the specs of the Verisimo.  I wonder why they quote lateral, rather than vertical, compliance.  I do believe that a major virtue of the MC2000 is its high vertical compliance.  The data on the Verisimo do not permit a direct comparison of compliance parameters.

 

 

 

@rauliruegas, with dozens of mc’s in my possession I have promised myself ( and my wife): no more cartridges. So I will not hear the Verismo in my own system, but I will get a chance to hear it at a local retailer I’ve known for many years. I will bring my own A95 and Anna and we’ll do a comparison in a controlled environment. The system used will likely be SME 15 table with V tonearm, Gryphon amplification and Harbeth 40 series speakers. Or something else they carry on a similar level. If and when that happens I’ll report our findings.

@lewm, I might bring along the MC2000 (and perhaps the MC7500) as well for an interesting historic perspective. Comparing new and vintage cartridges in my own system over the years has confirmed the impression that no major sonic breakthroughs have been accomplished over the last 30-40 years of cartridge design. Not by Ortofon and not by others. But I’ll admit, prices did go through the roof.

I would love to hear or even read about a head to head comparison between the MC2000 and the Verissimo. Not at all because I dream the MC2000 is better but only because that would be a great way to dissect out the improvements that nearly 30 years of tinkering have wrought. It would have to be done on top of the line equipment and using the exact same devices (tonearm, turntable, phono, etc) in each case. If I could not be present myself, it would be great to have the evaluations of 2 or 3 experienced listeners. MF is in a position to do these sorts of comparisons, but he probably wouldn’t, because of vested financial interests. The trick would be to find a mint NOS MC2000. For that matter, the comparison could be done with any of several of the many models that lie chronologically between the MC2000 and the Verissimo. Raul has already intimated that the A95, Anna, and Verissimo are quite different sounding, one from the other. Yet they are only separated by a couple of years of development.

Dear @drbond  : I think that you don't need to buy that 30/2 when the new 15 with the V tonearm can gives you at least 90% of a new 30/2 quality performance.

Now it's a hard call against a new 30/2 but vs a 27 year old 30/2 the call is different because it's not that SME can check up the used TT but that through all those 27 years SME made it a lot of refinements to its TTs with out notice for the customers.

Next is a review of the 15 but with the 309 tonearm that's inferior quality performer than the V class levels:

 

R,

Dear @edgewear  : Maybe you have to own it. It's unique because almost all was improved including suspension damping. Ortofon never put in the market a cartridge with the Verissimo " credentials " just as a MK2 " something ".

I had the opportunity to listen with a new  audio friend that as you owns the Anna and I owned the 95.

 

For me the " colourful " was and is a Anna design characteristic that in some ways was a departure from the other cartridges when started in the market. For me too the Verissimo has a more natural color the MUSIC color and at the same time has a natural balance over the frequency range.

Asd with the 95 the Verissimo is different performer than the Anna, better quality performer a little more near to the live MUSIC,

 

R.

@rauliruegas, I had noticed that the pricing of the Verismo with diamond cantilever is about the same as the regular MC Anna with boron, so that is indeed a positive step in contrast to the mostly upward trend in high end audio pricing.

Have you heard it yet? If so, how does it compare sonically to MC Anna and A95? I have both and sonically these are pretty far apart in character, despite similar motor, cantilever/stylus and SLM titanium body. The A95 is very fast and neutral, while Anna sound more voluptuous and colourful. Sonically they seem to reflect their ‘body shapes’, which might suggest the Verismo should be somewhere in between, adopting the strengths of both models with the added advantage (presumably) of a diamond cantilever. Does that make sense?

@drbond , The calculator is a rough guide as cartridge compliance can vary even with the best manufacturers. You tune the tonearm and cartridge with a test record by adding mass to the head shell. Starting out with a tonearm on the light side is always the best thing to do then you add mass till you get the lateral resonance down between 8 and 10 Hz. There are many types of head shell weights available. Soundsmith makes a very nice set of graded cartridge screws that work great with SME arms.

@edgewear , The Anna Diamond's achilles heal is that it is very low compliance which means you have to use a more massive arm and tolerate accelerated record wear. The vinyl has to do more work to move the stylus. But, it's motor is excellent. Very few cartridges can attain the low distortion levels of the Anna Diamond. The Verismo is the culmination of all this research. It is a more compliant cartridge with an ultra low resonance body and the low distortion levels of the Anna. The price is also a bit more realistic. To my mind only Lyra and MSL make cartridges as sophisticated. 

Just to confuse things further, there is also Clearaudio. I mention it because it uses a magnetically levitated bearing (and in some models a magnetic drive system. The bearing results in a very "quiet" turntable. Possibly not as quiet as an air bearing system but very simple in application. Again, you really do need to listen. For example for me, SME turntables, while objectively excellent, sound a little mechanical and sterile. Also, you need a dealer who has the experience to at least replicate the essential qualities of your system because that will have an impact on your choice too.

@rauliruegas, what new characteristics do you attribute to the MC Verismo? All the things described in the link are tried and tested Ortofon technologies that are already used in MC Anna, Windfeld Ti and A95. On the basis of this the Verismo can be seen as an A95 with a skirt or as a less bulbous Anna in a tight fitting evening dress. The diamond cantilever is also the same as in Anna Diamond. As such it nicely fits a niche within the Ortofon range, especially as A95 is no longer available. So I’m interested to learn what is so special about Verismo?

@rauliruegas

Yes, thank you for directing me to that vinyl engine calculator. So the weight of the cartridge does play a role in affecting the resonance frequency, which does put the Ortofon Verismo right in the middle of the ideal range with an 11g tonearm. It does look like the ideal cartridge!

Yes, I don’t doubt the FM223 is the ideal phono stage, but currently I’m having difficulty rationalizing a $70k expense for a phono stage, when I’m just gaining significant interest in LP’s, as I probably only have 200-300 in my collection, mostly classical, but also other acoustic (folk, bluegrass, jazz, etc).

Would you buy a 27 year old SME 30/2 turntable without sending it to SME for a check-up? Would the main bearings need to be replaced after 27 years?

Thanks.

Dear @drbond : " Add the weight of the cartridge to the effective weight of the tonearm to get total effective tonearm weight, in order to determine the best compliance in a cartridge? "

 

You have a misunderstood.because what we want through the know parameters: cartridge compliance and the tonearm effective mass+cartridge weigth+cartridge screws weigth is to know the resonance frequency in between: cartridge/tonearm that should be inside the " ideal " resonance frequency range of 8hz to 12hz.

 

In the other side the Ortofon Anna Diamond is an " exhausted " design that comes from around 10 years now.

The Verissimo model is the Ortofon " ultimate " design incorporating new cartridge characteristics by the very first time in any Ortofon cartridge and obviously the best of the Ortofon knowledge level and skills.

 

The cartridge is a departure from the very well regarded Anna where instead of those heavy 16grs. goes to only 9grs and with a healthy compliance of 13cu that will track every LP recorded groove. A very hard to beat cartridge quality performance by any today LOMC cartridge.

 

As the 223 you don’t need to listen it before buy it, as FM Acoustics is FM Acoustics Ortofon is Ortofon: you can’t go wrong with or with SME TT/tonearm.

 

Here a resonance frequency calculator:

https://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_resonance_evaluator.php

You can " see " that the Verissimo/SME is just at the middle of the ideal resonance frequency range: 10hz ! !

R.

If you go the AMG route, I will also strongly recommend isolation with HRS platform or similar.  

Perhaps I miscalculated tonearm effective weight, as I did not take into account the weight of the cartridge. . . is that a simple additive process?  Add the weight of the cartridge to the effective weight of the tonearm to get total effective tonearm weight, in order to determine the best compliance in a cartridge?

Typo - should say move from the P5 to the P8 was not as big an improvement.

@drbond - I've been using a van den Hul One Special for 9+ years and I have been very happy with it. It is medium to high output for an MC - .75 uV but has an excellent, unique stylus that is very long lasting. I use a Sutherland Insight phono stage with a linear power supply that has more than enough gain and several load options. It is extremely quiet. Tubes would be warmer, but I like dynamics, detail and a clean, quiet sound.

This is not as "high end" as some analogue rigs mentioned here but is the best part of my system. I'm of the school that everything is important, but the source is the most important. arm/cart/phono stage at the center of it. At one point I had the RB880 arm on a P5 upgraded from an RB700. That was a huge improvement, probably more than any other change in the analogue part of my system. Phono stage was big also replacing the input that comes with my Plinius integrated amp. The move from the table itself from the P8 to the P8 was not as big as improvement, but I really like the design, dust cover and wiring update,

I am set for now until the stylus wears out and I'll probably get it replaced by van den Hul or they may just swap the cartridge for a brand new identical replacement with a price close to the maintenance cost - that's what I did last time.

And yet, some of those verboten match-ups would work fine in actual practice.

As regards Raul's last post, the Ypsilon, which is indeed a very transparent phono stage, one of the best I have heard, makes only 39db of gain, which is barely enough for even some low output MM or MI cartridges.  So to use the Ypsi with a LOMC cartridge, you have to figure in a SUT.  That's a $30K phono stage that needs a SUT.

Based on Ortofon’s own resonance frequency chart, it looks like a tonearm with an effective mass of 10-11g should be matched with a cartridge that has a compliance of 20-30. (see link below)  Most of the Ortofon MC have a compliance around 6-10.

 

Dear @drbond : " I would probably agree with you if I had the chance to listen to that system..."

 

You just don’t need it is not rocket science but just common sense, please let me explain about:

 

First the phono stage amplifying task: a healthy phono preamps that can handled any LOMC cartridge even with an output of 0.05mv or even a little lower needs around 80 dbs of gain and this gain with true low noise levels ( something only 1 or 2 units can do it if none at all. ) wwhere due to that low output in the MC cartridges the signal way before any kind of amplification is contaminated from every where ( rf, emi, wires,solder joints, etc, etc. ) so when goes inside the phono unit that signal is already " waiting " to be and suffer high electronics contamination/degradation of every kind.

What is a normal amplifier gain to handled speakers?, around 22db-26db and this gain is with a more " healthy " and " robust " signal that is not so sensitive to contamination.

For we can have 3db more gain level we need the double of power, so it’s not easy to achieve 80db gain when each 3db we need to duplicate the power: it’s a true challenge. Why do you think exist SUTs? yes because there are not many designers that can handled accurated and with aplomb that challenge.

 

In the other side: the RIAA equalization is a hard task and a challenge to do it accurately and what means the word " accurated " and what if not accurated?

 

we will see: the RIAA equalization is a curve this’s that’s not linear and the overall equalization goes around +,- 20dbs from 20hz to 20khz. This is the standard equalization that the RIAA association determined several years ago.

So during recording the equalization reduce the bass frequency range starting at around 20db and the high frequency range is incremented at around 20dbs and from there comes the RIAA curve.

Inside phono stage the recorded audio signal needs to be proccessed/must pass through an inverse RIAA equalization designed curve that been inverted permits to recover a flat signal that in theory is what we will listen through the speakers.

In that hard equalization proccess and I say " hard " because the equalization db range is of 40db, please think on this: in my old times I owned equalizers ( graphic and parametric. ) and that I remember never gone over full 12db-14db and in the phono stage " things " goes at 40dbs ! go figure. It’s a true " masacre " for that cartridge signal where everything could and can happen.

Now, the inverse RIAA equalization must be accurated to achieve that flat frequency in the phono sdtage output and that means in theory that the equalization has not any deviation over the frequency range: 20hz to 20khz. Any deviation over the RIAA curve at any discrete/main frequency affects around two octaves adyacents to it and ovbiously that affects too to the harmonics developed in between those discrete/main frequencies.

Normal phono stage RIAA deviation are in the range of: +,- 0.5db to 0.1db all over the frequency range and normally the RIAA deviation in the phono stage left channel is different to the phono stage rigth channel ! !

So we can’t have not even one channel with flat response that can honor the recorded audio signal and could be a dream to have both channels that mimic in between ! ! ! Non accurated RIAA eq. means higher colorations/distortions on what goes out of our speakers.

 

Well, till today I know only two phono units that are nearer the full exp´lained targets and only one of them can be buy for any one and yes that only one is FM Acoustics.

 

No matters wich TT you choose, no matters which cartridge you choose and no matters which tonearm you choose if your phono stage will " destroy " everything and it really matters what your analog rig does if your phono stage can honor it.

 

Certainly Ypsilon, CH, Dartzeel and I can follow name it can’t do it but the 223.

Here you can read something about:

 

R.

 

 

 

@everyone

@rauliruegas 

Thanks for everyone's input to this thread. I've learned much about analog and turntables, which I previously had no idea, which is the main reason I've had a Rega P8, simply because it's plug and play, and sounds good enough. 

Now I'm beginning to understand the interactions between platter, tonearm,and cartridge.  Looks like the Rega P8 has a 11g RB880 tonearm, which is near to lightweight.  I can't find the compliance of the Linn Krystal cartridge, which seems to be a deficiency in Linn's available spec sheet.  
However, the SME V tonearm also appears to be around 11g, which means it would do best with a high compliance cartridge.  The Ortofon MC Verismo doesn't appear to be a high compliance cartridge, but has a compliance around 13, in which case there would be resonances, and coloration of sound.  
Perhaps there's a better high compliance cartridge out there?
Thanks. 

Sorry for my bad English. English is my fourth language.

I think a heavy platter weak motor combination can work only in super ideal conditions. Even rubber belt compliance uniformity can be an important factor. Any deviations of speed in such a system fixes very slowly that cause WOW and flutter. It leads to decline in PRAT accuracy. And in serious music PRAT is one of the most critical factors. For example the main difference between the great and average piano player is PRAT.
I have a friend who is musicant and audiophile two in one. He is a flute player, soloist and conservatorium flute and piano teacher.
He had Sona Cosmos and Thorense 124 turntables. But when his friend bought EMT 950 and he heard how EMT 950 musically superior to Sota, he ran to order EMT 950 on eBay.

Agreed, the compressor must be in another room. Disagreed about intrinsic noise of the air bearing. Empirically speaking, the higher end Nottingham Analogue (improved to Dais specification and anti-resonance plinth) does not compete with the air bearing, so obviously the statement, "The amount of noise on the record far exceeds what even a mediocre belt drive makes," is false or irrelevant.

@lewm , I am pretty sure as I explained above air bearing tables are different. Air is very compressible. As the weight on the air cushion increases it stiffens increasing the resonance frequency faster than the added mass lowers it. As for the Motus, the low torque motor won't bother it at all. I can imagine a little shake on start up but that would be about it. The suspension is made up of three rather beefy looking leaf springs. Have a look at a picture. Will it effect speed stability at all? A wow and flutter spec is not mentioned. It is servo controlled but exactly how is not mentioned. The frequency of the suspension is 2-3 Hz. 

If you haven't noticed already I am a silly guy. But, if you like Lencos go out and get yourself one:)

@drbond , I think Raul may be right on that. The Verisimo is more compliant and tracks better. It is using the same diamond cantilever as the Anna Diamond and I am drawn to the naked cartridge body design.

@terry9 , the question is is an air bearing turntable worth the complexity over a spindle and opposing magnets. Is the bearing going to be noticeably quieter. If you factor in the compressor that answer is definitely not but, just thinking about the bearings proper the answer is also no. The amount of noise on the record far exceeds what even a mediocre belt drive makes. I admire you for making your own table. That is very cool. I am reduced to making just the plinth. I did think once about making a turntable around a Clearaudio magnetic bearing. That fell by the wayside when Sota announced it's magnetic bearing. If I had the money to by any turntable I would get a Dohmann Helix.

@lewm 

"The trick is to minimize the noise while realizing the gain."

Completely agree. Obviously active devices are essential. My phono/pre uses three stages of them.

My point was this: "Why introduce a host of active devices to reduce pops and clicks, when we know that pops and clicks are partially caused by instability? There's a good chance that the money is better spent reducing instability in the phono/pre, not least because every active device produces noise."

Perhaps I'm not being clear today. Is so, sorry about that.

The belt drive analog of that philosophy is also coupling a very weak motor to a very heavy platter, first done by both Walker Audio and Nottingham Analog.  There is a stock argument against that approach, but I don't pretend to know whether it holds water or whether the weak motor/heavy platter is wonderful. Enjoy it if you got it.

 

I agree with Raul. The argument about active devices and noise makes no sense to me.  Any phono stage must develop lots of gain in order to amplify the very low amplitude voltage signal from a cartridge.  This can ONLY be done with active devices, or did you plan to build a phono stage with passive components only?  The trick is to minimize the noise while realizing the gain.  Different designs do it differently and with more or less success.

@lewm 

"Could be you are saying that to couple a low torque motor with a heavy platter is a good thing, because speed in such a design is primarily maintained by the rotational inertia of the heavy platter. "

YES. In my rig, the platter must be accelerated by hand, as the motor is scarcely strong enough to maintain speed. This is the 'quirkiness' that I referred to in my first post - if you don't mind a bit or quirkiness, you can improve sound and save money at the same time. The late lamented Tom Fletcher used this principle to great effect. I have one of his better efforts too, but the air bearing puts it to shame.

@rauliruegas 

Thank you for sharing your ideal set up.  I would probably agree with you if I had the chance to listen to that system, but I don't know if I'm ready to make the jump to a FM223 just yet. 

You definitely helped educate me about the true distinctions between a 9" and 12" tonearm. 

However, I do find it interesting that you recommend the Ortofon MC Verismo over the Ortofon MC Anna Diamond.  The MC Anna Diamond is supposed to be a higher quality, but perhaps you know something about the cartridges that I don't?

Thanks. 

Hi @lewm ,

Here is a bad thing about a spring-suspended DD turntable: The energy put into rotation of the platter is also going to twist the chassis on its suspension, in the direction opposite to platter rotation (counter-clockwise).

EMT had solution for this issue for "light weight models 948, 938. Look at page 5.

Model 950 had a very light patter and very heavy 70kg chassis.