Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

Here's one forum member improving his JVC QL-A75 by adding mass and damping to the plinth:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=426693

Here's one that adds a SAEC arm bracket to the stock plinth:

http://www13.plala.or.jp/mj4018/we308l2.html

.

Halcro,

With my JVC QL-F6, I use a Signet TK5Ea. The original stylus is on its last leg and needs to be replaced soon. I used to have a TK-7E but Audio Technica no longer make that kind of stylus so I sold it and I opted to for flexibility and kept the "Ea" type of body. I just reread your earlier post about the QL-A7 with the Signet TK-3Ea and coincidentally that's almost the same set up I had in my introduction to JVC! I was using a QL-7 with Signet cartridge. Fantastic sound!

Happy listening!

Hiho, your suggestion for a VPI 10.5 might not work. Remember the mounting pedestal for the VPI arms is offset from the pivot point and requires more clearance adjacent to the platter. They will not work with SP-10 Mk 2 or 3 for example with their square frame unless that is removed. I have mounted a 10.5 with my SP-15 but that frame is rounded and provides clearance.

I'm not familiar with the QL-A95 to know if it is framed.

Hiho, Have you seen these yet ?

GrooveMaster Vintage Direct

Website has the DP3 and the DP2 online, the DP6 is complete, and now working on the redesign of the DP80 which will be the DP8 in the Vintage Direct GrooveMaster lineup. Have about 20 of various models in progress at any time.

From their maker

Peter

Looks nice Peter and I must say, very original.

At one time you experimented with a similar plinth and VPI DD motor. Do you offer both or find this restored Denon to be a better performer?

Pryso, you are correct the typical 10.5" VPI base is cantilevered so it will not work to replace JVC 10", not enough clearance. What I had in mind was the first generation VPI Classic that uses the same base as 9"JMW in the Scout but with a 10.5" armwand. Good catch!

----------------

PBNaudio/Peter, thanks for the link. Very cool. You're rewriting turntable history! Time to look into the JVC QL line. :)

.

PBN, very nice tt's.

Thanks for the nice comments all :-)

I can still do the VPI based one, but the cost of the drive is quite a bit more than the Vintage Direct ones.

Pricing on the tables are $5500 for the DP3, $7500 For the DP2, $8500 for the DP6 and estimated @ $9500 for the DP8, with the standard 9" Jelco SA 750 on the DP2 and DP3, the longer SA750E on the DP6 and the DP8. We can do custom ones too, with up to 2 arms, mix and match in length brand etc. to your hearts desire.

Currently I'm making a DP6 with a Kuzma 4 point arm which will join the rest of the PBN Audio Equipment in the Ralston Listening Room and Library at the University of the South in Swanee Tennessee.

I will have all four models on display at RMAF in just a few weeks if you want to take a look at these, in my opinion, magnificent machines :-)

Good Listeniogn

Peter

Happy Days......🎁🎉
I picked up my TT-101 yesterday....all fixed 😀
After 3 months of tracking down 5 ICs from around the world (which weren't needed), and then removing and testing over 40 of the 100 or so transistors in the circuit boards (they were all good).....my Tech re-soldered all the joints in the Control Panel ICB.
Even though he had removed and re-soldered every single joint 18 months ago.....because this was an intermittent speed-related issue, he had a hunch.....and lucky he did...😜
It all appears to be working correctly. Fingers crossed..✌️

The good news for all TT-101 owners (and other vintage DD owners also) is that all the ICs and transistors he removed and tested were perfect.
It seems most of the problems with these old dames is in the ancient solder joints.
Find a good Tech and have him remove and replace all the solder joints BEFORE looking for more complex problems.
Oh....and if there is an intermittent problem (are you listening Lew)....re-do the joints again...👺

Halcro,

Good to hear your 101 has once again, a 'clean bill of health'! Who would of thought it could have possibly been a solder joint. You got a good tech. I will keep this information close to heart if something goes wrong with either of my TT-81's.
Regards,

Yes Griff,
I have a really good Tech.
I don't think you have so much to worry about with the TT-81s as they are so simple compared to the TT-101.
But you're right....if ever you DO have a problem.....look at the solder joints first...😜

Ebm style answer: No we're not.

Whoa. Congratulations, Halcro. Did your tech miss a joint on the first go around? Or did an already resoldered one break anew?

When my tech redid mine, he said he had to very carefully inspect each joint with a magnifying glass.

Get your magnifying glass out, Lewm.

Banquo, Between me and Bill Thalmann, I daresay about 70% of the solder joints on my TT101 have been re-done. And the ones that have not been re-done are OK by inspection, not that that means they actually are OK. Every time I fiddle with the TT101 I re-do a few perfectly good looking solder points. Eventually they all will have been re-done. Will the damned thing work then? I doubt it.

Thanks Banquo,
My Tech originally redid every solder joint as per your specific instructions which I had passed on...😃
So this was obviously a recent break in one of these new joints.
As your Tech wisely knew.....inspecting with a magnifying glass is a wise precaution.....
I think it would benefit Lew to send his TT-101 to your Tech. He sounds like he 'knows his onions'....🔎🔍

I don't believe Lew needs my tech, Halcro--he can probably solder just as well as my tech can--what he needs is a sunnier disposition :).

Lewm: after Halcro's experience I'd call into question every solder joint, including the 70%+ you already did. I recall you saying that for days it worked fine at Thalmann's but when you took it home it acted up again. Maybe some bumpy streets cracked one or two of those delicate joints?

The symptoms you describe are more or less what I experienced. They can lead one to suspect a failed component or something complex. My tech (and Halcro's) spent a good deal of time with that mindset only to discover that the gremlins lived in the solder joints. Since the boards are too complex to try to locate the joints responsible for any particular symptom, the 'brute force' method is recommended: redo them all; it's the only way to be sure.

If it still doesn't work, well then, we can say that your skepticism was warranted.

There is only one way to "redo" old solder joints, and that is to completely strip and clean off ALL of the old solder from both the eyelet and the component. This is incredibly tedious and time consuming. Some folk just wave a wand, melt the original solder and then add more solder - this is a recipe for disaster.

Great new Halcro!!

But seems like those JVC techs might have been cutting corners back in the day :-)

touch wood, but the Pioneer Exclusive turntable did not have any corners cut.
I guess that is why they offered lifetime servicing for all Exclusive hifi gear.

Unfortunately the hifi gear might outlive Pioneer corporation.

Thanks Shane,
Not sure if corners were cut or it's simply an aging characteristic of solder?
I think it's the number of joints and the sheer complexity of their locations plus the triple layer stack of PCBs which must flex whenever they are handled for servicing that is the real problem...?

Halcro

I think it's the number of joints and the sheer complexity of their locations plus the triple layer stack of PCBs which must flex whenever they are handled for servicing that is the real problem.

You hit the proverbial nail on the head, the hole bugaboo regarding DD IC failures {in this case} should be finally put to rest.

I searched through my communications with my tech when he was servicing my tt 101. Below are some pertinent quotes on the construction of the boards and how he went about fixing the table:

--There were no bad parts, just bad connections. I ended up resoldering all the feed thru eyelets, then flipping the board and removing the solder with a sucker, then resoldering them with much less solder. They all look pretty clean now. I know other companies that used the eyelet method had reliability problems. For some reason the solder cracks around the eyelets, probably related to different coefficients of thermal expansion.

--Besides I took a lot of solder out of those eyelets. The issue is the eyelets are hollow so they don’t fill with solder. The hot air insides always bubbles the solder out. I put just a bit around the edges and then cleaned the flux with acetone.

--The PCB is two sided but without plated through holes. It looks like they put eyelets in and then solder on both sides. I found one that was open but by the time I pulled the PCB it was connecting. I resoldered it and now the 45 light comes on and that speed works. The 33 light never comes on so I think there is something wrong with that flip flop. It is made of all discrete transistors so it is really hard to figure out the logic flow.

--I’m always amazed when someone would design a product as complex as this, with a high price, and not spring for a plated thru board. It boggles the mind that they would have relied upon these eyelets which are labor intensive.

Hope it helps someone.

Hi Totem,
I think, as you say.....the most encouraging part of this exercise was the fact that every transistor of the 40 that my Tech took out and tested was perfect.
The ICs were more difficult as many of the test figures in the Victor Service Manual didn't make sense or were simply wrong.
In any case....all the original ICs were also fine.
So it bodes well for most vintage DD decks out there (which certainly have nowhere near the number nor complexity of solder joints of the TT-101) that they are a good chance of continuing their 'normal' service for the foreseeable future.
And with the seeming cutback in production of Harry's VPI Direct at $30,000....that's good news 😃

Thanks Banquo,
That quote from your Tech is invaluable....

Halcro, You wrote, "The ICs were more difficult as many of the test figures in the Victor Service Manual didn't make sense or were simply wrong." Are you referring to the DC voltages on the pins of the ICs? I ask, because I measured some of the voltages at the pins of one IC that is suspect, and they do not at all match the predicted readings posted in the Service Manual for that IC. This led me/leads me to believe the IC may be faulty. But if my interpretation of what you wrote is correct, maybe I need not worry about it, unless or until I have further evidence of its malfunction.
Please confirm.

Banquo, where do you live, and who is your tech? Is it Bill Thalmann? Thanks.

see above:

09-12-15: Banquo363
hi Lewm,

You could try talking to the guy, Dave Brown, who fixed my tt 101. He wasn't taking new clients last I checked about 6 months ago, but he might be more open now. He's already famillar with the table and has perused the manual, so that saves a lot of time. You can find his contact info here. Good luck.

He's in Oregon, so you'll need to risk shipping the table.

Lewm,
From what my Tech showed me, I'd be firstly inclined to not worry about the values you are getting when you test some of the ICs.
He showed me three or four values in the Service Manual that he said bore no relationship to those he measured.....and the ICs he measured, actually worked perfectly once the solder joint problem was remedied.
As I surmised above....with the TT-101, firstly suspect a poor solder joint before thinking 'bad' IC or transistor.

Halcro
Can you expand on the comment re VPI cutback in production of their DD TT
I understood that they were selling well. It has certainly received good press.

Thanks

VPI Direct only made to special order now by Harry himself
HERE
Apparently not selling so well....

I can't imagine on the other hand, that the market for $30,000 turntables would be sizeable.....even with the current vinyl revival.....❓
Continuum will apparently only make a Caliburn if three are ordered together..

All VPI DD's are now factory direct and will be personally made by me.
HW

If its now factory direct, it should be AT LEAST 1/3rd cheaper at 20K since VPI are no longer selling to retailers.
Is it now 20K?

I have had my Victor TT-101 mounted in an open bottom plinth
and currently am building one where it will be entirely
enclosed.
Has anyone experienced elevated temperatures where some form of venting should be built in?

Totem395

Heat is the curse of audio components. I would hate to think you destroyed your TT101 or any audio component for that matter due to lack of circulation. I would think it was designed with its bottom hanging out for a reason.
Regards,

My TT-101 is open to the air on all sides, yet it does get warm to the touch. I wouldn't recommend enclosing it - perhaps drill some holes in the plinth where they wouldn't be visible?

Vent holes on say the bottom plate likely will do little since
there's no where for the heat to exit on the way up.

So an open bottom is the best I can do, even though the plinth
depth leaves none of the can exposed.

Halcro, Continuum is dead. Long live Dohmann. Apparently, Mark Dohmann, one of the principles of Continuum, is now producing a tt on his own, for about $36,000 with a Schroeder LT tonearm, a relative bargain compared to the Caliburn. He is said to have developed the new tt in collaboration with several others with various types of expertise relevant to the project. But this is not a DD, nor is it vintage.

Yes, definitely provide some ventilation for a TT101.

Lew, At RMAF I heard two Dohmann TT set-ups, both among the better analog presentations at the show. Dohmann incorporates a Minus K spring-based vibration platform into the plinth. A friend of mine has had great results with the Minus K with another TT. Perhaps it's worth pursuing.

Lewm,
I know the whole sordid Continuum story directly from Mark.
He is an astute audio guy with a genuine love and passion for the possibilities.
He has always appreciated the damage that structure-borne feedback causes to most turntable-based systems and has been an admirer of Minus K platforms for many years.
He is in fact the Australian Importer and Distributor for Minus K so it is no surprise to see him develop a turntable with a Minus K 'built-in'...
Somewhat reinventing Linn...👹❓
And let's gets real.....no-one is going to reinvent a new DD turntable which can be built in a 'garage'.
HW did it with a cogless super motor that still can't match the performance of the 30 year old Victors and can't be made for less than $30,000...😱
Rockport came the closest with its Sirius III but it would cost $200,000 today and was somewhat let down by its tangential tonearm....

And yes....ventilation AND breathing space is a crucial requirement for most vintage DDs....but especially the Victors.

10-13-15: Lewm:
"Apparently, Mark Dohmann, one of the principles of Continuum, is now producing a tt on his own, for about $36,000 with a Schroeder LT tonearm, a relative bargain compared to the Caliburn."

That Schroeder arm is NOT an LT model. The headshell offset angle and the lack of extra pivot point at the base gave away that it is not a pivoting tangential or Linear Tracking tonearm.

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2015/06/thrax-audio-helix-1-ultimate-turntable.html

The Schroeder arm appears to be a carbon fiber version of the discontinued Artemis Labs TL-1 tonearm.

Hiho, You may be correct. I found two sources of info that conflicted with respect to the nature of the Schroeder tonearm optionally supplied with the Dohmann tt. One claimed it was the LT; the other did not.

I don't have a Minus K or its equivalent, but one of my two systems is located in my basement on concrete flooring poured over solid earth. My subjective impression is that this has amazing benefits, compared to upstairs in my living room, where I would probably notice a Minus K.

10-13-15: Halcro
And let's gets real.....no-one is going to reinvent a new DD turntable which can be built in a 'garage'.
HW did it with a cogless super motor that still can't match the performance of the 30 year old Victors and can't be made for less than $30,000.

Henry, are you saying the motor can't match the Victor or the overall performance, or both? I'm curious about the basis of this statement.
Regards,

Regards Fleib,
Here is the Feikert Speed App for the VPI Direct as published by Fremer in Stereophile and
here is the corresponding one for my TT-101.
Now all the Raw Frequency and Lowpass-Filtered Frequency figures are near identical for both turntables yet look at the General Mean Frequency comparison figures.....
The VPI Direct is 4.5 Hz above the 3150Hz Test Tone Frequency whilst the TT-101 is spot on.
Oh I know 4.5 Hz is tiny and probably irrelevant in the scheme of things BUT.....the VPI is using the most expensive and sophisticated motor for this application currently available and has 35 years of computer advanced technology to draw on yet can't match the accuracy of the 35-40 year design work of the Japanese Victor engineers...😡
But these Charts are not the most revealing part of the Feikert Speed App.
Here is the real time analogue print-out of the actual sinewave produced by the VPI Direct whilst tracking the 3150 Hz Test Tone. Ignoring the fact that it is well above the 3150 Hz frequency line.....observe the continually varying pitch of the mean frequency (a straight line is theoretically perfect) as it drops and raises tone. THIS is the real analogue graphic of the true speed-constancy performance of the test turntable.
Here is the Frequency Chart of my TT-101 and here is the long-term frequency chart of my TT-101.
Now tell me what you see and how the world of audio technology has improved over the last half century.....❓😎

Well, that is interesting. Maybe it's harder to correct speed inconsistencies of a 20 lb. platter? I don't think electronics has ever been VPI's long suit and this technology hasn't changed in the last 35 years. Harry is an old plinth builder, ironically for JVC.

You wouldn't by any chance have those charts for the TT81 and 71?
Regards,

I don't have charts for the other Victors yet but here is a video of the TT-81 under the Timeline with three arms going on and off and showing no deviation of the laser on the wall mark.
Based on this evidence and the fact that the TT-81 employs the identical forward and backward speed monitoring of the TT-101....I believe the Feikert figures would be similar.

Hi Henry,
According to VintageKnob, the TT81 does not have the double bidirectional servo. The 101 has a second quartz locked servo outside of the drive to compare phase. Looking at absolute speed, it doesn't seem to make much difference?

I think there's something to be said for a 20.lb platter on a DD. Can't say I've heard the VPI Direct, but I wouldn't dismiss it on that basis.
On the other hand, $30K would buy a bunch of Victors.
Regards,

Hi Fleib,
According to Vinyl Engine and the Victor TT-81 Service Manual....

Servo system: Quartz-locked positive and negative servo control

Vintage Knob appears to be wrong.....

I think there's something to be said for a 20.lb platter on a DD.

I haven't heard anything said that is supported by solid evidence...?
If you're going to monitor and control a platter as swiftly and effectively as possible, it seems sensible to make it as light as possible whilst accomplishing its other duties.
That's what Victor has done within its design objectives whilst Technics chose another with their SP10 MkIII and Kenwood yet another with their L-07D and Pioneer another with their Exclusive P3.
The fact is that there are so many good and great vintage DD Japanese turntables still in existence that anyone wanting to hear what one can do for his system, need not wait (possibly in vain) for the next great modern iteration of this drive choice.
It will almost certainly not be better than those mentioned whilst almost certainly will cost multiples more.

Halcro and Fleib,

I have not had a need to check the V/E web site in regards the the service manual because I received the original manual with my TT-81. It does state what Halcro has repeated from the V/E site.
Regards,

Halcro and Griffithds,
They both have bidirectional servo, but the 101 has an additional servo to compare phase - double bidirectional. Why else are the electronics so much more complicated on the 101?
You're saying this is incorrect?

A massive platter imparts solidity to the sound, viable if and only if correct speed can be maintained. That's why so many belt drivers w/heavy platters sound ponderous IMO.

I'm not making claims about VPI Direct. Brinkman makes a couple of DD's also. Anything new is going to cost. Not everyone can deal with their 35 yr. old table breaking down.
Regards,

Fleib.

I also have a VPI Aries. I sent an email to VPI asking them for the price of an arm board for this Aries table so that I could mount a Lustre 801 arm that I have an opportunity to own. I was told by a return email that they no longer provide arm boards for the Aries!
How are people suppose to deal with NEW tables that they can not get parts for?
Yes, I could get some aftermarket outfit to make an arm board, but is that any different that getting someone to fix a 35 year old table?
No dealer support is "no dealer support". No matter how old it is!
Regards.

They both have bidirectional servo, but the 101 has an additional servo to compare phase - double bidirectional. Why else are the electronics so much more complicated on the 101?
You're saying this is incorrect?

I don't know where you read this Fleib, but the description of both TT-81 and TT-101 in the Service manuals are identical except the 101 has a 'coreless' servo motor.
Most of the additional complexity of the 101 I believe is centred on its circuitry of multiple 1Hz pitch adjustability (5 steps up and 5 steps down) together with its digital speed indication and its complex new braking system.

A massive platter imparts solidity to the sound, viable if and only if correct speed can be maintained. That's why so many belt drivers w/heavy platters sound ponderous IMO.

This is a subjective view and IMO has become an oft-repeated audio myth...
It implies that turntables like Rega and Project cannot have "solidity"to their sound....
I have found that to be too much of a generalisation.
I can understand the concept of a massive platter for a belt-drive deck which is trying to rely on inertia for its speed maintenance but for a DD which is quartz-locked and servo-controlled, a heavy platter simply involves a more powerful motor with all its associated problems.
I believe 'solidity' comes firstly from the ability of the turntable to maintain perfect speed through the heavily modulated grooves (resulting from complex low-frequency information) without suffering 'stylus drag'. A feat I still have not seen performed by a belt-drive....
Secondly I believe 'solidity' is greatly improved by the rigidity of the turntable supporting structure, its isolation from structure-born feedback and then the materials chosen to implement these.
It's interesting to note that the Victor engineers did not change anything about the platter weight and materials between the 81 and 101 and I can tell you that the 'solidity' achieved by this 'lightweight' aluminium platter is unmatched by any megaton platter I have heard.

And I thought we just discovered that old solder joints were the only problem areas of these old turntables....?
And this might be just the TT-101....
No problems at all with the TT-81 or the thousands of other makes and models of 70s Japanese DD decks out there from all the Forum reports...?
And just to lay to rest another bugaboo about these vintage decks....they are generally easy to repair by any competent Tech....and all the ICs, transistors, capacitors and resistors are still readily obtainable...😍

Griff,
That's beyond belief. VPI still has Aries listed as a current table. Even if it were discontinued you should still be able to get an armboard. Have they no shame?

I suspect they've grown too fast and forgotten where they came from. They used to bend over backwards to help the customer. Now the customer bends over buying an expensive VPI.

If you ever get that 801 mounted I'd be curious what you think. I just got a UA-7045. It needs a little work.
Regards,