Rwwear, The last link on your DN308 post was made into this one :-) https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/6431#&gid=1&pid=12 the last picture. This one is originally from 1983and is number 472, the oldest of the 8 units I have procured, the youngest is from 1993 and is number 1608, have seen an auction in Japan for number 1628 so the supply of these is very limited. Good Listening Peter |
Those are beautiful 308s. Makes me want one Peter. How many did you procure?
Thanks for sharing.
Robt.
|
RWwear, So far I have procured 8 of them and I'm constantly looking for more - just picked up another one last week - so if you want to get on the list let me know. I know of two more located in Japan this person had 3 from which I bought one so far - the possibility of getting these two exist. Good Listening Peter Added a new photo of the next one Im working on https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/6431 |
Peter, You seem to have taken a very different tack with the DN308 as compared to the DP80, in terms of the design philosophy behind the two very different plinths. The DN308 plinth seems to have a hollow interior, whereas the DP80 plinth (from photos I have seen elsewhere on your site) seems to have been built from layers of precisely machined wood such that the only available empty space is tightly fitted to the electronics and the mechanicals of the DP80. I actually prefer this latter approach. Can you comment? Thanks. |
Lewm,
Reason being that the DN308 is a very large machine, overall dimensions are 23.5W x 18.5D x 9.5T weight is 140 lbs. I did toy around with the layered wood approach it just became too big IMO. Its a VERY substantial machine as is both Top and Bottom are made from 1" thick T6061 tool plate. Arm boards are replaceable - however because if its size, the platter is 14" Diameter, only 12" arms are useable, the 14" Kozma 4 point can also be incorporated, have been on one and another with 2 each of the Kuzma's are being discussed with a potential customer.
I'm making a plinth for the DP80 also using the design of the big Brother the DN308 with a 1" thick T6061 Aluminum tool plate on top but a HDF bottom incorporated into the hardwood frame. This will be the GrooveMaster Vintage Direct DP80 Professional.
Good Listening
Peter |
Thanks Peter but I can't afford one. Besides I have an SP-10 MKIII that I really love as well as about five more models I am in the process of rebuilding myself.
Robt.
|
Thanks, Peter. I will look forward to seeing photos of the DP80 mechanicals in the DN308-type plinth. |
https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/6431Pictures of the GrooveMaster Vintage Direct DP80 Professional uploaded to the virtual system Specs as follows Dims 19.25” W x 15.25” D by 7.75” H (to top of platter)Weight Apx 55 LbsSpeeds 33.333 and 45.000 RPM @ 0.002%Bi Directional Servo Speed Control System 2” Ball Bearing Vibration Control FootersUp to 2 10” tonearms can be mounted Good Listening Peter |
Is this thread an advertisement for PBN? This like spam. I've got no beef against you Peter or your turntables. I just feel like this thread has been hijacked.
Please tell us more about your turntables. On another thread.
|
Theophile,
Possibly, however these are Vintage DD tables and the OP of this tread specifically discuses the possibility that no repair of such is possible should they break. My postings should clearly communicate that repair certainly is possible of the machines, by me and a lot of other knowledgeable folks that have contributed to this long tread.
Good Listening
Peter
|
It is also clear that in many cases the original post is completely incorrect. Peter, by all means share your experience of how to fix these turntables since that is the aim of a thread like this. Without the sharing of the information, all you are doing on this thread is drumming-up business and touting your restorations.
You have established that you can restore these turntables. Either share your techniques or take the marketing spam to a PBN marketing thread.
|
"
Either share your techniques or take the marketing spam to a PBN marketing thread."
With your kind permission please permit me to remind those here that complaints about spam should be directed to the group's moderators who are easily communicated with by simply clicking on the "report this" flag that appends each post here. It is not for individual users to define, influence, control and direct the conversation in this group by assessing the characteristics of each individuals post. Thank you. |
Theophile,
You do note that all, but the first the above posts with links to the Systems page are answers to questions and requests from other contributors to this thread ?
Good Listening
Peter
|
Questions that could easily be answered on a tailor-made PBN turntable thread.
|
I don't want to report Peter. I just want to see the thread revert to the topic. The on-going advertising of PBN turntable restorations, with little or no insight as to the specifics of the work done, can be continued elsewhere.
It would be relevant to this thread if the faults found and the remedies applied to the eventual PBN turntables was being discussed, but they are not.
|
It would be interesting to open a specific thread for the plinths, initially this thread was born for the Victor TT-101 and similar turntables with so much electronics inside.
|
The Victor TT101 is a completely different beast - have one that is partially overhauled, the complexity of this is quite unique. That plus the electronics are mounted on a flimsy large PCB with a myriad of wire jumpers. Most errors on these have been cracked PCB lanes when conferring with JP, our resident TT101 Expert :-) somewhere further up this thread I have made a list of suitable transistor replacements for it and have some of the un-obtanium IC's as well should anyone need any - had to buy 10 of them.
I'm hoping to get it working sometime but there is just too much to do
Good Listening
Peter
|
So let me get this straight, in the lengthy insomnia-fueled post on page one of this thread, it was said that once some of the ICs on these 'tables broke down, that was it...doorstop.
My question is that while there are good working ICs out there isn't there some way to reverse engineer them and make clones? Or instead of opening them up and cloning them, maybe make a microcontroller that would mimic the functions?
I am not an electrical engineer, so I don't know if this stuff costs millions of dollars to accomplish... |
@pbnaudio I do not know what to say, I expect to have some rest to take over the TT101 that I was given a few months ago, because almost nothing works and the engine spins fast .....display not work and it needs a great deal of restoration from me. I hope to solve the many problems that he has https://s2.postimg.org/440jrafnd/image.jpg |
Bestgroove,
You certainly have your work cut out for you :-) JP knows quite a bit more about these than I do. On vinyl engine theres a complete service manual available for download. Your photo only shows the electronics in the Bezzel, they main PCB is located below the motor and its with this large semi circular one the most issues have been, mostly with cracked PCB lanes.
Once I get mine spinning correctly Ill make a Plinth for it, but because of the original design of this Ill keep it in its original "UFO" shell. Ill make sure to post pictures once I get it built so you can atlas get some ideas of how to make yours.
Best of Luck
Peter
|
As regards JP and the TT101, I can only report that my TT101 had an intermittent glitch that persisted for the first 3-4 years of my ownership, even after replacing all electrolytic capacitors. (I got it cheap, because it was "broken".) The diagnosis eluded two very competent technicians over that time span, until finally I came upon JPs thread on DIYAudio, wherein he was talking about his new chip for the Technics SP10 Mk2 and Mk3. I detected that he had a deep understanding of these circuits. I contacted him and soon thereafter shipped my TT101 to him in NYC. Within two weeks or so he had localized the problem to a microscopic crack in one of the PCB tracings. Shortly thereafter, my unit was up and running, and I have had zero problems ever since, all because JP has the smarts to reason out where the problem ought to have been and then to locate it shortly thereafter. So, Bestgroove, if I were you I would waste no time in sending the TT101 to JP. My unit was the first TT101 he had ever seen in the flesh, by the way. Very impressive.
|
@pbnaudio @Lewn I do not know grand master JP but, I’m sure, I can not and I do not want to send the turntable to the world; I live in Italy and would have an exorbitant cost of shipping, repairing, customs and taxes; I have to fix it and restore it completely and I have to do it yourself. I’ve already got the service manual and I have a look at the two big mother board .... there will be a lot of work for me next winter and I hope there are no custom made ICs for this turntable. I already have a decent experience with the Techncs SP 10 II ..... I have restored a pair with their power supplies by disassembling all screw on the screw (even the engine) I had to repair broken tachometer coil wires, and put everything completely new and two others are under construction. All this is just for passion and because I love collecting old high-level turntables that would end up in trash because they're broken. :) for example this is 3ad my last restoration with more photos If you are curious....... http://forum.videohifi.com/discussion/375892/technics-sp-10-mk2-inizia-il-restauro-refurbished-e-fin... |
@lewm
Same answer for you :)
|
@pbnaudio
ooopss ....I forgot ..... for plinth there are many great looking photos on the internet and you tube for the TT 101 and others will arrive, but before the turntable will have to work, otherwise it's all worth having a nice plinth and broken turntable. :( |
Best groove, I did not realize you live in Italy. (Lucky for you, by the way.) I don’t know about cost of round-trip shipping to JP in New York City, but I do know that his repair work is very reasonable in cost, surprisingly so in relation to his skill set. The TT101 circuit is very complex, given the "bi-directional servo" system, so I wish you best of luck in figuring out the cause of your problem. You might benefit from talking to JP, even if you feel you cannot afford to ship the TT101 for repair. There are several chips in there, but one and only one of them is the main controller. Of two "broken" units that I know about, including mine, neither of them needed a new chip, fortunately. But I may be able to help you out if it turns out you do need a new controller chip.
Definitely you should start out by replacing all the electrolytic capacitors, unless you know for sure that this has been done recently. The lifespan of an electrolytic is typically less than 30 years, and shorter still if the unit has been sitting for many years without power. |
Best Groove,
Lewm has stock of one of the unobtanium IC, I have of the other, so should you need one I can help too.
Best of Luck
Peter |
I've given two TT101 chips away at this point, so I am not sure it's fair to say I have a "stock" of them, but I do think I have a few more, in one of those drawers where you put things you don't want to lose and then forget where the drawer is. I would always want to keep at least one spare for myself.
|
@lewm
@pbnaudio
Many many thanks for your precious help..... I will keep in mind if insurmountable problems arise when I begin work.
Surely the turntable will need a complete recap first of all because the capacitors are all original (many failures happen because of the skills out of tolerance) and later I will be able to discover the remaining faults.
I hope everything is resolved without major problems (I'm optimistic) luckily in the world there are good technicians very competent for repairs and to give some advice on this turntable; In the states there is Mr.JP in Italy someone might find, in UK I found there is a good laboratory with plenty of experience on the JVC turntable also for our TT-101 (I need to find the address).
This does not rule out that if I need an unsolvable failure I will ask all these competent people to understand and solve the problem.
I hope so much is not broken some IC unproblematic but I understand that Lewm has some spare for sale.
My English is bad and writing is not perfect, so you can understand that I'm a stranger. :)
|
Best-groove, No, Lewm does not have some spare for sale. I cannot supply all TT101 owners, but I may be able to spare one for you for no cost if you really need it. Assuming I have at least two left in my stash.
|
best-groove,
Fix first, re-cap after. You'll want to ensure the power supply voltages are correct, so you may need to re-cap the supplies. |
@lewm all right .......knowing if it will serve I will know it in several months I will keep all you up to date on development, I hope it is not necessary but thanks for your generous offer. :)
@jpjones .....many thanks for your suggestion :) |
Is the IC used in any other JVC or other brand turntable? Because there's usually lower priced models available cheap.
|
maybe everything can be...... but I do not know.
It would be sufficient to compare the TT 81 and TT 71 service manuals for example, but I'm not sure these models adopt the bi-directional servo.
|
I forget the part number for the critical IC, but all I did was Google it, and I found many sources for it, in Asia. Most are on Alibaba (I hope that's the correct name of that website). I just chose a vendor who seemed to understand at least a little English. The cost is cheap, once you find a vendor, because who else wants one, besides the few dozen people in the world who may be fixing TT101s? Albeit, this was 3-4 years ago when I made my purchase. One thing to keep in mind is that the chips are around the same age as the TT101, so I suppose it's possible that they can go bad just from sitting on the shelf under god knows what storage conditions, for 30 years. One of mine was used to repair a TT101, and it worked, is all I know. |
The QL-F6 has the same bi-directional servo as the 101. I have one of these and it’s very good. They are cheap on eBay. " Although far less remembered than the QL-10 or QL-7, the QL-F6 has about the same motor structure as the former, the same specs as the latter - and, in spots, even surpasses both ! Bi-directional servo as in the QL-10 (and the TT-101 and TT-801), Coreless DC servomotor (as in the QL-10), continuously variable Q oil-damping for both horizontal and vertical planes, diecast aluminium cabinet, non-resonant "High-Density Pararesonance"
Bi-directional servo works with a push-pull amplifier in the drive circuit : two currents are generated in each motor drive coil, one pushing and one pulling the rotor.
The result is less overshoot in speed correction, 50% increase in
efficiency, 40% increase in torque and the remedy to coreless' motors
lower efficiency and lower torque capability... See the JVC TT-101 page for more details."
http://www.thevintageknob.org/jvc-QL-F6.html |
Very interesting ... it is useful to look for some cheap model for spare parts.
A detail I do not understand about DDs is how the TT101 and the lower models use lightweight lightweight plates unlike the Technics SP or Kenwood L07D or other big turntables of the time.
|
First, take some of the stuff on Vintage Knob with a grain of salt; that site is not always perfectly accurate.
Second, if you can find the IC as an NOS part, via Alibaba or other internet source, it will probably cost a few bucks each. And you would be MUCH better off at a MUCH lower cost than trying to source the IC by buying a whole turntable. You would have to pay the cost for a working unit, too.
As to platter mass, the SP10 Mk3 has the heaviest platter that I know about among Japanese vintage DD turntables, except possibly for the optional and very rare gunmetal platter for the Yamaha GT2000X. But that latter platter will cost you about as much as a good GT2000, if you can ever find one. (For the heck of it, I have been searching.) The L07D platter is substantial but only a fraction of the weight of the other two. It can be enhanced by the addition of an optional peripheral ring specifically made by Kenwood for the L07D, which I own but don't use. The SP10 Mk2 platter is not much different in weight from that of the TT101 and the Denon DP80. I don't know about the Luxman platter; there are a few owners on this thread who may tell us. One determinant of platter mass back then may have been the choice of motor. For a given physical size, coreless motors produce less torque than do iron core motors, but the correlation between coreless motors and platter mass is not linear, either, except to note that the Mk3 uses a gigantic iron core multi-pole motor. The Pioneer Exclusive P3 has an impressive platter and uses a coreless motor, on the other hand. The GT2000 uses a coreless motor but had an optional oversize bearing and that optional massive platter to be driven by that same coreless motor. |
The Yamaha GT2000 series turntables use the coreless motor supplied by JVC if I recall correctly...🤓
|
Greetings from High End Munich...😎
No vintage DD tables in use here....
Tables of choice appear to be Kronos and TechDas.....but mostly they spin for show.
CDs and Servers are the popular (and easier) option.....and when the sound you hear is predominantly determined by the speaker system employed (Linn lied to us).....even I don't care 🤷♀️
|
|
lewm,
The 39 pound gunmetal platter was able to be utilised by the GT 2000, the GT 2000L and the GT 2000X. Not only the GT 2000X.
|
Theophile, OK.
I wouldn't think of using that platter without the optional larger and heftier bearing assembly. Was that available for all 3 versions of the GT2000, as well? If so, then what is the big deal about the "X" designation, apart from the fact that the standard tonearm on the X was maybe different from the standard? ((Yet, that tonearm can also be fitted to the GT2000, so far as I can tell.) Why would the X be twice as expensive these days as the plain GT2000? In photos, there are no obvious external differences between the two models, either. |
The only differences between the GT2000 and GT2000X are that the latter had brown veneering, bigger plinth, bigger motor shaft, and better tonearm (sold as an option on GT2000 as YSA-2). The bigger plinth & bigger shaft cannot be installed later on the GT2000.
The only differences between GT2000 and GT2000L are that the latter had the automatic arm lifter at the end of the record (optional on GT2000 as YAL-1) and brown veneering (black on GT2000).
Like Theophile said, the 18 kg platter worked with all three models: GT2000, GT2000L, and GT2000X, though undoubtedly the bigger shaft on GT2000X had benefits.
|
What should also be clarified at this point is that the standard platter for the GT 2000x was the 6.5Kg aluminium platter.
The GT 2000/2000L were released in 1982. Both were designed, let's get that clear, designed to deal with the 18Kg gunmetal platter. Let's also get the following clear, with or without the optional outboard power supply. The stock standard GT 2000 and GT 2000L were designed to deal with the gunmetal platter.
The GT 2000x came onto the market in 1985. 3 years after the GT 2000/2000L. 3 years after the gunmetal platter. The GT 2000 was a limited edition release at a premium price. The problem for Yamaha was that the GT 2000x competed with its own wildly successful GT 2000 which was close to one third the price. It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that Yamaha didn't sell all of the 2000x models manufactured.
The GT 2000 is the single most popular( read: high sales figures) Ultra Direct Drive ever sold in Japan. You have to hear one to understand the reason for that. In bare-bones stock form it is a remarkably good sounding turntable, even in comparison with any other Ultra Direct Drive. I am not saying it was the best, I'm just saying that it is a remarkably good sounding turntable in stock form. The Japanese obviously were very impressed with it.
There are a number of bonuses which accompany the stock bare-bones Yamaha GT 2000. It can be sonically upgraded by purchasing the optional extras. The GT 2000 is no slouch in bare bones form. When the optional outboard power supply is added(even to the stock 6.5Kg platter) the sound quality takes a decent advance. Supposedly the 18Kg gunmetal platter takes things much further again.
The original release price of the bare-bones stock standard GT 2000 in 1982 was 130,000 yen. The original release price of the optional 18 Kg YGT-1 gunmetal platter for the GT 2000 in 1982 was 120,000 yen. That's right; The 18Kg gunmetal platter cost almost as much as the entire price of the stock GT 2000. Consider also that the optional 18Kg gunmetal platter for the stock GT 2000, once purchased, rendered the leftover stock 6.5 Kg platter superfluous and essentially worthless. Despite costing almost as much as the entire stock turntable and rendering the stock platter superfluous, Yamaha sold lots of the gunmetal platters also. Surely that wouldn't be the case if the gunmetal platter made little or no difference? Surely word of mouth would have established that the expensive gunmetal platter was not worth purchasing? Quite the opposite happened. The Japanese embraced the now twice as expensive combination of Yamaha GT 2000 with YGT-1 gunmetal platter. OK the gunmetal platter did not sell in the same numbers as the stock GT 2000, but it did sell very well for such an expensive accessory. Obviously there had been an overwhelmingly positive reaction to the addition of the gunmetal platter by the Japanese buying public. Many wanted a GT 2000 and a substantial number of GT 2000 owners wanted to pay almost as much again for the gunmetal platter.
Fast forward 35 years, and we see that the prices for the gunmetal platters on the second-hand market have skyrocketed to between 2 and 3 times the price of the second-hand stock GT 2000. Again, with the hindsight of 35 years, don't you think that should the gunmetal platter make little or no difference to the performance of the stock GT 2000 that either there would be no movement of the second-hand market price or that it would have fallen in value? The gunmetal platter did sell in smaller numbers than the stock GT 2000, so it can be argued that the increase in value seen in second-hand gunmetal platters is solely down to the rarity factor. What has to be taken into account is that many of the other optional accessories for the GT 2000 are more rare than the gunmetal platter, yet their second-hand prices have not doubled or tripled. This tends to deflate the validity of the "gunmetal platter rarity solely responsible for the price increase" argument.
The GT 2000 is the dark-horse of the Ultra Direct Drive second-hand market only in the non-Japanese countries. That simply because it has no market presence of 35 years in non-Japanese countries to have established its reputation. Everyone knows of the SP10 Mk III despite its rarity. The same applies to the Sony PS-X9, the Kenwood L-07D, the Nakamichi TX-1000, the Marantz TT-1000, the Micro Seiki DQX-1000, the Luxman PD-555, the Nakamichi Dragon. All of these top of the line Ultra Direct Drive turntables received multiple reviews in many countries. This established them as High-End turntables in a world where belt drive was lauded and direct drive was demonised in many markets. The GT 2000 essentially never existed for the past 35 years outside of Japan. In Japan the opposite is the fact. The GT 2000 is well known and well loved. Despite thousands of them selling in Japan, when they appear on the Japanese second-hand market, the GT 2000 does not languish struggling to find buyers. They are snapped up within weeks if not days. Surely that would not be the case if the GT 2000 was over-hyped or especially vastly inferior to other Ultra Direct Drive turntables?
The GT 2000 still has very,very few Western owners. I know of less than 30 worldwide, despite keeping an eye on these numbers. Of those I am by an order of magnitude the most recognised internet author of posts about the GT 2000( a situation which is not due to my needing that reputation). I tend to prefer to respond to threads about either the GT 2000 or Ultra Direct Dive turntables. There is a lot of misunderstanding about the GT 2000. The biggest fallacy is that the GT-750 is the equal of the GT 2000. One only needs to look at the Japanese HiFiDo site. It has more than 20 GT-750s for sale at half the price of the GT 2000, some of which have been listed for nearly 1 year. It would seem that the Japanese aren't interested in the GT 750 at half the price of the GT 2000, at all. They ignore them. The Japanese buyer votes with their wallet on the issue of the GT 750 being the equal of the GT 2000.
lewm, I have repeatedly stated here that the gunmetal platter is suitable for the stock GT 2000. You have repeatedly reiterated that the gunmetal platter needs the GT 2000x. Please understand the truth of the matter.
|
The third paragraph should read:
The GT 2000x was a limited edition release at a premium price. |
Theophile, Please understand that the question of the gunmetal platter on a GT2000 or 2000X is not on my front burner, as I do not own any Yamaha turntable. Thus I confess only to being human and to having forgotten our previous discussion. In fact, after I posted my previous comment, it did occur to me that we have covered this ground before. Mea culpa.
Also, you seem to think that I dismiss the possibility that the 18kg platter was a significant upgrade to performance. I do not and did not. But because of its far greater mass compared to the standard platter, I personally would not run the 18kg platter unless I had the version of the GT2000(X) with the larger bearing assembly. Personal preference aside, I also don’t think I ever asserted that the 18kg platter could not be used with the standard bearing, if one wanted to do that.
You may also like to know that I have advised others not to purchase a GT750 or any other lesser model of vintage Yamaha DD in the belief the lesser model would be "just as good" as a GT2000. I agree with your assessment of the relative merits, based on data, not personal experience. I have also mentioned here that, because our son has worked and lived in Tokyo for nearly 10 years, I am a fairly frequent visitor. I can attest that the GT2000 is not rarely seen in high end emporia that sell vintage used merchandise. (Typically, the ones I have seen in the flesh were a priori "sold" to some other lucky buyer, before I got there.) They also turn up on Hifido more often than a Pioneer Exclusive P3 or Sony PS-X9, for examples. This is evidence that the GT2000 was very popular when it was current, among Japanese aficionados.
|
In Italy no GT 2000 has ever been imported nor even the older brothers.
Great pity. |
Hello fellow audiogoners
I have a Luxman PD-444 which is dead for all practical purposes: the light are on but nobody's home. I have re-capped it - no change. Can anybody fix it? Cosmetically it's only fair, so I'm thinking if repairs are too much I may sell it as is... I couldn't find any schematics or service manuals on it.
|
Mark, Please see up the thread where I have mentioned many times the fact that JP Jones is good with these problematic gems. I don't know if JP ever worked on a PD444, but he is a fast learner, especially if you can dig up a schematic. JP posts here, too. His business is called Fidelis Analog, located in NYC. Also, Dave Garretson, another member of this forum, owns a PD444; Dave is a pretty smart guy as well. Best of luck; your PD444 is worth the effort and cost to make it run again. |
|
