Fleib, On 8/29 or thereabouts you wrote, "Lew,
You mean 21mm short of the lead-out groove, which would be about 80mm from the spindle?" Then Hi-ho made some further comments to indicate that 76mm is correct.
But if you guys will look at the diagram in the article quoted by Hiho, follow the arc formed by the dotted line. In order to achieve zero tracking error (stylus tangent to groove) at point B, as defined by the designer of the RS-A1 in that diagram, the stylus needs to hit the label or the run-out grooves of the LP where that arc comes closest to the spindle, which I think is indeed about 21mm from the spindle. Thus we were talking about two different things, in one case how to mount the arm, in the other case, where on the LP playing surface we wish to achieve the one point of zero tracking error.
As to the Rigid Float. All that babble about how the "bearing" is constructed does not allow me to form a picture in my mind of how it works, how something can be both "rigid" and "floating". I would need to play with one to convince myself. Well Tempered liked to sell the idea that their tonearms have no bearing and hence no bearing friction; the problem is that their bearing (which IS a bearing, semantics notwithstanding) has a fair amount of play and so low friction is achieved at the expense of wobble. |
Doron, I agree with the others, it's probably best not to run the motor without the platter installed. It's definitely taboo for nearly all other DD turntables, for sure. However, I faintly remember that Bill Thalmann told me that where the TT101 is concerned, you can get away with it, because of how the circuit works. Even with that small qualifier, why worry about platter-less operation, if your TT101 works fine with the platter installed? If you follow Banquo's advice on how to raise up your platter by a few mm, via adjusting that screw below the bearing housing, you should be able to cure the scraping problem as well. Now, replace all electrolytic capacitors. |
Hi Doron,
I hope you haven't bought a 'bad' TT-101 π±βοΈ
They are sooo complicated electronically...that it's easy to do πβ
Three years ago I bought my first TT-101 from Foxtan in HongKong and it arrived with the 'Power' switch permanently engaged....the 'Brake' function inoperative...the motor noisy at both speeds and shutting down after 20 seconds of play at both speeds π΅π±πβοΈ
Apart from that....cosmetically it was perfect π....
My current TT-101 took another year for Tommy at TopClass (also in HongKong) to find π
So if all the main circuitry functions correctly on yours....and you can solve the scraping issues via Banquo's suggestions.....you may be 'cooking with gas' πβ
My fingers are crossed for you..βοΈ
Regards |
Hello and thank you all!!!
Much appreciate your help!
1. Re the platter/spindle height adjustment screw, do you need to remove the black upper motor cover to access this screw?
2. Any chance you could send a photo showing it? (doronor3 at gmail)
3. In addition without the platter installed, is there an allowable, slight (~1/16") axial movement of the spindle/shaft?
In other words, if I pull the spindle upwards by hand, it rises about 1/16" from its normal rest position.
Is this normal or is it an indication of excessive axial float?
Thank you kindly!
Doron |
Ok, found it!!! (The spindle height adjustment screw).
Removed the bottom black cage and it it's a brass large flat screw at the bottom.
Once I screwed it in slightly, the shaft went forward and the clearance/axial float of the spindle/shaft was reduced a bit. It still exists but just smaller. Is this normal?
The platter now rotates freely now (no scraping) and the motor locks on both speeds readily.
Thank you so much!!!
Doron |
Once I screwed it in slightly, the shaft went forward and the clearance/axial float of the spindle/shaft was reduced a bit. It still exists but just smaller. Is this normal? Mine does that. The platter now rotates freely now (no scraping) and the motor locks on both speeds readily. Then you're good as gold. Congratulations and enjoy....but as Lew says, think about replacing capacitors. |
Thanks for the wonderful advice, guys!!!
I cannot thank you enough.
You just saved me a huge heartache of having to ship this unit back to UPS and get a full refund when I had much better plans for this baby...
I was a happy Oracle Delphi Mk II owner until two weeks ago. Had it installed and its suspension correctly tuned (a royal pain) with numerous arms and cartridges in the last 5 years:
Carts: DV 17D3, Benz Wood SM, SAE 1000 E and LT, Adcom Cross-Coil (another Coral based cartridge), Shinon Red Boron and even EMT JSD-5 Gold and the currently installed EMT HSD-6. My previous arm was Alphason Xenon MCS and now I am working with a Zeta which I absolutely love.
Long story short, always wanted to try a properly CLD plinth with a JVC DD motor so I got a JVC TT-71 motor and with the great woodworking skills of a dear friend built a 50 lbs, 9" tall, birch plywood plinth with solid ebony arm board for the TT-71/Zeta/EMT HSD-6. Basically I have two Zeta arms so I moved the one from the Oracle (with its added counter weights so the weight is closer to the gimballed bearing - great tweak btw) to the JVC plinth. I can call this now: "removable tonearm" as a twist on "removable head-shell":-). This JVC T-71 in its new plinth, walked all over my trusty Oracle. It was bold, muscular, dynamic, full sounding and much smoother, all at the same time. Macro dynamics were explosive compared to the Oracle. The only area where the Oracle did slightly better was separation of instruments and micro-dynamics like textures retrieval (like the asperities of a celloβs bow grinding on the strings, etc).
Adding some weights on top of the JVC plinth improved the micro-dynamics retrieval so we have concluded that with mass loading its go big or go home and with the idea of a friend, decided to build a crazy plinth: 36" tall, solid baltic birch plywood, cladded with a thinner sheets of plywood for added weight and for better aesthetics. It sits on my basement's concrete floor with the help of 3 massive, 5/8" (!) steel spikes that look like M61/Vulcan rotary cannon ammunition:-)
This baby was now weighing ~280 lbs and is basically a console, very similar in concept to the Denon DP-308F recording/mastering professional TT.
Even without the TT-101 in there yet, it is the best sounding TT I have ever heard, regardless of price and I heard many, 5 figure TT's like Well Tempered, various VPIβs, Avid Volvere, Scheu, Revolver, Oracle Mk V, fully loaded Linn LP12, Jean Nantais Lenco reference and even the Kuzma Stabi XL4 with air-liner air bearing tangential tonearm and Dynavecor XV-1 cart, which is the closest to it in sound, judging from my memory (only the Kuzma is a $40K TT before the arm and cartridge...)
It has been a dream come true for me and I can only imagine what the TT-101 will bring to the table (pun intended).
Thanks again for the invaluable pieces of advice!
Re the capacitors: removing the cage from the TT-101 reveals two stories of electronic componentsβ¦many capacitors. Which ones do you replace? All of them? Do they need to be the same or any similar specs of capacitance and voltage will do?
Thanks again!
Doron |
Doron, I understand exactly what you are talking about TTs ;-)
IΒ΄m experienced too in Oracles (have had two IIs, one III and one IV since the late 80Β΄s, the IIs were the best I never liked the stiffer suspensions of the later models). OracleΒ΄s suspension does not reduce sound stage nor smear the sound (as such) but it does kinda filter acoustic energy and thus filters details too. The Oracle fits all environments and still is a wonderful vintage TT when correctly finetuned, a very special design and one of the very finest suspensions if not the finest designed anyway. Btw, when you have been married with an Oracle its finetuning becomes a second nature but it is never easy, like in marriages in a long run I think.
Congrats on your new TT & happy listening. |
Doron
First glad you no longer have the platter scraping issue.
Yes the spindle on my TT-101 has a small amount of upward
movement perhaps 1/16? |
Lew, Concerning these non-offset arms, I believe the RS-A1 says tangent at 1/3 of the way from the inner groove. It's not clear if the inner groove is the lead-out groove or at the record label, but I think it means 1/3 of the way to the outermost groove or 92mm from the spindle. If it means 1/3 of the way from the final lead-out it would be 85mm from the spindle. The record label extends to 50mm from spindle (which makes 21mm from the spindle - in the label). The lead-out is at 60mm. The recorded part is to 155mm, and the record edge is 160mm. The description isn't explicit, maybe it lost something in translation.
Anyway, it makes sense that the one tangent point would be slightly toward the inside of the record. I've never seen a Viv arm. Fremer said something about the magnetic fluid being held in a chamber and the arm pivots effortlessly with no play or wobble. It won a couple product of the year awards. I thought maybe someone here was familiar. It costs over $4K.
Regards, |
Hello Harold,
The Oracle Delphi Mk II:
I agree with you that the new revisions of the Oracle do not bring something special to the table (pun intended:-)). The heavier platter with the o-rings on the circumference and the nylon screws to support the journal bearing does not really do anything. I especially dislike the acrylic mat which sounds hard and lean to my ears and think that the groove isolator is a much better choice.
The Oracle suspension is probably the best on the planet. You can hit with your fist on the acrylic base while it is playing and the needle would not skip.
Unlike designs like the Avid, Linn or Thorens, the springs are suspended rather than compressed, which helps getting a piston like action rather than wobble like most sprung designs. Sound wise, it is a king of micro dynamics, like the Quad ESL of the turntable world.
It retrieves air between instruments, textures and spatial information like no other.
The two main weaknesses of the design, in my opinion, are:
1. Speed stability - the oracle motor and belt were somewhat iffy in my mind. Even the turbo power supply and newer motors do not really overcome the weakness in maintaining speed stability and avoiding cartridge drag in transient.
2. The suspension is very effective at filtering noise which translates to pitch black backgrounds but it is also a source for energy drain which robs macro dynamics. Mass loaded TT always sound more impact-full and muscular compared to the Oracle, given the same arm and cartridge. |
Thanks, Halcro!
Its cooking all right. Seems to work fine once the bearing/spindle was lifted a touch. Dead quiet and knock on wood, everything seems to function correctly.
Next is to re-drill the motor cavity in my console/plinth to allow for the deeper cavity that the TT-101 requires (we originally drilled it for the shallower TT-71).
I will share my experience of the differences in sound of these two motors.
Cheers and thanks again for the invaluable help,
Doron |
Doron: I especially dislike the acrylic mat which sounds hard and lean to my ears and think that the groove isolator is a much better choice.
Totally agree. My first Delphi, Mk IV had that hard mat and with that stiff (clumsy to be honest) suspension it simply sounded awful (after a cheap Thorens !). So my first experience with Oracles was a disaster. Very well, thought I in frustration and bought a brand new GOLDMUND Studio. It was slightly better in sound quality but due to its floating and thus flimsy suspension it was just another disappointment, despite of its excellent direct drive and very heavy mass. But I wouldnΒ΄t give up with those extraordinarily designed Oracles and I changed the Studio to a beautiful looking heavier black acrylic based secondhand Delphi Mk III with gorgeous gold plated brass spring towers and with the original platter with the GROOVE ISOLATION mat. Unfortunately the adjustment stems for the spring towers were a bit out of place so the subchassis didnΒ΄t quite fit the stems so the suspension was impossible to finetune :/ Then I changed the Mk III to a secondhand Mk II... and bingo ! Along the way I lost a minor fortune but got a very nice sounding TT. Heh, young and foolish was I but it proved to a happy ending.
And I agree also in everything else you say about.
This is what I mean by a finetuned suspension:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql9Gq6ir7hA
Sorry guys, this is totally off-topic but I just couldnΒ΄t resist (grin). |
Fleib, I fear we are still on different pages. I am talking about how to mount an RS-A1. To do so, you aim it at the spindle and let the stylus fall about 21mm short of reaching the spindle. It is my belief that thus you will obtain tangency somewhere near the middle of the playing surface, or wherever you prefer by adjusting the stylus underhang (i.e., the stylus hits the label a little closer than 21mm from the spindle or a little farther away, whatever suits you). If you look again at the diagram in Hiho's reference, see the arc that is shown as a dotted line. See that achieving tangency at point B will require you to adjust underhang such that the stylus falls on that dotted line arc some distance from the spindle, which I take to be about 21mm, from my memory of the RS-A1 instruction manual.
Doren, For caps in the circuit, I would not stray from the original values given in the parts manual available on Vinyl Engine. Voltage rating can be higher than original but not lower. For caps in the PS, you may wish to use slightly higher values of capacitance, but there is no need for it. Yes, replace all. Any one of them can fail any time, after 30 years. Digikey and Mouser are good sources for Panasonic, Nichicon, and other top quality brands. For only a few bucks you can buy them all. |
Lew, Right you are, different pages. I was talking alignment. Interesting thing about that Viv arm. They say you can mount it almost anywhere. No drilling, it's a surface mount.
What about replacing resistors? They are said to age also. Do them on an individual basis?
Regards, |
|
Fleib, RS-A1 is also surface mount with no fasteners to the TT plinth surface. Thus you can (all too easily) move it back and forth with respect to the spindle, if you want to fiddle with where on the LP surface you will achieve tangency. The saving grace is that alignment need not be at all exact, because the best you can do is to achieve a single point of tangency on the LP surface. Precise positioning only affects WHERE that single point will be located.
Resistors are ageless, except carbon composition ones (cylindrical in shape and brown in color, bearing circumferential colored rings that denote the value in ohms) which can indeed drift over time and due to temperature. I suppose it would not hurt to check carbon resistors to determine whether the value is within ~10% of the schematic value. If so, I would leave them alone. If not, replace. |
Hello,
Finally got my TT-101 installed in my solid 40" tall birch plywood plinth with Zeta tonearm and EMT HSD-6 cartridge.
Then stayed until 2:00AM listening with fascination!
This is the best sound I have had in my system by a large margin.
So how does the TT-101 compare to the previously installed TT-71?
Smooth as butter, more refined, darker background, like voices come from outer space, so all the oracle's advantages (micro dynamics, air, pitch black background) + the macro dynamics, impact and the tonality of the TT-71, simply incredible!
Very happy and thankful to you all for your invaluable help in fixing the minor issue.
Off topic: Lewm, noticed OTL amps in your system. Great choice!
I own Joule-Electra LA-100 Mk III and VZN-80 OTL.
Heard other OTL's too (Tenor, McAlister).
OTL's are the most effortless, natural sounding amps out there, in my opinion. Closest thing to a wire with a gain...
Cheers,
Doron |
Doron,
I have always been curious about Joule OTLs, maybe because it's the only brand of OTL I've never owned or heard. I started with Futterman amplifiers in the 70s, owned many variants of the Futterman circuit, and now for the past 10-15 years have been using Atma-sphere amplifiers, as you can see. Most of my audio life has been OTL amplifiers driving ESLs. Lately, I've been enthralled by a pair of Beveridge 2SW speakers, driven of course by the built-in Beveridge amplifiers, which are not only OTL but also direct-drive. Amazingly good. The Bevs constitute a "second" system, in my basement. Atma-sphere/Sound Lab system is in my living room.
Well, I may now be the only one here who still does not have a completely reliable TT101. I can make mine work, but I would not say it is reliable, at all. I do have an idea of the problem and how to fix it, but I have too many projects, now including to complete the restoration of a 1959 Alfa Romeo Spider that's 95% done. To add insult to injury vis the TT101, its UA7045 tonearm seems to have a shorted wire somewhere inside. To use the TT101, I will now need to replace the tonearm on the QL10 plinth. Fortunately, the pivot to spindle distance for the UA7045 is close enough to that of the FR64S that I can sub the latter into the QL10. But since I love music more than tinkering, I tend to crank up the old reliable Lenco with Dynavector tonearm/Acutex LPM320 cartridge (muchas gracias, Raul), driving the Beveridge system via a Silvaweld phono stage and Klyne 6LX used as a linestage. The QL10 just sits there. |
OTL driving panels is surely a very good match. I have heard McAlister Audio OTL 195 driving Acoustat 3 with great ease (not an easy feat with speakers that swing impedance from 0.5 to 40 ohm!). King sound, like wise.
The Beveridge are very insteresting design.
I am not a panel guy but do appreciate their incredible transparency, their mid-top end coherence and their big sound stage.
I still like my "box colorations" and my trusty mid-bass:-) a matter of personal taste.
The Joule OTL is fairly full bodied OTL due to some 5751 driver tubes. With the Joule LA-100 Mk III premap its a very sexy/sensual sound (not muffled but very liquid) and a match made in audio heaven for my taste. Not sure the Joule is panel material though. Maybe the more powerful monoblocks can handle the low impedance but these take a lot of real estate and you could sell your furnace...
Someone wrote a beautiful piece about the Joule OTL's. I agree wholeheartedly:
"audio shows take the romantic sheen of cute packaging and sales literature very quickly. Once fatigue and impatience set in, you discover how much mediocrity is being promoted, and how few designs rise above the fray. The Joule amps exceeded my expectations. The second I heard them, I immediately knew what was missing from nearly every other amplifier on the market. This was the only amplifier I heard that could keep all the harmonic information together in one coherent image. It sounded like other designs were suffocating the harmonics, but hiding the damage behind oversharp highs or thumpy bass. The Joule is technically underdamped, but the bass has the rare quality of being tuneful, rather than punchy or visceral. This ability to be true to tone is the great distinguishing qualty of Joule. The complexity of piano strings is fully revealed instead of glary banging. Large stringed instruments have "cavity" , as if you can hear whats happening internally in the instrument. If classical music or acoustic music of any stripe is you favoured listening, Joule will absolutely ruin you for any other amp. It is the most civilized tube design in the world, if not the coolest running or easiest to live with. This isn't a toy, and it isn't ultra-convenient. You won't want this for ear-crushing boozy gatherings or adolescent angst sessions. It is an adult experience in the best sense of the word" |
The impedance of any ESL is a complex function of many factors, but basically an ESL can be viewed as a giant capacitor. Thus it will tend to have high impedance at low frequencies, and the impedance will tend to fall off at the very highest audio frequencies. More than one ESL measures 2 ohms impedance or less at 20kHz, for example. However, that same panel may well measure 100 ohms at 20 Hz. The step-up ratio of the audio transformer is also a major factor in impedance; many if not most "modern" ESLs present a relatively low impedance load as a deliberate design choice, to make the speaker more friendly to solid state amplification. Martin-Logan speakers are a particular example of this. The impedance seen by the amplifier will vary inversely as the square of the step up ratio of the audio transformer. So choosing a high-ish step-up ratio will tend to result in low impedance even across the mid-band. Crossover networks also tend to reduce impedance around the crossover point. My point is that your Joule amps can certainly drive any ESL that is built or modified to work well with a tube amp, i.e., any ESL with a decent impedance curve (e.g., >8 ohms) at low and mid-frequencies. There is little electrical energy required at 20kHZ, so a very low impedance at such high frequencies is nothing to worry about. For example, my SL speakers measured impedance at ~500Hz in stock form was about 5 ohms or less, not good for an OTL. When I removed all the crossover parts from my SLs and substituted the treble audio transformer with a full-range audio transformer, the impedance now measures 20-25 ohms at mid-frequencies. Needless to say, my Atma amps are in OTL heaven driving my 845PX speakers. And the improvement in sound afforded by getting rid of the crossover brought tears of joy to my eyes.
Try an original Quad 57 or a KLH9. Those great speakers were made to mate with tube amps from the get-go. You will be amazed. |
Hello Lewm,
I am well aware of the potential. Acoustat had model X which had the OTL directly driving full range panels.
My "issues" with panels are not how hard they are to drive.
I am well aware of their strengths. My issues is maybe my own personal perception but panels always make me analyze the music instead of listening to it and immersing myself in it. They give me an illusion that the voices come from outer space but the cavity of instruments are missing somehow as if the cavity was blocked or instruments were much flatter than what they really are. To me they sound like they miss the resonances of a stringed instrument but panel guys will say I miss box colorations, which is maybe the case.
Hard to explain why panels sound like that to me, but perhaps it has to do with mid-bass cancelation due to the dipole construction (destructive interference in physics). In addition, I always panels as coherent from the midrange and up but not so from lower mid-range to the deep bass.
I believe that some people are more sensitive to upper frequencies and some are more sensitive to lower frequencies and then you have the horns, which I could never warm up to due to my own preferences in sound reproduction.
In the end, at the highest echelons of audio, when clarity is achieved, our hearing and perception defers and everyone has his own preferences.
Otherwise we were all owning the same exact system, which would have made this hobby pretty boringβ¦:-) |
Doron, I misunderstood. Some people like olives and some don't. That's cool. As for me, I have yet to hear any box speaker I could live with, knowing that I could also have what I do have as an alternative. (I don't use the term "panel" speaker, as there are many kinds of panel speakers, e.g., Magnepans, which I do not wish to include in my endorsement. Nor do I feel the same enthusiasm about all ESLs, only certain ones.) |
Agree. Not all panels are created equal. I agree with you on the Magnepan.
I heard Martin Logan, King-Sound, Quad ESL and various models of Acoustat including 2+2, 3, 33, 4, 66.
The best of best of the lot was 3 located between two rooms (so it had almost the same distance to the back wall as to the front wall) with very high ceiling in the listening room. Dipole powered sub (two woofers back to back) included.
Driven by push pull tube amps and by OTL's.
Sound stage is huge, clarity is unparalleled, background is pitch black and it's quite dynamic too, unlike Quad ESL 57.
Probably the best implementation of ESL I hand ever heard.
Again, depending on source material, to my ears, mid bass was missing and bass to midrange connection was not to my liking.
Its a very impressive big orchestral pieces material. Just not one that I can personally live with. I am missing the wood:-)
Its interesting that in speaker choices there are camps:
Horn guys can never settle for anything else, ESL ditto (they are very sensitive to "box colorations" and to what they describe as separate drivers rather than one coherent sound wave, at least in the mid to upper frequency) and box speakers guys are also pretty stubborn in their choice.
In the end speaker choices are like "choosing" your wife:
She is not perfect but she is perfect for you, if you know what I mean:-)
I never changed my main "lowly" Sonus Faber Grand Piano Home speakers after hearing countless other speakers, including, comparing them, in the same room to "higher end" Sonus Faber speakers. Just to show there is a reason why I chose them in the first place,
The main thing is to chose a pair of speakers that work in your room (can't over emphasize that because speakers are never one size fits all) and to work with them rather than becoming a "speaker womanizer" who swaps speakers left right and centre to never assume each spraker's potential rather than picking a pair and find out how to make them sing.
Just my opinion based on my experience. |
I have noticed that some of the members here had experience witn Lenco and other idler wheels as well and was wondering what was your impression of the results compared to a DD in a heavy plinth.
My experience is limited to a friend's JN Reference with Analogue Instruments, 12" Cocobolo, Uni-pivot tonearm and various cartridges (SAE 1000 LT, Koetsu Black, low output Elac).
On the plus side:This combo had very good flow and sounded very smooth.
On the negative side: noise floor was high, which made dynamic contrasts lacking. Air, 3D and detail were missing.
A while ago, 3 audiophiles from Canada conducted a "Lenco Challenge": building a CNC machined, heavy birch plywood plinth for a donated Lenco drive, greasing the bearing and following The Lenco Heaven instructions.
Results were not super positive when compared to modern tt's like DD Brinkmann Bardo for instance:
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=28246&hilit=lenco+project+brinkmann&start=285
I was wondering what was your experience? |
I personally use other peoples' opinions only in the grossest way, as a guide to what I might NOT like. Which is why I usually don't even ask. This is because my brain already knows what it wants, and I've already spent decades taking my brain to where it wants to be. I own a Lenco in a slate plinth with a "PTP" top plate (see Lenco Heaven). The OEM bearing is completely replaced by a "Jeremy" Superbearing (see also Lenco Heaven). The platter is stock, but it has been dampened. The idler wheel and idler arm are stock, but I have replaced a spring that loads the idler assembly with a lead weight on a string. This was the idea of Jean Nantais, possibly one of the Canadians to whom you refer. I have a Dynavector DV505 mounted on the slate. The AC comes from a Walker Precision Motor Controller. This combo gives me great pleasure, plenty of "air", dynamics, 3D-ness, whatever. It may be a hair less super accurate on timing, compared to my Technics SP10 Mk3 and Kenwood L07D, but if you don't compare it to those two every day, you don't worry about it or notice a problem. It definitely crushes the prior turntable, a Notts Hyperspace, in terms of timing, but I thought the Notts crushed the SOTA I owned before that, especially on piano music. You mentioned noise; I hear zero issues with noise, but again the Mk3 and the Kenwood (especially) may be a hair quieter. No idler noise that I can hear whilst sitting in my listening chair at normal (loud-ish) sound pressure levels. I think (very tentatively) that the slate plinth is superior to the Nantais plinth Lenco I owned prior to embarking on the slate project, less noise by a tad.
Sorry to all. I think I wrote much the same post only a few days ago up the page. |
Lewn,
Glad to hear again that the Kenwood L07D is the protagonist on your stage. Proves the superiority of the maglev spindle over other designs. Without having not heard your system I do believe your evaluation 100 % and would agree because I have experienced the benefits of my maglev.
In my system I will never even think of trying a non-magnetic spindles. In my system I have managed to get rid of all the direct rim noise just recently, the adjustment is really a hair less.
Thanks for confirming this essential info about the Kenwood L07D, again. |
Hi and thanks for the thorough response!
What I meant by noise is not audible noise as much as high noise floor or lack of pitch black background which hurts the 3D and the dynamic contrast and gives you a sense of flatness to the sound.
It is still amazing that with 4 pole (!) motor, 50-60 dB S/N and wow and flutter at 0.6% one gets results that are not far off DD's with 75 dB S/N, core-less motor and 0.02% wow and flutter.
A lot of isolation, superior bearing and better platter, somewhat reminiscent of the EMT 927 and 930 idlers, I assume.
The one thing that these idlers have in spades is torque (which translates to drive, a sense of flow and PRAT) but my question is:
How much torque do you really need?
If you manage to overcome cartridge drag on transients with ease do you need the extra torque?
Does a Technics with 16kg cm sound more convincing than a TT-101 with 1.3 kg cm?
Lewm, I agree with you that opinions are just that, opinions.
At the end each of us have different reference points and preferences and what appeals to one person might not appeal to other.
I remember having a discussion with a guy who was very opinionated about things audio. He talked about turntables, about building his own record cleaning machine, about soundstage and audio preferences.
When he visited me and heard my system he said that the midrange intimacy and concentrated sound was too much to bear.
When I visited him I saw two Kef mini-monitors the size of Bose AM-5 located on the sides of a plasma TV with 1,600 watts SVS sub.
Basically a Bose sound - bloated bass and two tweeters with no midrange to be found. This is just to show you how amazingly subjective this hobby is. Who am I to judge? To each his own.
Many audiophiles will look at my gear and will say to themselves that its mediocre and that's fine with me. In the end its about pleasing our heart and not about convincing others that our sound is great.
I believe that with this understanding, when it comes to opinions, one can judge a differential (one item compared to another when all other parameters are the same).
Based on what I read between the lines, it seems that to make an idler wheel work one needs a heroic effort: see EMT 927 with its industrial washing machine sized motor and steam train flywheel sized platter and EMT themselves moved to DD once they could (once torque was sufficient to start a song in less than half a second when broadcasting). |
Harold, You are welcome to dissect the wonderfulness of the L07D and attribute that quality to magnetic levitation of the platter, but I think that misses the point. IMO, the L07D is transcendent because in its design every aspect of construction and function was considered and addressed in one single product, from plinth to headshell. One may quibble here and there with some of the choices that were made, but there is no denying that the L07D's excellence is the product of its "whole-ocity", if Harvey Rosenberg will forgive me for borrowing his parlance.
Doron, I have never seen in person an EMT927, but in my mind the EMT927 and the Lenco L75 are at opposite ends of a spectrum; the Lenco is on the "less is more" end of the spectrum, and the EMT is on the "more is more" end of the same spectrum. The business of torque is a mystery to me, because there is to some degree a correlation between torque and performance for dd and idler tt's (leaving belt-drive out of the discussion), but with some exceptions. The Lenco has a physically large and powerful motor, but the torque that can be delivered to the platter is always limited by the coefficient of friction between the idler wheel and the platter surface that is in contact with the idler wheel. In a Lenco, that contact patch must be small, because there was a negative trade-off to using a wide idler wheel, as is typical for idlers that drive the inside rim of the platter or the outside edge; a wide contact patch would cause "scrubbing" in a Lenco, between the idler wheel which "wants" to go in a straight line and the platter, which must rotate in an arc. So, the torque of a Lenco is truncated by the force required for the wheel to dissociate from the underside of the platter and skid. If you grab the platter, you can feel that happening well before the motor comes to a stop. |
Lewm, I do believe that the L07D is a triumph in TT design namely due its successfully completed construction in every aspect in one single product. I just think that the maglev is the dot of i, so to speak.
The Victor TT-101 is a triumph in speed accuracy & stability as Halcro has proved in his videos with the 3 TAs in action at the same time. I just wonder how it would perform with maglev on its spindle...
Both are truly exceptional and superb TT designs, even in todayΒ΄s standards IMO. |
Small point: As I understand it, the L07D platter is not completely suspended via Maglev. Rather, the load is only partially dissipated in that fashion; there is still some vertical force exerted on the bearing and thrust pad. (I never have pushed down on my platter so as to prove that to myself.) But to your point, the Kenwood engineers definitely saw some benefit in Maglev. |
KenwoodΒ΄s platter in partly "suspended" like ClearaudioΒ΄s. Actually itΒ΄s not floating and the spindle maintain contact with the trust pad. But the maglev takes platterΒ΄s weight in some extent and the force exerted on the spindle and trust pad is less. Does the maglev take the most or a great part of platterΒ΄s weight is another thing. Anyway, maglev in general provides some kind of benefit in sound quality. In my system itΒ΄s a serious improvement. |
|
Peter, THAT is so cool I am going to ask PBN if they can mount my DP80 in their plinth. A two-armed version would do nicely. |
Lewm
Certainly, we working on three of them, DP80, right now along with a DP75 two DP6000, one DP2000 and none less than 8 each DP3000. Let me know as soon as you are ready. On the Vintage Direct platform we can accommodate up to two arms, 12", 9" or one of each its basically up to you.
The rebuild includes a complete overhaul of the servo controller cards, a complete new power supply, including a new transformer, power filter etc.
Good Listening
Peter |
Pbn, My unit has been completely refurbished electronically. Even the very rare IC that runs everything has been replaced. (I found a source in Hong Kong.) However, we did not make an attempt to "upgrade" anything, except probably the diodes. It still has original transformer, etc. Can you go into more detail on how you "overhaul" the servo controller? (Sounds like you've been watching Chip Foose restore old cars.) Or should I contact you privately? (I tried to send an email to your website last night but could not find a way to do it.) |
I forgot to add that we replaced nearly all the original transistors, as well, since some of them have a reputation for having been unreliable. We used modern equivalents that have a better track record. |
Hello Lew
peternoerbaek@pbnaudio.com or call 619-440-8237
Sounds like you have the electronic overhaul done, but the transformer.
Thanks
Peter |
I have a SL1200 serial number 00092 and I died. |
Popsy,
I've heard the term 'Zombie Thread' but that's ridiculous! |
If you see Popsy walking very very slowly down the middle of your street, and if he looks kind of greenish and seems to want to eat you, just offer him an SL1200. |
just offer him an SL1200. If you want to see if Popsy can still do the Zombie dance, make sure the sl1200 is playing Thriller as he approaches u. - - - - sorry popsy could not resist :^( - - - @lewm the Armpod Drag can be seen at the 30 second mark of the video.... |
Dear Henry,
Here's a story about my TT101 that fits this thread. As you and some others may recall, I bought mine very cheaply in "broken" condition. Bill Thalmann re-capped it and Bill and I re-soldered many of the joints. All of that work did improve things, but it still has/had an intermittent problem that was rather maddening: It starts up fine but after 1-2 minutes, it "dies"; the power seems to cut off and the platter will coast to a stop, even though the "Power" light stays on. For this reason, I sort of gave up on it temporarily. I had a plan to build a jig for it, so that I can flip it over on either side, top or bottom, to work on the wiring harness, because my last hope is that the issue has to do with a cracked wire or a cracked solder joint somewhere inside one of the multi-prong connectors that traverse the various layers of the chassis. Today we're having a snow storm, so I spent some time building the jig. Then I removed the metal cannister/shield from the TT101 chassis and mounted the now naked chassis in my jig. For the heck of it, I re-installed the platter to see if I could reproduce the problem. Guess what. The TT101 runs reliably at perfect speed consistently, in naked form mounted in my jig. I think you had a similar finding way back when you were having an issue with your TT101. Do you still use yours in the "nude"? I am going to do that. I think the metal can is putting pressure on one or another of the harnesses and bringing out an underlying issue with solder joints or old wires that is moot when the TT101 is in the nude. I'll send you an email with a photo of my jig, which is just a piece of plywood cut out for the TT101, held up in space by three threaded rods.
So, this also makes me want to build a minimalist plinth to mount the nude TT101, something like yours but with an attached platform for mounting a tonearm, rather than an outboard arm pod. |
Hi Lew, I sincerely hope you've solved the problem permanently...πβ I seem to remember some 'false' hopes previously....β Whilst you are making up your attached platform....it is easy enough to mount a tonearm on something like...oh, I dunno.... a can of asparagus so that you can get the table running and see what you think....πβ |
You are perhaps referring to my innovative tt "feet", made of small cans of Mandarin Orange slices in water. I think Del Monte brand sounds best (joke here), but you may have different brands in Oz. I still use them under my Denon DP80 and Lenco L75, both of which are mounted in slate slabs. Actually, I do one thing further: the bottom of each can (3 per tt) sits on a tiptoe so as to isolate the sides and rim of the can from the shelf. I think you guys or the Brits say, "Works a treat". In this case, if you're unhappy with the feet, they are STILL a treat: you can open the cans and eat the contents. Oddly enough, when you remove the paper labels, the cans look quite avant garde and art deco. One visitor to my home thought they must be very expensive boutique footers. (Cost = ~$2 per can.)
Have you seen the Denons remounted in elaborate wood plinths, by PBN Audio? They've done a beautiful job, and I have no doubt that the Denons are much improved by getting rid of their cannister shield, just as are the Victors. But PBN go much farther to improve performance, other than merely removing the cannister, albeit at a very steep price. I've got to remove the cannister from my DP80, as well, even though it runs "like a top". I think the cannisters are a sonic negative, regardless of how they may or may not affect function. |
Henry, You're correct. There was one point in the past where I did think I had the problem solved, or more fairly, I did think that after all the re-soldering and fussing either I had accidentally re-soldered the exact right bad connection so as to actually fix the problem without knowing it, or the beast had cured itself in some mysterious way. At that point, the TT101 in its QL10 plinth was sitting on our kitchen counter. However, when I then moved it to its point of use in my basement, it turned out still to be possessed of evil spirits. If you recall, we also speculated on the vagaries of my household AC lines or the role of RFI, as causative agents. At one point, you removed the canister/shield from your unit, and I thought you reported that it ran more reliably in the nude. Isn't that when you discovered the wonders of the TT81? We talked at that point about the fact that the canister itself acts as a shield for RF generated inside the TT101, etc. Anyway, nude is advantageous for sonics as well as for reliability (no failures now in 4 days running off my basement AC), and I'm leaving it nude. |
Today its freezing and raining and gray outside. I took the opportunity to re-mount the now nude TT101 back into its heavily re-enforced plinth. Lo and behold, it still works. I am keeping my fingers crossed. |
Four days and the TT101 is still running reliably in the nude, back in its QL10 plinth. I realize no one gives a damn but me, but I just thought Halco would appreciate my keeping his thread alive.
I am convinced that the bottom canister cover, now discarded, was putting some stress on the wiring harnesses, such that an existing marginal solder joint or cracked wire was pushing or pulling so as to cause an intermittent circuit issue. I really don't care to find it (only because I and Bill Thalmann have already spent so much time looking for it with no luck), if things continue to go well. |
03-04-15: Lewm
Four days and the TT101 is still running reliably in the nude, back in its QL10 plinth. I realize no one gives a damn but me.... I care Lewm :^) The question I have of you, is if you had to put money on it right now. Which do you think will end up being more reliable. This turntable or your Alfa Romeo project ? |
Lewm pls disregard my Alfa question.
Aside from listening to music, and being a music lover my interest in my summer ride and cars is equal if not more than my passion for the gear part of this hobby. But this is not the forum for it. sorry |
