Let's consider higher-end tables that all sound excellent. Same arm/cartridge and the rest of the chain. Turntable is a seemingly simple device but apparently not quite or not at all. What do members of the 'scientific community' think?
and the Micro Seiki RX 5000 I bought new, then sold about 15 years ago and recently bought back two months ago , with its bearing in its original lube untouched or opened still moving a 36 pound platter effortlessly and quietly as the day I originally bought it new decades ago,... it gives me reason to not really concern myself with what leaves you unconvinced, biased or unable to accept . I use the proof every day , Even the well executed inverted bearing in my Orbe Se for a lighter suspended table shows the rewards of a quieter and low friction design and well made bearing. Any of the over 40 tables I have owned or built over the last 4+ decades that shined the best to me, had better built , quieter low friction bearings. Those that were not as close, needed massaging to reduce the noise, lesser point of fulcrum contacts make, as well as other poor designs and sources of noise.
Thanks, I am in USA. I have decided to wait for the Technics 10R. Believe that it will be designed to take another arm of your choice. Plan on a Tri-planar 12". I think it will be a game changer.
The Rockport treatise should be compulsory reading for anyone either contemplating the design of a turntable or who is merely interested in this issue. I am not a designer of HiFi equipment but it is a compelling, albeit lengthy, read.
The most salient point of the white paper is the assertion that the turntable platform/motor unit is responsible for “50% of the music signal”.
Why is that? Well, if you display an audio signal on an oscilloscope you will see it presented in 2 axes. The “Y” axis represents amplitude i.e. signal magnitude (this is the cartridge's responsibility) and the “X” axis represents the timebase i.e. the “timeline” of the music (this is the turntable's responsibility).
The speed stability of the T/T is instrumental in holding up its half of the bargain by maintaining this relationship with the other half of the signal.
Achieving that target both in the broad and transient sense is easier said than done, as the white paper will explain.
As has been highlighted by various contributors in the posts above, parasitic vibrations related to the T/T can also affect the cartridge’s ability to perform its function thereby complicating the situation even further.
This is why T/T “motor units” always influence the final sound.
In the early 1970s, I think Linn were the first to make the assertion that motor units sound different and started doing AB comparisons with other turntables to reinforce this fact in the public mind.
Basically speed and vibration are the right answers.
Speed: the more speed stable, the less 'shimmer' in the soundstage- the more it soundstages like tape. This is because the arm does not oscillate over the position of the stylus as it tracks the groove due to variation in skating forces as the LP rotation speed changes.
Vibration: there are several aspects 1) the platter pad has to control resonance in the LP without imparting any editorial of its own. To do this it has to be no harder or softer than the LP, but have the ability to absorb vibration.
2) the platter has to be dead such that you can hit it while the LP is playing and not hear anything in the playback. If you can hear something, its imparting its own signature.
3) the plinth must be dead also and here's a big factor: it must have absolutely rigid coupling between the mount for the platter bearing and that of the tone arm. If there is any flex or its not dead enough, the patter bearing and the base of the arm may be vibrating in completely different planes and different frequencies depending on the source of the vibration.
Turntables are all over the map on this last one; some are very good and some even have separate mounts that are entirely independent of the plinth (the latter demonstrating a misunderstanding of the requirements of proper playback)! Any difference in vibration between the platter surface and the locus of the cartridge in the arm will be interpreted by the pickup as a coloration.
To make your T/T selection headache even greater, take a
look at this You Tube clip. Even if you pipe this through a budget amp & speakers it
will give you a flavour of the turntable’s capability.
Bob Wood has posted quite a few with this particular turntable
plus at least 3 other tables. He also boasts, apart from his SPU collection, a
fine collection of Soundsmith carts, amongst others.
This table, my personal favourite of the 4, is a
rebuilt/restored Lenco idler drive built by a real craftsman and technologist.
If you were looking for a top VFM purchase you couldn’t go wrong with an
arrangement like this.
Not only does Bob superbly optimise & present the audio
aspect of his turntables but he does a killer video edit as well. :)
I’m always keen to see the latest thing that he has posted.
This link will put you in touch with more needledrops…
Most turntables from medium to high end have a vibration suppression system built into the unit. What I see as being the ultimate difference in turntable sound is the cartridge you select. The cartridge actually reads the vinyl and transmits sound to your integrated amplifier, preamp or receiver. Looking for better sound? Try auditioning better quality styluses.
Ralph, would you name those turntables you mentioned that were competent and sounded similar ? I know, I know, you don't agree aloud that vinyl is inferior to tape medium. Theoretically, maybe not but in reality..
Placing the turntable ANDelectronics in an adjoining room us the best. The only long wires needed are for the speakers. Of coyrse, tgen yih lose the awe factor of showing off your stuff, but for me it is about the music, not the show.
"Most turntables from medium to high end have a vibration suppression system built into the unit."
The trouble is when turntables do have some sort of vibration ISOLATION system built in, such as spring system, the built-in isolation system is not nearly as effective as a very competent outboard isolation system. The spring rates of the on board spring systems are just not as low as they should be to be effective. Obviously, the cartridge and tonearm are designed with very low resonant frequencies, which is intended to suppress acoustic vibration, but are still susceptible to very low seismic type vibration. While damping and resonance control for turntables might be issues, they are not substitutes for vibration isolation. Furthermore, some damping techniques are more effective than others. There’s a damping gap. 😳
Visited both of your links this morning. Again, I appreciate your solid information. Much food for thought here. Will definitely help and effect my future decision.
Just interesting reading from a fellow enthusiast and turntable designer. Hope some insight can be gained and either confirm or refute presumptions, assumptions, and the like. Happy Listening!
Ralph, would you name those turntables you mentioned that were competent and sounded similar ? I know, I know, you don't agree aloud that vinyl is inferior to tape medium. Theoretically, maybe not but in reality..
Kuzma Reference, Atma-Sphere 208, Technics SL1200 GAE with Triplanar arm, Technics SP-10MkIII with 12" Triplanar arm. I've heard a much longer list that I don't like and even longer than that are the ones I've simply not heard.
In addition to a solid plinth a robust drive seems to be really important to prevent shimmer in the soundstage. That is why the Lenco, Garrard 301s and some of the early Thorens have a following.
Regarding the tape/LP thing... Direct to Disc is really the only way for vinyl to really show off what it can do. So practically speaking, a tape with good proven provenance is likely to sound better... So in practice on this point I think we are in agreement. I mentioned that provenance thing because it appears that there are a lot of tapes out there that are questionable- its a bit of the Old Wild West on ebay for that stuff right now!
Would love to hear the differences on the above 3 turntables you liked. You have direct drive and a heavy platter with 3 motors and lighter platter with 1 papst motor.
I would like to hear about the tone, body, decay, attack, pitch, and separation of instruments.
Are you really serious? Placing everything but the speakers in a different room is ludicrous and extremely impractical. Actually, I am sorry to have even responded. Please relocate to planet earth.
There was a thread years ago about recordings from vinyl to half track high-end deck sounding in some respect better than the record. There were a lot of arguments from both sides. I think, tape has more fluidity and continuity, it also sounds bigger with more powerful propulsion. Few audiophiles will openly admit that their super set-ups don't have the best source existing. I don't have any direct to disc records, but to compare you need to have both tape and record of the same recording. Someone must've done it. So, all great turntables should sound similar, not the same - that's impossible - but very similar. Just as everything else, perhaps, except speakers ?
I found the KAB upgrade kits to be very educational in terms of how each upgrade impacts sound quality of the Technics. That is why I chose a Technics SL-1210M5G as my second turntable. I wanted to understand what affects sound quality for a turntable.
Would love to hear the differences on the above 3 turntables you liked.
You have direct drive and a heavy platter with 3 motors and lighter
platter with 1 papst motor.
I would like to hear about the tone, body, decay, attack, pitch, and separation of instruments.
I'm not sure I would characterize it quite that way...
Its important to understand that I've not heard all these side by side. At least all the 'tables mentioned had the same arm installed- the 12" Triplanar.
The best so far has been the Technics SP-10 MkIII. It came the closest to tape in the regard that there was absolutely no shimmer in the sound stage- something that is hard to describe until you hear it.
The SL-1200GAE was really similar. I've not heard it with the stock arm.
The model 208 is next- it is less speed stable, but does have a good solid plinth that is pretty dead and a very dead platter. The Kuzma was very similar but its plinth is not as dead. In addition if I had to guess I would say its drive simply is not as robust- it takes longer to get up to speed and the speed drifts more with stylus drag (but to be clear, not by much at all- its an excellent machine).
We've had tape in our room at shows. I've heard the 'tables above outperform the tape on the same titles; since some of those were analog sources, its led me to believe that we are in a period where lots of titles are showing up on half track 15ips 10.5" reels that don't have the provenance they need to actually outperform the LP- IOW, the LP is significantly closer to the master than the tape.
You guys run and sell your Comtinuums, Walkers, TechDases, Kronoses etc. real quick. They are not as good as Technics. And don’t argue, just do while you can still get a good price. Yeah, Rockport too. I am not talking about 100th generation copy of the master on junk tape. There are much more advantages than soundstage. But it should be top deck in top condition.
I'll take the new Continuum Obsidian, you know, the one with the mag lev isolated platter with huge, and I mean huge bearing. Also vibration isolation system for the tonearm. You guys can fight over the rest of them. And I would definitely use the Audio Technica wet playing system.
In my opinion, there is a certain "musicality" that's missing in many direct drives. Inner detail, densely woven layered imagery, finesse etc. I would call them macro machines as they get a lot of the big things right, but miss out on the subtleties that make an exceptional table. One reason for this is they are NOT necessarily more speed stable than belt drives. My tables in particular often produce less wow flutter and drift. Coupling a motor to the platter, in my estimation is a compromised design. Modifying them and adding a good match may produce a better result, and I have not heard the modded tables, and of course variables like the room matter too. Also, achieving the lowest possible w&f does NOT automatically make for a good sound. Other design criteria are just as important. Just my opinion
@anvil_turntables I have ordered a new bearing for my Technics, I took your suggestion and went for the sapphire-ceramic bearing. This will be my last upgrade. The next upgrade will be a new turntable of some kind.
If direct drive was obviously the best design approach not many turntable makers would stubbornly continue with the belt drive. Clearly, the situation is much more complex. Ralph, though you express your own opinion, I think that you misinform some people. You did say that there were many tables that you had not heard. Why would you choose the Technics before auditioning all of the top tables? And tonearms. And cartridges. I don't have an expertise to voice my opinion and I would certainly not rush when choosing one or another. Intuitively, that's what I would expect from great belt drive design - quietness and sophistication. I don't need it for jazzrock but I do for the rest I care to listen to.
I would think that would make for a noticeable improvement. Also, don't misunderstand, as I think the Technics are excellent and great value too. I just think this whole w&f measurement thing is way overblown. Maybe I am biased as I had some woeful experiences with direct drive Denons from the 70s and 80s that were a hollowed out grey sounding mess.
Interesting thread. We all know table/arm combo's will sound different. I liken it to global climate change. We all know its going on but it is difficult if not impossible to distinctly say why. There are a lot of factors. I tend to like the high mass tables with air bearings in both the platter and arm as i "think" this helps isolate or protect against sound effects from non-groove sources. How much is caused by what mechanism but every link along the chain from the source (ie groove) to the speaker impacts. Even the wire choice on a moving coil is touted as having an impact on the sound. I tend to agree with the crux of many of the responses in that vibrations caused by a variety of sources will impact the sound. I know that bearing induced sound from my old Michell occurred and changed as i tried different bearing types and oil types. Even the air bearing system will have a faint sound, though much less than any other table i have heard, as i rotate the platter as even with these there still is a centering pin that does provide some contact from platter to the table base. I do also agree in keeping the table if possible in a separate room from the speakers. is this a huge impact, not sure, but i do it primarily to keep my electronics in a more controlled environment. Obviously these are just my opinions and not based on scientific measurement but rather from 40 years in the hobby with many different tables
Ralph, though you express your own opinion, I think that you misinform
some people. You did say that there were many tables that you had not
heard. Why would you choose the Technics before auditioning all of the
top tables? And tonearms. And cartridges.
I base a lot of my assessments on an LP that I recorded (Canto General- using two different tape machines, an Otari and a modified Ampex 354 tube machine). (FWIW I feel that the Technics needs a different platter pad and plinth to really show its stuff).
Since I was there and have the master tapes, I have a pretty good idea of what the LP is supposed to sound like. I've heard plenty of 'tables; the closest I've heard that does Canto General properly has been the Technics SP-10 MkIII equipped with the Triplanar 12" arm (of all the arms I've auditioned, the Triplanar is one of the very few that gets everything right). I've found that the cartridge choice is less important if the arm tracks the cartridge properly and the phono preamp is stable.
I do concede that when I see a machine that ignores what I see as basic engineering principles with regard to playback, that I will be prejudiced about that machine. So I am far less likely to even audition it. I've learned that from using about 30 different machines at shows. Its not worth the frustration of getting things to sound right if the 'table isn't based on sound engineering.
As I said, according to Ralph everyone with good hearing and sense should go after the Technics and Triplanar arm. And don't forget about Atma-Sphere amps and Classic Audio speakers. Everything should be wired with Mogami cables, of course. That's the current state of the art. Yeah, that's how you lose competition not win.
Yet, there are those who gave up their Walkers and other high end tables and use highly modified Technics SP-10 MK III while claiming this set-up's with various arms and cartridges superiority. I would be happy to compare if I could. Most likely outcome is that it would be different with the advantages and disadvantages of either, and also a matter of taste and the synergy of the entire chain. At the highest level I believe you have to match everything, including turntable to speakers. The system should work in complete oneness. This would take enormous effort, but that's the only way. Science is science but art goes beyond it.
I think that almost everyone on these forums, think that they are applying science and art to their system at whatever level they are at.
Few mention that they are new to this hobby.
Fewer mention that they are wannabes.
I mostly agree with your comments. But, unless you have your Studer and have it fine tuned/ calibrated and your tapes match the calibration of that Studer; your almost in the same boat as the TT / vinyl people. I may be wrong on this point; perhaps you or Ralph can comment and clarify.
I will still wait for the Technics 10R.
It would be great if you would post your system with pictures. Help us visualize.
Oh no, I don't have Studer, that's my future project, but I am familiar with good tape sound. And I certainly would not get any high-end table without comparing it to the tape. As for proper alignment and calibration, I would leave it to professionals, there are still people who know how to do it. It is also how I would choose speakers - with Studer or Ampex as a source. And if I was a crazy audiophile millionaires I would also move along three sets of electronics - solid state, hybrid and tube to audition speakers. Let's say, Gryphon for solid state, Ypsilon for hybrid and Lamm for tube. Some would say why such an effort, just get Continuum and that's it. They might be right but they might be wrong too. So, speakers frst, 'wire with gain' second, turntable/arm/cartridge/phono last. nkonor, why are you so sure about that Technics ? Do you already use Technics and want to upgrade? It's expensive stuff.
We are not really closer to answering the original question. In essense, the only kind of answer we have so far is they just do sound different. Or, they just color the sound differently and that's why they sound different. The exact science behind it let alone art remain elusive.
The exact science behind it let alone art remain elusive.
I laid out what the engineering principles are. How well a turntable manufacturer adheres to them will determine how neutral their machine is.
We have a Studer A-80 in the studio. Of all the solid state machines we have, it is clearly the best performer (and by that I mean the most neutral). Tape calibration is not hard if you have an MRL test tape and the manual for the deck. The main difference between consumer decks and pro decks is that the consumer decks are usually set up for flat 1K-10K record and playback, while pro decks are usually set up for flat playback with the lowest distortion in record.
When we recorded Canto General, we used two different machines. Essentially one was tube and the other solid state, both fed the same signal from the mic preamps. That way we were able to audition the difference between the two master tapes. The tube-mastered tape seemed to sound more detailed on both the tube and solid state machines, so we went with that.
Its a simple fact that all tape machines sound different (assuming proper calibration), just as all turntables do (and for that matter, a lot of digital playback).
To defend Ralph against myself, though I only attack him when he is advertising, he is not alone who thinks that modified Technics SP10-MK III with the right arm, cartridge and phono comes very close to the tape sound. I just wonder if top belt drive tables were involved in those comparizons. I think, not sure, that when Fremer was evaluating the Continuum Caliburn he actually said exactly that - closest to tape, and so he got it for himself. It's easy to choose an open reel deck - just get Studer A80 or 810 or Ampex, and if you cannot any of those - Otari. But with turntables, considering that there are many, it's not easy even if you can audition them. But yes, I would actually compare any table with my deck. In other words, even if you are not going to use the deck, you need it to choose a turntable ! And possibly speakers too. In fact, anything. I don't think many do it this way but maybe more than I would expect.
Anvil, With reference to direct-drive turntables, you wrote, "Coupling a motor to the platter, in my estimation is a compromised design." You are not the first person in your industry to make such a distorted statement, so I am sensitive to it. In a direct-drive, the platter IS the rotor of a motor that has its stator mounted symmetrically around the spindle. There is zero possibility for the coupling to introduce noise, except for the noise of the bearing itself. Bearing noise is a bugaboo common to all types of turntables. Quiet operation is a virtue of direct-drive, not a problem. DD introduces other possible issues, but not that one.
As to your statement about DD lacking microdynamics, this can happen if the motor causes counter-rotation of the stator, because of the hi-torque forces involved. (Motor drives platter in clockwise direction but its torque exerts an equal force in the counter-clockwise direction. Per Newton's Third Law of Motion.) If a tiny amount of counter-rotation of the motor or its parts occurs, this results in a perceived speed error by the servo, and the servo exerts a correction. Thus there can be a constant hunting for speed on a very micro level that is not readily perceived as pitch error but as a loss of detail or a mechanical sound. This is why DD turntables do best in massive plinths, IMO. But also, Richard Krebs has addressed the issue for Technics tables with his internal mods that reduce the capacity of the stator to rotate against its own force.
I don't waste my time arguing for one turntable technology uber alles. I have found what I like, and I plan to stick with it. Probably the same is true for others participating in this thread who champion other drive technologies.
Inna et al, Like any top dogs in any field of endeavor, both the Continuum Caliburn and the Rockport Sirius have their detractors, even among belt-drive aficionados.
I would also think that the belt in the belt drive design should be very important. It's like a cable, in a manner of speaking, that connects two components. I can even imagine that at this level my preference might depend on a particular music and record, so I would take both the Continuum and modified Technics, no need to choose, really.
This is a bit of an Oxford Entrance Exam question, but IMHO and in short:
1. Drive mechanism - affects timing fundamentally - the amount of vibration transferred into the playback and indeed the type/cycle of vibration; 2. Platter - channeling of resonances from the record - also relevant to speed stability and is fundamentally linked to drive mechanism 3. Plinth/suspension - again vibrations both from the record, platter, bearing, and room born 4. the arm - energy transference from cartridge; cartridge match; resonance control
It is arguable that almost everything has an affect on the performance between decks. Just compare the various Linn Sondeks which have seen generations of change - new top deck; bearing; motor, and power supplies. For instance some arms are too heavy for the suspension on the LP12.
What is more interesting is when you have two totally different decks that sound almost the same - but I guess that brings around another whole new topic of discussion ;)
I have pondered whether or not all decks should all aspire to have the same sound, but I think being neutral and altogether accurate is an impossible ideal - why you ask? Well a full rock band, let alone an orchestra can fit in the average persons living room - so how can we expect all-together accurate replay of that very thing?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
