I believe the secret of the 927 may actually be simple. It works using brute force in a way that no one has ever tried to mimic in an idler type because of the difficulty of obtaining such a powerful and smooth running motor. EMT built that motor in house, but they used it on no other EMT turntable. There are also some construction nuances of the turntable that have been overlooked by other turntable manufacturers.
I have often wondered where my turntable would fall in a comparison. Would be better, as good, almost as good, no where near as good? Maybe I'll find out one day. |
A correction.
I misspoke when I said the 927's motor was made in-house. Rather, it was EMT designed, and built from scratch by a vendor. Still, it is an incredible piece of work. |
"Why will no other turntable beat the EMT 927?"
No one has countered with the question, "Why does the EMT sound the way it sounds?" Yet, many are all too willing to dismiss it out of hand. Personally, I have never heard an EMT 927, so I have no firsthand experience with it. I have studied it's design, however, and I am convinced that EMT did build a superior piece when they produced the 927. Is it the best? Tuchan thinks so. As a turntable manufacturer, I would like to believe that at least one beats it. :wink: Like everything else, your mileage may vary, and so it goes.
There are other issues here that are displayed by the notion of some that we have nothing to learn from history because it produced no true performers. To lump all vintage pieces into a single category based on age alone, and to lump all modern ones into another category for the same reason is folly, in my opinion. It would be like saying that all modern turntables are the same, and we all know that isn't true. The same goes when it comes to drive types, too.
Some turntables from the past are stellar by any measure. The Mitchell Cotter turntable is one example. It looks like a DIY project, but most modern turntable manufacturers can't begin to rival it on their best days. (That's my opinion, but not necessarily Tuchan's. LOL) The Fairchild Studio 750 is another example of a vintage force to be reckoned with. I'm sure there are others.
So, when it comes to turntables (or other equipment for that matter) we should ask why it's good, or why isn't, rather than making hasty generalizations based on age, or whatever.
That's my two cents on the subject, anyway. |
Dev,
They are $36,000. It takes many, many hours to build even one, so I make very few of them. No tonearm comes with the turntable.
I do not sell through dealers, but I may make it to RMAF this year. If you search the archives here, you will find comments of Audiogon members who have heard the Saskia turntable. I am proud to be able to say that their comments are extremely favorable. Admittedly, it is a rare beast. |
Mapman,
I agree. If an expensive turntable cannot hold its speed, it fails to meet the objective, doesn't it? Not only should it hold speed, it should be adjustable for those fine ears that, as Doug Deacon says, can hear a one-fifth harmonic.
Too many turntables today try to carry the day with bling. Bling is fine, but isn't much use when one closes his eyes, and tries to escape to that place where the music wants to take him. Maybe that level of performance is why the EMT 927 is held in such high regard after all these years. I initially posted just because I believe there should be historical references to inspire modern makers, and EMT set the bar for that. |
"Climbing the Everest is not about money nor is it a BtoB market...it is about personal achievement or ego......"
Perhaps, but I am convinced that the EMT is about personal achievement, not ego.
Mr. Franz understood one simple truth; that the job of the platter is not to control the resulting sound, but to provide the turntable's signature. That signature is merely his idea of what the resulting tone should be; it does not define the physics of the machine.
Unfortunately, that simple truth is lost on the vast majority of turntables in the world. Their designers often laud the perceived benefits of flywheel effect at the platter, but I am convinced that Mr. Franz abhorred the notion. I know I do, although I didn't for many years.
It's a lot more than that, though. His machine works as it does because he had a grasp of what its task really was. He was able to see it as an entity, rather than a collection of parts, and he knew what roles to assign each of part, so that it would be in perfect unison with all the others. That is what makes it an entity, and the end result follows logic without any gaps. There are no weak links. Every single aspect of its design can be defended. One cannot say that about most turntables, not even the purported "good" ones.
I suspect that in the end, whether one likes how EMT 927 sounds, or doesn't, depends solely on its maker's idea of what constitutes the proper signature because all the other bases seem to be covered. |
Dkarmeli,
I agree on all counts.
By the way, The motor for the EMT 927 was made in-house. A look at it will quickly reveal why it has never been copied. It would be pretty much cost prohibitive these days, not to mention that no turntable manufacturer that I am aware of has the in-house setup to actually do it. However, the Continuum has a motor that was especially built for it by a company in California. I suppose that company could do it, but would a sufficient market exist?
Here is link to a 41 page forum thread about the 927 where one can see the motor, as well as the other parts...
http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=7793.0
Raul,
I have never met anyone who can define neutral, so Dkarmeli's "natural" term is one I find far more appropriate. "Neutral" is probably the very last term that should be used anywhere around the audio hobby! If we knew what it is, everything would sound the same, and that would be so boring. ;) |
Raul,
"I know that you know exactly what I'm refering when I speak of neutrality on TTs."
I did not understand, and I did not mean to offend. It is just that I find the term to be misleading for the reasons that Thuchan explained so eloquently in the post above this one, assuming the word "bullshit" fits into ones definition of eloquent. Being the forward thinker that I am, I'll accept it. LOL |
Lew,
I did dismiss turntables with lightweight platters, until I heard a Mitchell Cotter. The motor can provide the needed system inertia, though. By the way, the EMT 927 platter is fairly lightweight. It is around 12.5 lbs. not counting the mat, if my memory serves me.
According to Mark Kelly's math, 35 lbs. is the cutoff point for the weight of an idler type turntable, but I have never put it to the test.
The servo mechanism used in top Denons seems to have a leg up on the others I have heard, but my exposure is extremely limited. |
Raul,
You asked, "Dear Mosin: What could be main targets for you or people like you when are going to design an audio item?"
Dksrmeli made three points that are key, in my opinion.
"They achieved that fantastic figure with a servo controlled motor, what that means is that the speed of the platter is continuously monitored and adjusted. This constant tweaking creates certain sonic artifacts that don't occur with an inertia driven system and a non-servo motor, where the platter spins continuously and seamlessly."
" There's nothing extra here, every element serves a purpose."
So, I would suggest:
1) Do not interrupt the flow of the music by altering the speed in some artificial way.
2) Use inertia to best make the music happen in a natural way.
3) Don't add useless elements that get in the way of the music.
Of course, there are nuances to everything, but if the designer misses one of those three principles when designing a turntable, he is screwing up, in my honest opinion. |
Raul said,
"Subject is that we must have measurements of the 927 as a reference independent of that: " I like it ", IMHO we have to know: what are we hearing with those today tipical measurements/facts?. It can't hurt if we know about."
True, but the rub is in what is measured, and how it is measured. Let's use speed control as an example. I make a turntable that is "speed accurate" to at least one part per million, which is the theoretical limit that can be achieved with an idler type drive due to the inherent tracking error of an idler wheel. I know that sounds impressive, but what does it tell us? The answer is not much, really. Why not? That is because such a measurement is an average.
Here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's assume that a given record has twelve transients of the same character on one side; say a cymbal crash followed by a low organ note. And, let's say that the turntable slows down 2% when it enters the transient, and speeds up 2% when it leaves the transient going into the low note, but only for a millisecond. Now, you have a smear in the music, and no matter how small it might be, the turntable is performing less than than optimum. So much for one the part per million measurement even if that is the average accuracy, right?
So, how could the measurement be beneficial? It is useful only for comparison with lesser turntables. However, if you calculate the inertia of the platter, then it would be useful without making some comparison that may, or may not, be a fair one. The reason that an inertia measurement along with a speed measurement would be useful is because then one could predict what might happen when transients are encountered. Nonetheless, it wouldn't necessarily tell anyone how the turntables sounds when compared to another one. Ears are best for that.
That crazy scenario is one example, but there are so many variables to almost every aspect of a turntable that developing a standardized system of meaningful specifications is virtually impossible. I would welcome such an endeavor, though. |
Dkarmeli,
Thanks for the kind words, but I think you have me confused with someone else because I don't have a website, yet. I am proud of my work, though. I suppose I should stop stalling on that the website. For me, the presentation of my work online is more daunting than actually building it.
"Solid engineering is the foundation the rest of creation is all art."
You are right about this. Many of us are wired that way, probably almost everyone who tries to reach the limits of our craft. At some point, the designer's personality enters the mix, even if it is unintentional. Maybe that is what constitutes the signature that I was talking about. |
David said, "Dear Mosin, isn't Oswald Mills yours?"
No, any association I had with that company was dissolved years ago. Saskia is my only product. |
Thuchan,
Here is no place to promote my turntable, but I will say that it is not a Lenco. That really isn't a fair comparison because it is an entirely different idler, like the EMT 927 is an entirely different idler. If you are coming to RMAF, we can continue down this path. I would like that.
Peterayer,
In reference to the Sutherland Timeline as a tool for judging turntables, I would be remiss if I didn't remind everyone that an uneven speed is far more critical than one that is a bit off. Recently, a group of us checked a stellar sounding vintage turntable that did not spin exactly to the Timeline standard. In fact, it appeared to be significantly faster. After checking it again with Fieckert's software, it was determined that it was spinning at 33.45 RPM, but it was perfectly consistent. The slight increase in speed is most likely due to a replacement belt that is probably the wrong thickness. Compare that turntable with a turntable that spins 33.34 almost all the time, but with noticeable moments of change that cannot be attributed to a parts replacement. Which would you pick? My point is that the tool should be used carefully, so as to not draw a wrong conclusion. |
