Useless anecdotal observation about noise
Found my mechanics stethoscope yesterday.. Some interesting if anecdotal observations follow..
I decided out of curiosity to "listen" to a couple of different points on the chassis, arm and armboard while playing a record.
The big surprise was that I could actually hear rather band-limited music through the stethoscope (the stethoscope has a bandwidth of a few hundred Hz at best) which was loudest on the arm bed plate.. I'm running a low compliance cartridge (ZU DL-103) at 2.5gms on an Orsonic head shell on an SME 3009 Series II (not improved). Clearly there is a lot of energy traveling up the arm tube and across the bearings into the bed plate and hence the chassis. I now understand why there was such a massive improvement when I removed those grommets - presumably this energy needed somewhere to go.
I would say that this "noise" is probably more than a few dB higher than the mechanical noises generated by the table which incidentally seemed quite low and uniform across all of the chassis when running, but not playing a record.
All quite subjective and no way to relate this to any sort of meaningful measurement, and since I have never tried this on another table - impossible for me to related overall to anything else. I'll try that soon as I have two other tables here I can "evaluate."
Found my mechanics stethoscope yesterday.. Some interesting if anecdotal observations follow..
I decided out of curiosity to "listen" to a couple of different points on the chassis, arm and armboard while playing a record.
The big surprise was that I could actually hear rather band-limited music through the stethoscope (the stethoscope has a bandwidth of a few hundred Hz at best) which was loudest on the arm bed plate.. I'm running a low compliance cartridge (ZU DL-103) at 2.5gms on an Orsonic head shell on an SME 3009 Series II (not improved). Clearly there is a lot of energy traveling up the arm tube and across the bearings into the bed plate and hence the chassis. I now understand why there was such a massive improvement when I removed those grommets - presumably this energy needed somewhere to go.
I would say that this "noise" is probably more than a few dB higher than the mechanical noises generated by the table which incidentally seemed quite low and uniform across all of the chassis when running, but not playing a record.
All quite subjective and no way to relate this to any sort of meaningful measurement, and since I have never tried this on another table - impossible for me to related overall to anything else. I'll try that soon as I have two other tables here I can "evaluate."
To give you an idea, when I reassembled the motor and screwed the top and bottom plates back in place with the felts, oil was oozing out of the bearings housings. Also, I let the bearings bathe in oil for 24 hours at least before reassembly.
I just got back from work yesterday night (left thursday morning), so I will continue to run the motor in and keep you updated.
Thanks for all the input so far!
Just finished reassembling most of the tt. The only piece left to install is the clutch but I'd like to replace a piece of teflon tape on it before I do.
The turntable is actually spinning, running pretty quiet as I only hear a bit of noise from the rotation of the idler wheel. All speeds work, it comes up to speed pretty fast and seems to be holding it very well, although I've checked only by using incandescent lighting, strobe light doesn't work.
I had to spray clean the electrical contact assembly since it was sticking in the off position. After application of De-Oxit and working the spring manually, it came back to life and now works flawlessly when switching between the speeds.
It took me a good 6-7 hours to complete the work since I didn't take any picture while disassembling and had to rely on picture from this site:
The Analog Dept.
Very useful....!
Now, I can't wait to receive the RCA connector modification for my SME 3012,
I'm very anxious to hear the results of my work on the tt!!!
The turntable is actually spinning, running pretty quiet as I only hear a bit of noise from the rotation of the idler wheel. All speeds work, it comes up to speed pretty fast and seems to be holding it very well, although I've checked only by using incandescent lighting, strobe light doesn't work.
I had to spray clean the electrical contact assembly since it was sticking in the off position. After application of De-Oxit and working the spring manually, it came back to life and now works flawlessly when switching between the speeds.
It took me a good 6-7 hours to complete the work since I didn't take any picture while disassembling and had to rely on picture from this site:
The Analog Dept.
Very useful....!
Now, I can't wait to receive the RCA connector modification for my SME 3012,
I'm very anxious to hear the results of my work on the tt!!!
I think the information received from using a mechanic's stethoscope on a turntable is very useful. I don't think I would use the word "subjective" in this case, because anyone can do the same and should hear the same result. (Assuming the same TT being observed by several different persons.) Also, Physicians and nurses still use the stethoscope to listen to your circulatory system. Of course they have training in how to use the tool. And we probably don't.
I think of it as a tool for objective observations. Whether that be a vibrating drive train of a TD124, or a slightly noisy rocker on a Datsun L18sss motor, where one rocker is heard to be louder than its neighbors.
But the downside is that the stethoscope does not produce a document that we can share with others.
Anyway, I trust you will find much usefulness from the new stethoscope in your future turntable tuning sessions. I wouldn't be without mine.
-Steve
I think it will be very useful for troubleshooting TT noise sources going forward. I've owned this particular mechanic's stethoscope for about 27yrs now, and I think this is about the third time I have used it since that time. It spent the last 7yrs out in the garage and has now found a place of honor in my lab tool box..
Well, here is the fruit of my labor!
I'm very happy with the results so far. Now the real test is coming, as soon as the SME 3012 is modded and installed. Many thanks to you Kevin and the others who built this thread, I will continue to follow it and hopefully keep on learning about this marvel!
I'm very happy with the results so far. Now the real test is coming, as soon as the SME 3012 is modded and installed. Many thanks to you Kevin and the others who built this thread, I will continue to follow it and hopefully keep on learning about this marvel!
Attachments
Looks very good. The 3012 with a DL-103 or better still an SPU should be an excellent match. Do yourself a big favor and remove the bed plate grommets before you install the arm - it will sound much less colored in the low and mid bass, and just generally better.
Thanks Kevin!
I remember you writing about the bed plate grommets earlier on... I haven't ordered any new ones since I'm going to follow your advice... I'm, however, waiting on an RCA connector upgrade for my 3012.
Will keep you posted.
TD124 Listening notes 5/14/2011:
I'm still listening to #2729 and the Zeta/Uwe bodied DL-103R. With regard to tonearms I must confess I've a strong temptation to try something in the 12 inch range. I've been reviewing my options here.
1) modify a SME 3009 S2 into a 3012 condition by the replacement of the original armwand with one for the 3012. Then add a longer end stub and perhaps replace the 3009 cw with a heavier one. Perhaps made of brass rather than the steel/chrome satin plated original. A chap named Jeremy, who haunts the Lenco Heaven is making these parts for SME conversions. He has a number of replacement parts designed to modify/upgrade the arm. I'm looking at this.
2) Buy an original Ortofon RMG 309 and refurbish it. (expensive option)
3) consider the Schick (not cheap but by all accounts, very good value for the dollar spent)
4) Look into Ikeda 12 inch arms. (expensive)
5) FR-66s (no longer an option due to the insane collector prices being received for this arm)
6) EMT 997 (Banana arm)
In one of the rear recesses of what remains of my brain, there is a nagging thought that the differences I'm likely to hear will be at best, only marginally better than what I've got now. But in another area of what remains of my brain, there is a similarly nagging thought that I won't know til I try it.
re: what I've got now. This particular Zeta arm has an Incognito wire harness utilizing vdH silver wire and Incognito clips and plugs. Taking advice from other Zeta owners I removed the back cover from the cw. This improved upper end detail and air. Subtle but worthwhile. I'm also doing some "mass tuning" by using a head weight between the cartridge and its mounting to the arm. I've got the Denon and arm resonating at 9hz on the hfnrr test record. That was my target range. ('kept adding weight till it reached 9hz)
In general, this is one very dynamic sounding tonearm. A nice compliment to the TD124 which does have the ability to project the power and force of music. Much more so than most suspended belt drives, I suspect. In this context, the Zeta gets out of the way and allows the musical energy to flow through into the listening room. At the same time, this arm gets out of the way and allows detail, air and transients to to manifest themselves. (Yes the TD124 does allow some detail and air. And so do these Denons when fitted with a nice Uwe body)
On whichever 12 inch arm I make/acquire, I plan to continue using one of my two Uwe bodied DL-103R's. The one shown in the top photo has the standard conical tip. Another has the Uwe Panzerholz body and a SS ruby cantilevered/ FL stylus re-tip. The SS retip adds a some more detail, air and transparency to the already good Uwe-bodied Denon. But there is something about the standard conical tip version that I like for playing 60's/70's rock records. Perhaps it is a forgiving combination that ignores some surface noise while allowing the essential parts of the performance to shine through while allowing the objectionable parts of the recording to remain in the background. Not sure which of these I prefer best but it's nice to be able to make the comparison.
While thinking about 12-inch SME's and Ortofons I picked up the nos Orsonic from 2Juki. This should be one viable option for holding a Uwe-bodied Denon. The AV-101s weighs 16g by itself. Just about right, I'd think, for a low compliance MC.
Other notes:
It's starting to look like spring around my part of the country. (Seattle area). Ambient temperatures in my listening room are now hovering in the low seventies while outside temperatures tend to range in the 50 - 60 deg (F) range. This warming trend reminds me of how temperature sensitive the TD124 is. Today the TD124 comes up to speed from a cold start within a few rpms. It hasn't been since early October when it did this. During the winter months, when I allow ambient room temperatures to range in the mid to high sixties, the TD124 takes a few minutes to reach operational speed from a cold start.
Keven:
I'm looking forward to reading your impressions of the Schick. This could be an option for me. Did you get yours from Jonathan?
-Steve
I'm still listening to #2729 and the Zeta/Uwe bodied DL-103R. With regard to tonearms I must confess I've a strong temptation to try something in the 12 inch range. I've been reviewing my options here.
1) modify a SME 3009 S2 into a 3012 condition by the replacement of the original armwand with one for the 3012. Then add a longer end stub and perhaps replace the 3009 cw with a heavier one. Perhaps made of brass rather than the steel/chrome satin plated original. A chap named Jeremy, who haunts the Lenco Heaven is making these parts for SME conversions. He has a number of replacement parts designed to modify/upgrade the arm. I'm looking at this.
2) Buy an original Ortofon RMG 309 and refurbish it. (expensive option)
3) consider the Schick (not cheap but by all accounts, very good value for the dollar spent)
4) Look into Ikeda 12 inch arms. (expensive)
5) FR-66s (no longer an option due to the insane collector prices being received for this arm)
6) EMT 997 (Banana arm)
In one of the rear recesses of what remains of my brain, there is a nagging thought that the differences I'm likely to hear will be at best, only marginally better than what I've got now. But in another area of what remains of my brain, there is a similarly nagging thought that I won't know til I try it.
re: what I've got now. This particular Zeta arm has an Incognito wire harness utilizing vdH silver wire and Incognito clips and plugs. Taking advice from other Zeta owners I removed the back cover from the cw. This improved upper end detail and air. Subtle but worthwhile. I'm also doing some "mass tuning" by using a head weight between the cartridge and its mounting to the arm. I've got the Denon and arm resonating at 9hz on the hfnrr test record. That was my target range. ('kept adding weight till it reached 9hz)
In general, this is one very dynamic sounding tonearm. A nice compliment to the TD124 which does have the ability to project the power and force of music. Much more so than most suspended belt drives, I suspect. In this context, the Zeta gets out of the way and allows the musical energy to flow through into the listening room. At the same time, this arm gets out of the way and allows detail, air and transients to to manifest themselves. (Yes the TD124 does allow some detail and air. And so do these Denons when fitted with a nice Uwe body)
On whichever 12 inch arm I make/acquire, I plan to continue using one of my two Uwe bodied DL-103R's. The one shown in the top photo has the standard conical tip. Another has the Uwe Panzerholz body and a SS ruby cantilevered/ FL stylus re-tip. The SS retip adds a some more detail, air and transparency to the already good Uwe-bodied Denon. But there is something about the standard conical tip version that I like for playing 60's/70's rock records. Perhaps it is a forgiving combination that ignores some surface noise while allowing the essential parts of the performance to shine through while allowing the objectionable parts of the recording to remain in the background. Not sure which of these I prefer best but it's nice to be able to make the comparison.
While thinking about 12-inch SME's and Ortofons I picked up the nos Orsonic from 2Juki. This should be one viable option for holding a Uwe-bodied Denon. The AV-101s weighs 16g by itself. Just about right, I'd think, for a low compliance MC.
Other notes:
It's starting to look like spring around my part of the country. (Seattle area). Ambient temperatures in my listening room are now hovering in the low seventies while outside temperatures tend to range in the 50 - 60 deg (F) range. This warming trend reminds me of how temperature sensitive the TD124 is. Today the TD124 comes up to speed from a cold start within a few rpms. It hasn't been since early October when it did this. During the winter months, when I allow ambient room temperatures to range in the mid to high sixties, the TD124 takes a few minutes to reach operational speed from a cold start.
Keven:
I'm looking forward to reading your impressions of the Schick. This could be an option for me. Did you get yours from Jonathan?
-Steve
Last edited:
Hi Steve,
Yes, I purchased my Schick through Jonathan over at OMA - he's the only authorized agent for the United States. The arm shipped directly from Schick in Berlin to me. The time from order to delivery was about 14 weeks, lead times might be a bit longer now as demand has increased lately..
I mounted it on a quickly cobbled together and completely inadequate kluged arm board. The results are rather interesting to say the least. As a preface I am really glad I went this route, although the long wait and the financial commitment go against my grain for instant gratification. I must be growing up..
I agonized over getting a 3012 instead, but the cost is comparable and I am relatively confident that the 3012 is not the equal of this arm.
I'm using an Orsonic headshell with the Zu DL-103-1 and the optional counterweight intended for for use with the SPU.
The sound could not be much more different from the 3009 as far as the Zu is concerned. It's much darker, fuller, meatier, and in a good way I'd say - the detail is all there (and then some) the bottom end is very solid.
The sound is detailed, precise and this arm makes the Zu shine in areas where it hadn't previously. The midrange tonal balance is much more neutral in comparison the 3009/Zu combination and is something of a relief as the mids and highs generally sounded a bit aggressive in retrospect. (Reminiscent of the difference between aluminum and titanium diaphragms in mid compression drivers.)
I am no where near realizing the full potential of the arm given what it is mounted on, but should have the slate plinth in a month or less.
The arm is a joy to use, and not very fussy about set up either, changes are quickly and easily made. I anticipated difficulty setting the tracking force, but had it accurately set within 5 minutes, and there is no way for it to inadvertently get out of adjustment.
Yes, I purchased my Schick through Jonathan over at OMA - he's the only authorized agent for the United States. The arm shipped directly from Schick in Berlin to me. The time from order to delivery was about 14 weeks, lead times might be a bit longer now as demand has increased lately..
I mounted it on a quickly cobbled together and completely inadequate kluged arm board. The results are rather interesting to say the least. As a preface I am really glad I went this route, although the long wait and the financial commitment go against my grain for instant gratification. I must be growing up..
I agonized over getting a 3012 instead, but the cost is comparable and I am relatively confident that the 3012 is not the equal of this arm.
I'm using an Orsonic headshell with the Zu DL-103-1 and the optional counterweight intended for for use with the SPU.
The sound could not be much more different from the 3009 as far as the Zu is concerned. It's much darker, fuller, meatier, and in a good way I'd say - the detail is all there (and then some) the bottom end is very solid.
The sound is detailed, precise and this arm makes the Zu shine in areas where it hadn't previously. The midrange tonal balance is much more neutral in comparison the 3009/Zu combination and is something of a relief as the mids and highs generally sounded a bit aggressive in retrospect. (Reminiscent of the difference between aluminum and titanium diaphragms in mid compression drivers.)
I am no where near realizing the full potential of the arm given what it is mounted on, but should have the slate plinth in a month or less.
The arm is a joy to use, and not very fussy about set up either, changes are quickly and easily made. I anticipated difficulty setting the tracking force, but had it accurately set within 5 minutes, and there is no way for it to inadvertently get out of adjustment.
Attachments
Update on noise reduction efforts
My TD124 is now behaving significantly better.
Old belts were fitted, I was able to get hold of two very well used belts, that had a much greater elasticity than new belts, also compared with the pair I bought from Beverly Hills, FL.
And when I fitted the old, discarded belts, the engine whirr was significantly reduced, without sacrificing platter performance. I am now stretching one of the new belts, to see how it will perform, once the tightness has been reduced.
Difference in elasticity between new and old belts is significant - the new belts resist being stretched, while the old ones are easily stretched quite a bit, relatively speaking.
I also switched idler wheels, to see whether that would affect performance. I had an idler wheel with bearings that produced a little "knock-knock" until I applied the grease that comes with the Schopper noise reduction kit. After I applied grease, the "knock" completely disappeared. I was able to get a wheel with good bearings and mounted that, without grease - and that runs truer than the old idler wheel.
I experimented with talcum, but with the more elastic belt that's not necessary, I feel.
But I did discover something that may be of interest - the Thorens libelle (level) mounted on my deck wasn't in true level! There shouldn't be room for error here, as the libelle is pushed into its slot, and should seat in a way that lets it indicate true level.
I discovered this when I bought an Ortofon record clamp with a bubble level indicator - and the two were not indicating the same. I therefore checked platter level independently, and it turned out that the smaller libelle was out of horizon.
Once I adjusted level according to the bubble on the record clamp, the noise floor through the speakers was lowered.
I understand that mounting the arm independently of the chassis, directly on to the plinth, can also significantly reduce the noise floor, and I'm going to experiment with that.
My TD124 is now behaving significantly better.
Old belts were fitted, I was able to get hold of two very well used belts, that had a much greater elasticity than new belts, also compared with the pair I bought from Beverly Hills, FL.
And when I fitted the old, discarded belts, the engine whirr was significantly reduced, without sacrificing platter performance. I am now stretching one of the new belts, to see how it will perform, once the tightness has been reduced.
Difference in elasticity between new and old belts is significant - the new belts resist being stretched, while the old ones are easily stretched quite a bit, relatively speaking.
I also switched idler wheels, to see whether that would affect performance. I had an idler wheel with bearings that produced a little "knock-knock" until I applied the grease that comes with the Schopper noise reduction kit. After I applied grease, the "knock" completely disappeared. I was able to get a wheel with good bearings and mounted that, without grease - and that runs truer than the old idler wheel.
I experimented with talcum, but with the more elastic belt that's not necessary, I feel.
But I did discover something that may be of interest - the Thorens libelle (level) mounted on my deck wasn't in true level! There shouldn't be room for error here, as the libelle is pushed into its slot, and should seat in a way that lets it indicate true level.
I discovered this when I bought an Ortofon record clamp with a bubble level indicator - and the two were not indicating the same. I therefore checked platter level independently, and it turned out that the smaller libelle was out of horizon.
Once I adjusted level according to the bubble on the record clamp, the noise floor through the speakers was lowered.
I understand that mounting the arm independently of the chassis, directly on to the plinth, can also significantly reduce the noise floor, and I'm going to experiment with that.
I'm using chassis #2729. Early version, circa 1959 or perhaps a little earlier. The stepped pulley/capstan drive is the early design with its axle fixed solid to the chassis. A bearing ball at the very top of the solid axle functions as the vertical thrust for the stepped pulley/capstan.
I think this earlier design holds up very well over time. I'm not so sure about the later re-design of the stepped pulley axle as is seen in the very late mk1 and mkII models. One example I'd give to support this idea is that my version seems to tolerate different drive belts of different thickness/length and tension without any overt/obvious difference in perceived drive train noise levels.
I've been using the belts sourced from Elex-atelier for the TD124 for the past few years. A few of them on different TD124's. It has seemed just a touch tight going over the 60hz pulley but wears in well. No perceived increase in drive train noise when using this belt versus an old stretched belt.
Then recently I've tried a new belt from Thorens Export. The one with the Thorens logo. It actually fits up easier than the Elex-atelier belt. Also, no perceived increase in drive train noise. I'm using it now. No problemo.
Sometimes, the real problem with motor noise has more to do with the self-aligning motor bushings (top and bottom) being slightly out of line to the motor axle shaft. It pays to revisit the adjustment procedure for this as many times as it takes until that motor runs as quiet as it can.
Sorry, but this is subjective stuff. If we had a factory spec for motor bushing alignment complete with motor vibration analysis and a chart with real hard values to shoot for, that would be one thing. 'Til then we are reduced to getting a 'feel' for the least vibes/smoothest running by listening through a mechanic's stethoscope as the probe touches upper and lower casings of the running motor. Then lightly tapping on one case or the other to 'adjust' orientation of the bushing within while the 4 machine screws are just loose enough to allow the case to slightly move in any direction. The stethoscope is a must have for motor bushing alignments. It does work.
Anyway, just sayin' no belt troubles over here on an early example TD124.
re: level
Very important stuff to get the TT leveled up to planet earth. (any TT) Tonearm performance comes into the right zone when the TT is correctly level. I don't expect a simple level like the one on the TD124 chassis to be the last word. It's crude in its precision but looks attractive and adds to the overall appraisal of the deck. I agree that it's a good idea to check with different levels. One thing to beware of when using the platter to check level on the TD124; bent outer platter shells. When the upper surface of the platter shell is a little bit warped, placing a level over that surface will issue false reads.
re: idler wheels and knock.
I've seen just a slight cleaning/scraping of the outer rubber surface of the idler make the difference between a slight knock, and silent running. Indicating foreign matter stuck to the surface of the tire.
Interesting results you report on the Schopper "noise reduction kit". They sure charge enough for that little vial of grease. It reminds me of bicycling days past. Campagnolo sold a grease with their name on it designed to quiet the bearings of their rear hub. It turned out that the grease was effective because Campy took standard white lithium grease and mixed in a generous amount of talcum powder. It changed the color of the lithium grease to a light beige and added substantial 'texture' into it. And that is what silenced their rear hubs.
I think what Schopper is doing with their "noise reduction kit" is substituting standard oil lube with a more viscous grease to take up some of the slop between bushing and axle that has developed due to wear over decades of use. If it works to good effect, it's a good thing.
The idler wheel is one area of the TD124 that could stand some improvement. Currently our options range between:
a) finding a good but 50 year old wheel and using that
b) finding a good wheel then having it re covered with new rubber (a few shops do this)
c) a new Mirko idler for the TD124 (the Mirko idler is pretty much a reproduction of the original design)
My take; this TT could benefit from a re-design of the idler wheel complete with high precision vertical and horizontal true running characteristics, improved bushings, and modern tire materials.
anyway, my two cents.
-Steve
Thanks, Steve - good feedback. After trying the old and stretched belt, I have now mounted a "Beverly Hills, FL" belt - I had it stretched overnight.
Very interesting result - the engine is now completely silent, no whirr at all, and while having been stretched overnight, this new belt is definitely tighter than the old stretched one.
And that leads us to considering rubber composition and surface structure, I'd think. Maybe even how the belt is taken up and comes off the engine pulley because of same.
I now have a whispering instead of whirring engine pulley/belt, and that's a good thing.
The grease of the noise reduction kit is high quality grease, and as you say, it helps old bearings do their thing. I had no da-dump from the idler wheel after having applied it. At some point I'll try one of the idler wheels from Mirko - have read many positive reviews of that.
Very interesting result - the engine is now completely silent, no whirr at all, and while having been stretched overnight, this new belt is definitely tighter than the old stretched one.
And that leads us to considering rubber composition and surface structure, I'd think. Maybe even how the belt is taken up and comes off the engine pulley because of same.
I now have a whispering instead of whirring engine pulley/belt, and that's a good thing.
The grease of the noise reduction kit is high quality grease, and as you say, it helps old bearings do their thing. I had no da-dump from the idler wheel after having applied it. At some point I'll try one of the idler wheels from Mirko - have read many positive reviews of that.
Hi Steve,
Yes, I purchased my Schick through Jonathan over at OMA - he's the only authorized agent for the United States. The arm shipped directly from Schick in Berlin to me. The time from order to delivery was about 14 weeks, lead times might be a bit longer now as demand has increased lately..
I mounted it on a quickly cobbled together and completely inadequate kluged arm board. The results are rather interesting to say the least. As a preface I am really glad I went this route, although the long wait and the financial commitment go against my grain for instant gratification. I must be growing up..
I agonized over getting a 3012 instead, but the cost is comparable and I am relatively confident that the 3012 is not the equal of this arm.
I'm using an Orsonic headshell with the Zu DL-103-1 and the optional counterweight intended for for use with the SPU.
The sound could not be much more different from the 3009 as far as the Zu is concerned. It's much darker, fuller, meatier, and in a good way I'd say - the detail is all there (and then some) the bottom end is very solid.
The sound is detailed, precise and this arm makes the Zu shine in areas where it hadn't previously. The midrange tonal balance is much more neutral in comparison the 3009/Zu combination and is something of a relief as the mids and highs generally sounded a bit aggressive in retrospect. (Reminiscent of the difference between aluminum and titanium diaphragms in mid compression drivers.)
I am no where near realizing the full potential of the arm given what it is mounted on, but should have the slate plinth in a month or less.
The arm is a joy to use, and not very fussy about set up either, changes are quickly and easily made. I anticipated difficulty setting the tracking force, but had it accurately set within 5 minutes, and there is no way for it to inadvertently get out of adjustment.
Hi Kevin. Thanks for that initial analysis of the Schick. It is useful to me since you've also experienced a 3012 and 3009 on the same/similar TT. And the 3012 is something I'm considering. Acceptable examples of the SME 3012 go for considerable moolah these days.
re: midrange tonal balance of the Zu DL-103R schick versus SME. I wonder if the Zu 103r didn't energize the arm wand of that SME a bit more than the knife edge bearings could cope with? I see that Thomas Schick discusses the SME with regard to bearings and condition. I have to agree with Thomas's conclusion that the SME knife edge can get into pretty rough condition after 40/50 years of use/abuse. Here's a close up photo I took of a steel knife edge from a later 3009 S2:
The wear pattern is obvious on this. Toward the armwand the knife edge appears sharp - er than outward where you can see evidence of the functional area and wear that has occurred over the years. Just a guess; a "sharp" knife edge bearing is going to sound better than a worn example like this one.
Then there are those bronze knife edge replacements being made.
Here's an example of a bronze knife edge bearing I bought from an ebay seller based in Taiwan:
In these photos it can be seen that the machinist has left a "flat" at the surface of the knife edge where you would expect a sharper edge, or at least a very tiny edge radius. Instead, a rather large flat surface that is too wide to seat down into the bearing race of the SME knife edge saddle. Not a good thing, I suspect.
I should note that I have not seen the bronze knife edge bearing being offered by Analogue Tube Audio. Maybe theirs is different.
I've heard some discussion in favor of one of those clunky FR headshells (the one with the large screw on top) as being a good upgrade for SME's attempting to carry low compliance MC cartridges like the DL-103-R. I see that decent used examples of these tend to sell for real money. (naturally
)re: "darker, fuller, meatier..."
All good things, I'd say.
-Steve
Last edited:
I'm using those Hollywood, FL belts exclusively and find that they not only run quiet, but over time they keep running quiet. (No cast off "goo" like the OEM belt) I have not had to do anything to my TD-124 for several months now. The fact that they are the cheapest option on eBay doesn't hurt either..
My experience with several TD-124/I and TD-124/II makes me believe that the original intermediate pulley was superior in one specific regard and that is that the bronze bushing really damps the pulley so it doesn't sing much. Keeping the running surfaces of the later design scrupulously clean after a good polish seems to make them work nearly as well. Talc helps too.
Rebuilt motors and modern lubricants perhaps in conjunction with higher line voltages creates the issue where the eddy current brake is required to impose considerably more drag than was originally the case - this too contributes to noise and vibration. Changing to the next higher voltage tap (if available) addresses this issue by reducing torque enough to allow a rational setting of the brake, but unfortunately it seems to kill the very thing that attracts people to this table in the first place - the sense of authority, dynamics, drive, etc. I tried this and didn't like the resulting sonics at all. (Perhaps I was deluding myself, but I really thought it sounded very lack luster..) A better compromise might be to reduce line voltage slightly with a bucking transformer in a range of perhaps 5 - 10% and see what that does - just a small reduction in torque would probably suffice..
Hi Kevin. Thanks for that initial analysis of the Schick. It is useful to me since you've also experienced a 3012 and 3009 on the same/similar TT. And the 3012 is something I'm considering. Acceptable examples of the SME 3012 go for considerable moolah these days.
re: midrange tonal balance of the Zu DL-103R schick versus SME. I wonder if the Zu 103r didn't energize the arm wand of that SME a bit more than the knife edge bearings could cope with? I see that Thomas Schick discusses the SME with regard to bearings and condition. I have to agree with Thomas's conclusion that the SME knife edge can get into pretty rough condition after 40/50 years of use/abuse. Here's a close up photo I took of a steel knife edge from a later 3009 S2:
The wear pattern is obvious on this. Toward the armwand the knife edge appears sharp - er than outward where you can see evidence of the functional area and wear that has occurred over the years. Just a guess; a "sharp" knife edge bearing is going to sound better than a worn example like this one.
Then there are those bronze knife edge replacements being made.
Here's an example of a bronze knife edge bearing I bought from an ebay seller based in Taiwan:
In these photos it can be seen that the machinist has left a "flat" at the surface of the knife edge where you would expect a sharper edge, or at least a very tiny edge radius. Instead, a rather large flat surface that is too wide to seat down into the bearing race of the SME knife edge saddle. Not a good thing, I suspect.
I should note that I have not seen the bronze knife edge bearing being offered by Analogue Tube Audio. Maybe theirs is different.
I've heard some discussion in favor of one of those clunky FR headshells (the one with the large screw on top) as being a good upgrade for SME's attempting to carry low compliance MC cartridges like the DL-103-R. I see that decent used examples of these tend to sell for real money. (naturally
re: "darker, fuller, meatier..."
All good things, I'd say.
-Steve
Hi Steve,
Yes I suspect the Zu DL-103-1 (mine isn't an "R") is a bit much for the SME Series II arm in some respects - still it sounded better than some other cartridges I have tried on it. My knife edges are in excellent condition as this arm had virtually no use in its original lifetime as was also the case with my TD-124/II. The DL-103 likes mass, the more the merrier I'd say, which leaves me suspecting that there are really only a few arms that do this cartridge justice, truthfully it is a lot better than I suspected listening to it on a variety of other arms - most recently the SME 3009.
The 3012 Series II or the R would seem to be a good match for the DL-103 with heavier counterweights and an Orsonic or similar high mass headshell. While I liked the ZU on the 3012 it was more or less just a better sounding stretched 3009, the Schick transforms it into something altogether different, and better - if not quite perfect.
Given what nice 3012s go for these days I would strongly recommend the Schick instead if you can handle the long wait.
I purchased an analogtubeaudio.de bronze knife edge for one of my other arms and decided not to install it as the consensus seems to be that it is not an improvement on a series II, in the case of a S2 Improved though, it is strongly recommended. Mine was machined to a relatively sharp point, although to be honest perhaps not as sharp as an SME knife edge - I didn't really check that closely.
As fond as I am/was of SME 3009/3012 series arms I have to admit in the light of new experience that for my chosen direction they aren't the best choice and would probably work better with a medium compliance MC or MM cartridge.
I'm very curious about the AT-33 series of low compliance LOMC that are now appearing from Japanese sellers on eBay - several in the series seem like they might be a good match with my new arm in the right (very heavy) headshell.
Hi Volken.
I look forward to your analysis of the Pabst motor for the TD124.
I have one of these sitting on the shelf waiting to be used...again.
I'm sure what the Pabst really needs is a true 3 phase power supply to tame its tendency to vibrate the TD124 chassis.
I did try this motor by following the information sheet provided by Thorens for setup. This sheet recommends a "hack" which uses a capacitor to provide a crude timing mechanism for the motor to run. But the result is a 3 - phase motor running on single phase power...
In my experience it runs rough in comparison to the stock E50. But it does provide some added energy to the propulsion system. The tt was much more forward sounding and offered greater output of musical energy. Too bad the motor put a wet blanket over the mids and highs. (more than just a vail to be lifted..
Here are some of my notes on my first trial with the Pabst on a TD124:
Papst Aussenlaufer
Do keep us posted on your trials with the Pabst. I'd love to find a 3 phase PS for this interesting motor. I've got a spare TD124 chassis just waiting for another go around.
-Steve
Dear Steve
In the meantime I have done some interresting measurements on the Papst and E 50 motor both revised , the Papst first with single phase and later three phase supply.
First measurement single phase with the original phase capacitor 0,47uf which is very critical for minimal vibration as we shall see .
On the HP analyzer you can see the 100 hz motor freq.on -31 db.
