CDM 4/11 vs CDM 4/19

adhoc · 17th August 2006, 02:14 PM

Hello all,

First off, like a good boy, I have searched. But I have still not gotten all the information I need.

I here today asking about the differences between the 4/11 and 4/19 CDM mechanisms.

From my research here, all I can tell is that the 19 is the 'standard' version while the 11 is the 'hall motor' version. Can anyone tell me what 'hall motor' means? Is this a better motor?

If someone could point out any other differences, I would be most grateful.

Cheers!

anatech · 17th August 2006, 02:28 PM

Hi adhoc,
The /XX is the option code, as you have mentioned. A hall motor is one where the disc motor has no brushes. The coils are energized in sequence from the rotor position. Hall effect elements provide the position information.

These motors are the ones you see where the rotor sits just over a small circuit board. It's a very flat assembly, but wide.

-Chris

adhoc · 17th August 2006, 02:48 PM

anatech, thank you for your reply.

My research here has indicated that 'brushless' motors make for superior transports due to their better mechanical characteristics. Am I correct? Would you happen to be able to elaborate on these 'better mechanical characteristics'?

Cheers!

anatech · 17th August 2006, 02:55 PM

Hi adhoc,
That is a question that has many variables. It depends on the number of poles for one. It's true there are no brushes to wear, but I see more bearings gone anyway.

I have a deep distrust for anything Philips makes. They are usually very inexpensively constructed. So I will not comment any further.

-Chris

PetrL · 21st August 2006, 10:03 AM

Adhoc, a Philips player with CDM4 *can* make excellent transport. I use one with CDM4/25 (? -- no sticker). But I also have CD650 with CDM2/10 which is clearly much worse. Both have hall motor... Now I bought same player as first one, but with CDM2 mechanism, so I'll compare them. The thing is that the radial bearing of the rotor on these motors isn't very good or durable, one has to select, which is not too expensive.

"I have a deep distrust for anything Philips makes" -- same for me, except for those swingarm transports and tda1541

But this is history.

PetrL · 24th August 2006, 08:01 AM

Only to close my previous post: the other player with CDM2/29 is equaly good transport as the one with CDM4/25(?). Very good microdynamics top to bottom. Pitty that CD-650 doesn't catch it at all, because it has remote. Perhaps a jitter problem...

tubee · 26th August 2006, 08:59 AM

The on the CDM-2 is not that bad. I have played 18 years (!) with a CDM2 in CD640, it still plays. Every Philips (standard) CDM after its predecessor became more flimsy every time. CDM-0 & 1 has roll bearings on arm, Cdm 1 is from alu. CDM 2 has all features of 0 and 1 but single ball as bearing and more plastic as base, though this is quite rigid glass fibre filled polyester. Imo the CDM 4 is the last reasonally good CDM, but there are exceptions: CDM-4/25 is not as good as other CDM-4's with lower suffix #.
My current project has a modified CDM2-(00081 as suffix#) This diy player weighs about 8 kg's allready.

Guido Tent · 26th August 2006, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by adhoc
anatech, thank you for your reply.

My research here has indicated that 'brushless' motors make for superior transports due to their better mechanical characteristics. Am I correct? Would you happen to be able to elaborate on these 'better mechanical characteristics'?

Cheers!

Brushless motors do radiate far less RF. In (for example) a TEAC T1 I can measure that at the SPDIF output. 2 capacitors solve a lot of these problems.

best

anatech · 26th August 2006, 01:55 PM

Hi Guido,

Quote:

Brushless motors do radiate far less RF.

I hadn't considered that, of course it is undeniably true!

-Chris

PetrL · 28th August 2006, 08:25 AM

I think the CDM4/25 is older than CDM4/19, even older than CDM4/11. It has just different laser head than CDM2 or CDM4/11, the rest seems equal. Re the bearing, is there a reversible way to take away the platter from shaft? This would allow a bronze bushing or the like and new life for these plastic chassis, better than new.

17th August 2006, 02:14 PM	#1
adhoc diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Australia	CDM 4/11 vs CDM 4/19 Hello all, First off, like a good boy, I have searched. But I have still not gotten all the information I need. I here today asking about the differences between the 4/11 and 4/19 CDM mechanisms. From my research here, all I can tell is that the 19 is the 'standard' version while the 11 is the 'hall motor' version. Can anyone tell me what 'hall motor' means? Is this a better motor? If someone could point out any other differences, I would be most grateful. Cheers! __________________ jitter critter.

17th August 2006, 02:48 PM	#3
adhoc diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Australia	anatech, thank you for your reply. My research here has indicated that 'brushless' motors make for superior transports due to their better mechanical characteristics. Am I correct? Would you happen to be able to elaborate on these 'better mechanical characteristics'? Cheers! __________________ jitter critter.

26th August 2006, 08:59 AM	#7
tubee diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Netherlands	The on the CDM-2 is not that bad. I have played 18 years (!) with a CDM2 in CD640, it still plays. Every Philips (standard) CDM after its predecessor became more flimsy every time. CDM-0 & 1 has roll bearings on arm, Cdm 1 is from alu. CDM 2 has all features of 0 and 1 but single ball as bearing and more plastic as base, though this is quite rigid glass fibre filled polyester. Imo the CDM 4 is the last reasonally good CDM, but there are exceptions: CDM-4/25 is not as good as other CDM-4's with lower suffix #. My current project has a modified CDM2-(00081 as suffix#) This diy player weighs about 8 kg's allready. __________________ Daisy Bell

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

17th August 2006, 02:28 PM	#2
anatech diyAudio Moderator Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Georgetown, On	Hi adhoc, The /XX is the option code, as you have mentioned. A hall motor is one where the disc motor has no brushes. The coils are energized in sequence from the rotor position. Hall effect elements provide the position information. These motors are the ones you see where the rotor sits just over a small circuit board. It's a very flat assembly, but wide. -Chris

17th August 2006, 02:55 PM	#4
anatech diyAudio Moderator Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Georgetown, On	Hi adhoc, That is a question that has many variables. It depends on the number of poles for one. It's true there are no brushes to wear, but I see more bearings gone anyway. I have a deep distrust for anything Philips makes. They are usually very inexpensively constructed. So I will not comment any further. -Chris

21st August 2006, 10:03 AM	#5
PetrL diyAudio Member Join Date: Sep 2005	Adhoc, a Philips player with CDM4 can make excellent transport. I use one with CDM4/25 (? -- no sticker). But I also have CD650 with CDM2/10 which is clearly much worse. Both have hall motor... Now I bought same player as first one, but with CDM2 mechanism, so I'll compare them. The thing is that the radial bearing of the rotor on these motors isn't very good or durable, one has to select, which is not too expensive. "I have a deep distrust for anything Philips makes" -- same for me, except for those swingarm transports and tda1541 But this is history.

24th August 2006, 08:01 AM	#6
PetrL diyAudio Member Join Date: Sep 2005	Only to close my previous post: the other player with CDM2/29 is equaly good transport as the one with CDM4/25(?). Very good microdynamics top to bottom. Pitty that CD-650 doesn't catch it at all, because it has remote. Perhaps a jitter problem...

28th August 2006, 08:25 AM	#10
PetrL diyAudio Member Join Date: Sep 2005	I think the CDM4/25 is older than CDM4/19, even older than CDM4/11. It has just different laser head than CDM2 or CDM4/11, the rest seems equal. Re the bearing, is there a reversible way to take away the platter from shaft? This would allow a bronze bushing or the like and new life for these plastic chassis, better than new.