Stylus drag is a real thing and can indeed affect the speed.
Video #1: using the Sutherland Timeline strobe speed detector. Raven belt drive table under load. Watch the gradual speed drift.
Video #2: using Timeline on a JVC TT101 quartz locked direct drive table under load and extra arm. Stable speed through out.
Video #1: using the Sutherland Timeline strobe speed detector. Raven belt drive table under load. Watch the gradual speed drift.
Video #2: using Timeline on a JVC TT101 quartz locked direct drive table under load and extra arm. Stable speed through out.
Indeed, stylus "drag" is a real thing.
We're dealing with friction here of the diamond tip negotiating through a wobbly vinyl groove.
This also leads to skating forces which vary, depending on groove modulation.
But that is another subject.
However, as I mentioned before, this "drag" is very small in relation to the massive inertia imposed by a platter and record spinning.
At 1 to perhaps 3 or 4 grams of stylus pressure, it's hardly something to worry about with a well-designed turntable system.
A good direct drive system will track and compensate for any deviations imposed by the platter being "loaded down".
In belt-drive systems, the flexibility of the belt itself imposes another problem by "lagging" momentarily when the platter is loaded down, and any slippage of the belt on the motor pulley just adds to the mess.
That is indeed the problem I observed with very low torque belt-drive designs. I had a flimsy table with a tiny motor that the speed is off depending on the thickness of the record! Put a light record on and the speed is accurate but as soon as I put a 180g audiophile vinyl on and the speed is slowed down. On top of that the loose stretchy belt slips and creates wow. Playing piano recording is unlistenable.
Of course, all of the above problems can be addressed with proper designs and that goes for all drive systems.
Hi wiseoldtech,
Stylus drag is countered by the large rotating mass, and also by the speed controlled motor - even on belt drive systems. In short, stylus drag isn't an issue with any well designed turntable. I think that in this case, the turntable mat would have a great deal more to do with W&F due to stylus drag than anything else. Anything that decouples the record from the platter is a very bad thing as you then lose control over what the record is doing
As for Dual, they made an okay table. But they seemed to be hung up on the fact that the table could be sitting at any angle and it would play properly. I'm sure you remember that, and speaking of Shure (play on words), that was the factory supplied cartridge for decades until they switched to a better cartridge (Ortofon). Mind you, anything was better than the Excell cartridge that was most store's supplied cartridge. Terrible little things they were! I just gave away a Dual turntable in fact.
When I was starting out, I was given all the Dual tables that had issues. It was the grease getting stiff, binding up the entire mechanism. I know them extremely well and can still picture them if I close my eyes. I don't want to picture them! But, they were the #1 turntable that came in with problems. The belt drive tables I saw generally needed a belt and possibly some lubrication for the platter bearing. A few cheap ones had the grease problem as well.
-Chris
Stylus drag is countered by the large rotating mass, and also by the speed controlled motor - even on belt drive systems. In short, stylus drag isn't an issue with any well designed turntable. I think that in this case, the turntable mat would have a great deal more to do with W&F due to stylus drag than anything else. Anything that decouples the record from the platter is a very bad thing as you then lose control over what the record is doing
As for Dual, they made an okay table. But they seemed to be hung up on the fact that the table could be sitting at any angle and it would play properly. I'm sure you remember that, and speaking of Shure (play on words), that was the factory supplied cartridge for decades until they switched to a better cartridge (Ortofon). Mind you, anything was better than the Excell cartridge that was most store's supplied cartridge. Terrible little things they were! I just gave away a Dual turntable in fact.
When I was starting out, I was given all the Dual tables that had issues. It was the grease getting stiff, binding up the entire mechanism. I know them extremely well and can still picture them if I close my eyes. I don't want to picture them! But, they were the #1 turntable that came in with problems. The belt drive tables I saw generally needed a belt and possibly some lubrication for the platter bearing. A few cheap ones had the grease problem as well.
-Chris
Hey Bill,
-Chris
Edit:
Yes, I remember your excellent work on platter stability. That LP-12 is certainly in need of help! Normally they are a bit better than that. Let's note that I'm not a Linn fan at all. I recognize they make a good table, but things like the motor drive upgrades should have been warranty fixes, not chargeable to the end user. The money they want is somewhat extreme in my view as well. I am a Thorens fan, having worked on plenty over the years. The motor drive could be upgraded some, but that isn't going to happen any time soon. Too many other issues with other equipment has my attention.
I'm trying to see where we disagree ...
-Chris
Edit:
Yes, I remember your excellent work on platter stability. That LP-12 is certainly in need of help! Normally they are a bit better than that. Let's note that I'm not a Linn fan at all. I recognize they make a good table, but things like the motor drive upgrades should have been warranty fixes, not chargeable to the end user. The money they want is somewhat extreme in my view as well. I am a Thorens fan, having worked on plenty over the years. The motor drive could be upgraded some, but that isn't going to happen any time soon. Too many other issues with other equipment has my attention.
Hi schiirrn,
Yes, we are in agreement.
Hi directdriver,
Love your experiments! Certainly interesting, and you would learn something from them.
Making a good DD table isn't very different from making a good belt drive table. They each have challenges that must be met competently. We are only talking about how to add energy to a rotating mass smoothly and evenly. Both are valid ways to do this. It's just that I haven't seen that many really good DD tables, that's all.
-Chris
Yes, we are in agreement.
Hi directdriver,
Love your experiments! Certainly interesting, and you would learn something from them.
Okay, fine. I can agree with you on that - all things considered equal. Belt drive systems need a heavy platter, DD drives might not, but I would hazard a guess that they would be better off with a platter with substantial rotating mass. An idler system just boggles my mind as I can't see it isolating motor noise from the platter system. I'll include the Thorens TD-124 in that group. Notice that they quickly went to a belt drive system and stayed with that.
Making a good DD table isn't very different from making a good belt drive table. They each have challenges that must be met competently. We are only talking about how to add energy to a rotating mass smoothly and evenly. Both are valid ways to do this. It's just that I haven't seen that many really good DD tables, that's all.
-Chris
Chris, I doubt that Thorens moved to belt only - no idler, for performance reasons. IMHO, it was likely manufacturing costs and the introduction of the AR table driving pricing down.
I have many years experience with top model Thorens and, until recently, a fairly well sorted Linn/Lingo/EKOS. My TD-124 will run circles around them all.
I have many years experience with top model Thorens and, until recently, a fairly well sorted Linn/Lingo/EKOS. My TD-124 will run circles around them all.
I have an SP-10 mkIIa. I moved from an Ariston RD-11s. It had an 11 lb platter.
Irrespective of the arm that was on the Ariston , there was a "cavernous" sound to the music. This made every record sound grand.... which is not what I wanted. Digital audio was *so* much nicer.
The SP-10 got rid of that grandiose sound, but using the stock mat, I found the bass a bit weak, and the treble a bit uninteresting. Originally it was an 6.4 lb platter. However, once a 9 pound copper platter mat was added, it became a very neutral sounding TT. Every record played sounds *very* different -- as it should. Good ones are very good. Great ones are outstanding. Digital is for background music now, but it remains ultimately the standard. It's still excellent.
I hypothesize that the suspension gave the cavernous sound -- but I cannot prove it.
Irrespective of the arm that was on the Ariston , there was a "cavernous" sound to the music. This made every record sound grand.... which is not what I wanted. Digital audio was *so* much nicer.
The SP-10 got rid of that grandiose sound, but using the stock mat, I found the bass a bit weak, and the treble a bit uninteresting. Originally it was an 6.4 lb platter. However, once a 9 pound copper platter mat was added, it became a very neutral sounding TT. Every record played sounds *very* different -- as it should. Good ones are very good. Great ones are outstanding. Digital is for background music now, but it remains ultimately the standard. It's still excellent.
I hypothesize that the suspension gave the cavernous sound -- but I cannot prove it.
Hi Dilbert,
If that were the case, Thorens would have used that for their flagship turntable. While I liked the way Thorens designed the idler system, I think it still couples more motor noise to the platter. They did use a belt to decouple the motor from the idler. I have worked on many TD-124 tables. I think the eddy current loading is slick, I do not think it is a good way to control speed.
I know many people absolutely love their TD-124 tables, and I can't knock them for it. By comparison, my top table now (only a TD-126 MKII) has a much lighter platter than the TD-124. But on the flip side, the TD-124 has a very light platter suspended on rubber bumpers. It seems to me that it would pick up air borne vibrations much more easily than the other Thornes tables that use the heavy platter directly.
That might actually be a really cool experiment Dilbert. Remove the bumpers and place a good mat directly on the heavy platter and see what that sounds like. The VTA might have to be adjusted to a point out of range though, so I don't even know if that experiment is possible.
Hi BigE,
I know what you mean. I gave away an Ariston years ago. It didn't sound right I also gave away another table soon after that I can't remember the name. It was cheaply made, but apparently sold for a lot more than pocket change.
Are either of you fellas coming to the BBQ this Sunday?
-Chris
If that were the case, Thorens would have used that for their flagship turntable. While I liked the way Thorens designed the idler system, I think it still couples more motor noise to the platter. They did use a belt to decouple the motor from the idler. I have worked on many TD-124 tables. I think the eddy current loading is slick, I do not think it is a good way to control speed.
I know many people absolutely love their TD-124 tables, and I can't knock them for it. By comparison, my top table now (only a TD-126 MKII) has a much lighter platter than the TD-124. But on the flip side, the TD-124 has a very light platter suspended on rubber bumpers. It seems to me that it would pick up air borne vibrations much more easily than the other Thornes tables that use the heavy platter directly.
That might actually be a really cool experiment Dilbert. Remove the bumpers and place a good mat directly on the heavy platter and see what that sounds like. The VTA might have to be adjusted to a point out of range though, so I don't even know if that experiment is possible.
Hi BigE,
I know what you mean. I gave away an Ariston years ago. It didn't sound right I also gave away another table soon after that I can't remember the name. It was cheaply made, but apparently sold for a lot more than pocket change.
Are either of you fellas coming to the BBQ this Sunday?
-Chris
That's a great description but for many people that sound or coloration is actually desirable. I often use the word "bloom" and I like it quite a bit myself. I'm not really a "neutrality" fiend so I don't mind having a bit of pleasant euphony, provided it's not grotesquely so. I used to own several SP10Mk2's over the years and they all have that dry matter of fact sound that makes me crave for a bit of "bloom." It would be nice to have all the best traits from all the drive systems, wouldn't it?
Chris, I think we might be able to agree on many philosophical points about some of the potential technical benefits of the later tables and I certainly wouldn’t disagree about the 124 speed accuracy. But my ears tell me of the of the 124 superiority hands-down, every time.
What I found really interesting was my Linn made everything sound almost the same while my 124 clearly shows distinct differences in recordings.
By the way, I’m not a member of the “vinyl is best” crowd, but I do think it’s an enjoyable way to listen to music. I also like to play my sixties 45 RPM records on a Technics SL-1210M5G via an Aphex, just for giggles!
Not able to make the next get together, unfortunately.
What I found really interesting was my Linn made everything sound almost the same while my 124 clearly shows distinct differences in recordings.
By the way, I’m not a member of the “vinyl is best” crowd, but I do think it’s an enjoyable way to listen to music. I also like to play my sixties 45 RPM records on a Technics SL-1210M5G via an Aphex, just for giggles!
Not able to make the next get together, unfortunately.
Last edited:
Well Chris, any turntable that is aged is going to need attention to restore the original performance, Duals, Garrards, Thorens, the list is endless.
As for that Dual "demonstration" that gravity doesn't effect them, it was mainly to show the dynamically balanced tonearm being immune to gravity.
Of course it was a "selling point", and became famous.
We had a Dual tipped on its side in the audio showroom that I worked in in the 1970's, it always got strange looks from customers.
The Duals that I had didn't come equipped with cartridges - everything was optional - base, dustover, 45 adapter, cartridge.
But I was aware of Shure's reputation, and much enjoyed the sound I got from them.
I've tried Pickering, it was nice, but seemed a bit "edgy".
Ortofon was also "nice" but boring to my ears.
I wanted a neutral uncolored sound both from my Koss Pro4AA headphones AND my Advent speakers.
Ah, to go back to the 1970's, and experience it all again....
Chris, back in the early 1960's, (1961-66) Zenith made a hybrid record changer featured in their top-line console stereos. - The "MicroTouch 2G"
It had a two pole motor with a stepped shaft, which drove an idler, the idler drove a small flywheel, which in turn drove a belt to turn the platter.
The platter was a two-piece affair also, with three rubber isolation "bumpers" for the record platter to sit on.
While sounding complicated, it worked extremely well, with very low rumble/wow/flutter.
Friction-free knife-edge vertical bearings and ball bearing horizontal pivots on the tonearm allowed for that 2-gram tracking.
Some nifty features were a retractable 45 RPM stack adapter that literally folded down into the platter for LP use, and a retracting soft stylus dust brush that exposed itself from the tonearm rest post every time the arm moved over it.
That era of engineering was marvelous in my opinion.
I recently sold one of these changers to a guy who wanted a stacker machine.
Taken from a console, I made a nice base for it to be used as a "stand alone" model to be used with any MM phono input (original "floating" ceramic wired with an equalizer network to drop level for mag inputs.)
And I will say that after my servicing/overhaul/upgrades, this machine played records as nicely as a modern machine.
This is the turntable I sold...
Attachments
The EMT 950 has a lighter platter than the cheapest throw away turntable! So high mass is not a pre-requesite. Of course I do have a belt drive with enough intertia and low enough bearing friction to have a >4 min spin down if you drop the belt, but I did get that in my foolish days
I didn't do any work on that per se was Scott and LD I just erm, encouraged them! The potential benefit to all of us using ancient tech is huge and we owe them both many beers!
Hi Bill,
Well, it probably would have been easier for them had they used a heavier platter. After all, physics "likes" high inertial mass to remain at a constant velocity, angular velocity in this case. That's what is so amazing about CD players using a "stable platter" disc support. The CEC even used a belt drive! I'll just say, "unclear on the concept".
That work was inspired all right. Thank you for bringing it up in this thread as it does have a bearing on what we are talking about.
-Chris
Well, it probably would have been easier for them had they used a heavier platter. After all, physics "likes" high inertial mass to remain at a constant velocity, angular velocity in this case. That's what is so amazing about CD players using a "stable platter" disc support. The CEC even used a belt drive! I'll just say, "unclear on the concept".
That work was inspired all right. Thank you for bringing it up in this thread as it does have a bearing on what we are talking about.
-Chris
Hi Dilbert,
I can't argue against your preference the same as you can't argue against mine. I do respect where you are coming from on this. Perhaps the "Platter Matter" I use brings the TD-126 MKII closer to what your TD-124 is all about. As soon as that mat adhered to the first album, I was pretty much sold. Now I'm looking for a replacement for my pair of mats, or if I can rejuvenate them to their tacky former condition.
Hopefully I'll see you at a later get together. Have you followed the thread for this one?
-Chris
I can't argue against your preference the same as you can't argue against mine. I do respect where you are coming from on this. Perhaps the "Platter Matter" I use brings the TD-126 MKII closer to what your TD-124 is all about. As soon as that mat adhered to the first album, I was pretty much sold. Now I'm looking for a replacement for my pair of mats, or if I can rejuvenate them to their tacky former condition.
Hopefully I'll see you at a later get together. Have you followed the thread for this one?
-Chris
Chris: It was a specific design decision, coming from the heavy platter designs of before. They did the sums and decided electronics could do the job as well as mass. ISTR this this will go from stationary to lock in 0.2 seconds. The BBC had digital counters on theirs so they could exactly position the record ready. Well at least for classical. I believe the pop stations with their SP10s just used a black mark to wind back to
EMT 950 BBC, '9 950 347'
And yes CD players are amazing in that respect. I almost wish I had kept my marantz CD 80 just for the mech..
EMT 950 BBC, '9 950 347'
And yes CD players are amazing in that respect. I almost wish I had kept my marantz CD 80 just for the mech..
Hi wiseoldtech,
Up here in Canada the Dual tables came with Shure. I'm not certain if that was an option as I was just a sales person at that time. Interestingly it was Shure I found to be strident, or brittle sounding. Especially the V-15 series. I could identify those without seeing the table. The Ortofon cartridges seemed to be lively and pretty well balanced without being "brittle". I guess it depends a lot on your equipment and speakers. My newer Ortofon 540 MKII blows the VMS-30E MKII away for sound quality. Jaw dropping really.
It's funny that I also used Koss Pro4AA headphones (head crushers). Then I moved to a set of AKG K-240. I still use those ones, but I recently heard a pair of Denon headphones that are the best thing I have heard to date. Keeping my eyes open for those.
I also loved the engineering they explored in the 1960's. That carried over through the mid 1970's. Remember the Garrard Zero 100? I saw that one in a Heathkit store. No angular error was the point of that design, but the flat acrylic arm wasn't the best shape or material to go with. Looked neat. That Zenith table you showed (thank you) screams '60's. If it tracked as low as 2 gr, it was well beyond the record carvers it had for company. I haven't seen that one before. I don't think I could bring myself to trust it with my albums though.
I think it's great you gave it a new lease on life.
-Chris
Can't disagree with you. It's just that some tables require more effort to keep running than others. Remember that yellow gear in the Dual that needed replacement, and the rubber foot that other people liked to lubricate? That's the one that moves the arm across. The gear ran the arm pickup cycle and the first tooth tended to wear away. Those were maintenance items. The stiff grease was rebuild the table time. I wasn't really pleased by the Garrard tables either, being another idler table like those Dual tables.
Up here in Canada the Dual tables came with Shure. I'm not certain if that was an option as I was just a sales person at that time. Interestingly it was Shure I found to be strident, or brittle sounding. Especially the V-15 series. I could identify those without seeing the table. The Ortofon cartridges seemed to be lively and pretty well balanced without being "brittle". I guess it depends a lot on your equipment and speakers. My newer Ortofon 540 MKII blows the VMS-30E MKII away for sound quality. Jaw dropping really.
It's funny that I also used Koss Pro4AA headphones (head crushers). Then I moved to a set of AKG K-240. I still use those ones, but I recently heard a pair of Denon headphones that are the best thing I have heard to date. Keeping my eyes open for those.
I also loved the engineering they explored in the 1960's. That carried over through the mid 1970's. Remember the Garrard Zero 100? I saw that one in a Heathkit store. No angular error was the point of that design, but the flat acrylic arm wasn't the best shape or material to go with. Looked neat. That Zenith table you showed (thank you) screams '60's. If it tracked as low as 2 gr, it was well beyond the record carvers it had for company. I haven't seen that one before. I don't think I could bring myself to trust it with my albums though.
I think it's great you gave it a new lease on life.
-Chris