Oh come on now!
You make it sound like I'm some uneducated idiot here, which I assure you I am not.
I'm well aware of the properties of wires, electrical currents, and all that jive.
I've been educated through accredited universities, gotten my needed certificates, and spent 40+ years in the Service Industry, with numerous accolades and an outstanding reputation.
But I don't choose to dabble nor argue about such rediculous conversations concerning utterly trivial brain-nutting "nuances" that some people obsess over.
article on static electricity
Materials that Cause Static Electricity
if you disconnect the ground on a tonearm you can listen to AM radio
Materials that Cause Static Electricity
if you disconnect the ground on a tonearm you can listen to AM radio
Well you are full of it and of course nothing has changed has it, you know everything. You remind me of that old Zen lesson. A self important visitor to a Zen monastery was asked by the master "would you like to drink some tea", yes he replied and so began the 'tea ceremony' The master began to pour the cup of tea. When the tea reached the cup brim he kept on pouring "stop, stop you idiot can't you see the cup is full" The master replied yes just like your head, there is no room for anything more to enter - the pompous prat was never going to achieve sartori - so it goes.
So consider this. For years VPI extolled the virtues of belt dirve and also a short dabble into rim drive. So now the flagship of the line is a BLDC DD motor table. Harry says this is now his reference and Stereophile gave it a A+.
I have three tables, a VPI belt drive, QRK idler drive broadcast table, and a Denon DD. They all sound different and all sound good. Depends on my mood which one I listen to.
I have three tables, a VPI belt drive, QRK idler drive broadcast table, and a Denon DD. They all sound different and all sound good. Depends on my mood which one I listen to.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter what type of platter drive system is used, IF the whole machine is built with some precision and quality.
And that actually doesn't take much money to do, if done intelligently.
Qualifications:
1) A platter of sufficient mass to support enough rotational inertia, in order to quell any noticeable wow and flutter from intruding into the music.
And you don't need a platter weighing in at some rediculous weight.
2) A central shaft and bearing assembly machined carefully enough to eliminated any wobble/play and noise or rumble.
3) A drive motor with sufficient torque to eliminate speed variations, along with minimal self vibration and with proper isolation/mounting.
Also, these main factors have to be implimented to support, if not enhance one another.
You'd be surprised that all the above qualifications are available in even some budget turntables, which of course are frowned upon by the purists who believe/insist that only a costly machine can provide acceptable performance.
"You'd be surprised that all the above qualifications are available in even some budget turntables, which of course are frowned upon by the purists who believe/insist that only a costly machine can provide acceptable performance."
How bout some model numbers of budget turntables that fit your qualifications ?
How bout some model numbers of budget turntables that fit your qualifications ?
I was under the impression that this was a DIY forum. Check out Opcode66 on youtube who built his own direct drive platter motor:
The Making of Scooty Turn Jr. - YouTube
The Making of Scooty Turn Jr. - YouTube
THAT would be useful, preferably something that has been lived with for a time rather than sampled for a few moments in passing.
Has anyone seen a Linn or Thorens motor in a cutting room? If you visit Abbey Road, The Exchange - or just about any world-class cutting outfit, you'll see the Technics SP-02 DD motor fitted to the lathe... So, a huge proportion of all of our collections were cut with a Quartz-Locked DD motor made by Technics...
If platter ringing is such an issue with a Technics, why are LP12s so prone to feedback in high SPL environments? I've seen it happen. They cannot sustain anywhere near the SPL as a Technics. When Technics feed back, it's usually because the operator (i.e. DJ) has removed the 8mm thick rubber mat, replacing it with a felt slipmat. The rubber mat is part of the Tech design.
Where are the tech papers presented to the AES by Rega or Linn? Matsushita published their white papers, and you can still see them in the AES library. Which other OEMs put their calculations forward for scrutiny by the AES Technical Committee?
'SP' stands for Special Projects. The nearest domestic relative to the SP-02 is the SP10 Mk3. The humble old 1200 / 10 was designed by the SP team and has the same type of motor, scaled down. Whereas the SP10 and SP-02 used discrete circuitry, by the time the 1200/10 came along Matsushita had custom ICs, making the drive circuitry a lot smaller.
To my knowledge, the 1200/10 drive system is accurate to the point where it can only be accurately measured optically. Hi-Fi World measured its accuracy and said it was as good as their test setup could measure.
Budding mathematicians might wish to do the calculations, but in order to introduce noticeable wow, you need tip pressure that's into the hundreds of grams on a Technics DD. Several firms have marketed DIY lathes using the 1200/10 motor. Obviously, they aren't anywhere near the standard of what a Neumann can do, but I haven't heard people complaining of wow, and I have a few friends who own these.
Next time you're down on the Technics DD system, remember that a large proportion of your vinyl was cut on it (the studios who could afford the SP02, which was marketed as a replacement for the belt-driven Lyrec system).
NB - On the new Technics decks, they've gone to great lengths to damp the platter from ringing. They used laser vibrometers and presented measurement graphs at the launch at Abbey Rd. Interestingly, a rumble figure of -90 is given for the new decks, which is the same (If I recall correctly) as the original 1200/10.
If platter ringing is such an issue with a Technics, why are LP12s so prone to feedback in high SPL environments? I've seen it happen. They cannot sustain anywhere near the SPL as a Technics. When Technics feed back, it's usually because the operator (i.e. DJ) has removed the 8mm thick rubber mat, replacing it with a felt slipmat. The rubber mat is part of the Tech design.
Where are the tech papers presented to the AES by Rega or Linn? Matsushita published their white papers, and you can still see them in the AES library. Which other OEMs put their calculations forward for scrutiny by the AES Technical Committee?
'SP' stands for Special Projects. The nearest domestic relative to the SP-02 is the SP10 Mk3. The humble old 1200 / 10 was designed by the SP team and has the same type of motor, scaled down. Whereas the SP10 and SP-02 used discrete circuitry, by the time the 1200/10 came along Matsushita had custom ICs, making the drive circuitry a lot smaller.
To my knowledge, the 1200/10 drive system is accurate to the point where it can only be accurately measured optically. Hi-Fi World measured its accuracy and said it was as good as their test setup could measure.
Budding mathematicians might wish to do the calculations, but in order to introduce noticeable wow, you need tip pressure that's into the hundreds of grams on a Technics DD. Several firms have marketed DIY lathes using the 1200/10 motor. Obviously, they aren't anywhere near the standard of what a Neumann can do, but I haven't heard people complaining of wow, and I have a few friends who own these.
Next time you're down on the Technics DD system, remember that a large proportion of your vinyl was cut on it (the studios who could afford the SP02, which was marketed as a replacement for the belt-driven Lyrec system).
NB - On the new Technics decks, they've gone to great lengths to damp the platter from ringing. They used laser vibrometers and presented measurement graphs at the launch at Abbey Rd. Interestingly, a rumble figure of -90 is given for the new decks, which is the same (If I recall correctly) as the original 1200/10.
Being in the sales and service of audio and video for 40+ years, I've seen hoardes of turntables in the shop, and reasonably speaking, I don't retain model numbers in memory, I just know what I've previously said was the truth.
Can you remember model numbers of say, thousands of products?
Listen...
I did mainly sales from 1974 to 1982, so those turntables are now catagorized as vintage, and it's well-known that vintage turntables today are favored machines.
Duals, Technics, Miracords, Kenwoods, Pioneers, all hold their value.
After that, I ran service shops up until recently, and had the benefit of seeing thousands of them on the inside, and noted build quality, as well as performance, but again, it seemed the vintage machines ranked better than post 1995 models.
Bluntly speaking, the "new stuff" is dismal in comparison.
Unless, of course, you prefer clone-like machines with cookie-cutter styling, and always discussing the topic of "upgrades", which vintage machines never needed.
This I ,'mostly', agree with.
I was there and sold a bundle of Linn's, Sota's, Ariston's, Thorens, Sansui, Well Tempered, Technics, Kenwoods, Rega,Dual et alThis is less than accurate.
Perhaps for the China buy-up of off-market brands but not at all for the dedicated platter producers...;-)for instance... Royale 400
Home >> Well Tempered Lab
Products >> Well Tempered Lab
Last edited:
Hi thermionic,
Cutting lathes did not use consumer DD motors as a rule. However, a cutting lathe has different requirements than a reproduction table and they rule out a belt drive. DD is the only technology that makes sense. Earlier units used direct drive, servo controlled AC motors and they worked great. Later they would have transitioned to DC direct drive - and yes, they can be very accurate.
While Panasonic generally makes great products, the classic DD tables they made didn't have great arms or suspensions. I sold tables in the 70's and serviced them since and up to now. A classic Thorens (and the current ones) have extremely low noise and rumble. If you compared a Technics to a Thorens, the lack of LF noise would astonish you as long as your listening environment was up to it. Electronics too of course. The new Thorens TD-1601 is the one to beat. Factory arm of course! It is a belt drive.
What the belt drive does is isolate motor noise and chassis vibrations from the platter / bearing system. The heavy platter assures a variation free rotation with changing stylus loading. There are other belt drive table out there with the same characteristics that are ridiculously large and heavy as well. A DD system would need a special ramped up speed control to benefit from a heavy rotating mass. It would burn out otherwise.
The Linn mat is terrible and the cause of those problems. Change the mat to something like the old platter matter and those vibration problems evaporate. That's the same for any table no matter how they spin the platter. However, a light platter is a lost cause. So are bearings that are not top notch.
-Chris
Cutting lathes did not use consumer DD motors as a rule. However, a cutting lathe has different requirements than a reproduction table and they rule out a belt drive. DD is the only technology that makes sense. Earlier units used direct drive, servo controlled AC motors and they worked great. Later they would have transitioned to DC direct drive - and yes, they can be very accurate.
While Panasonic generally makes great products, the classic DD tables they made didn't have great arms or suspensions. I sold tables in the 70's and serviced them since and up to now. A classic Thorens (and the current ones) have extremely low noise and rumble. If you compared a Technics to a Thorens, the lack of LF noise would astonish you as long as your listening environment was up to it. Electronics too of course. The new Thorens TD-1601 is the one to beat. Factory arm of course! It is a belt drive.
What the belt drive does is isolate motor noise and chassis vibrations from the platter / bearing system. The heavy platter assures a variation free rotation with changing stylus loading. There are other belt drive table out there with the same characteristics that are ridiculously large and heavy as well. A DD system would need a special ramped up speed control to benefit from a heavy rotating mass. It would burn out otherwise.
The Linn mat is terrible and the cause of those problems. Change the mat to something like the old platter matter and those vibration problems evaporate. That's the same for any table no matter how they spin the platter. However, a light platter is a lost cause. So are bearings that are not top notch.
-Chris
I've tried all manner of Thorens next to Technics myself, over many years, many times. Please give me verified measurements. 'Extremely low rumble' is not quantifiable. Technics quote rumble figures for their decks. What are the Thorens figures? Where are Thorens' AES papers? I don't doubt that Thorens decks are good, and BD decks can be excellent. But we ought to be honest and say that *very* few BD TTs give meaningful performance data, and are marketed on pure subjectivism.
There are hundreds of firms making BD decks because the price of entry to the market is a fraction of what it is for a DD deck... I'm also intrigued to know what connection the current Thorens has with the firm who made the likes of the TD124... Any more than a Trademark? I'm not doubting their expertise, but we should count them as different OEMs if this is the case.
>didn't have great arms or suspensions
Data, please, not opinion.
(NB - I've changed many an arm on a Technics. I do not think they are the last word in arms. The DD mechanism is a different question)
There are hundreds of firms making BD decks because the price of entry to the market is a fraction of what it is for a DD deck... I'm also intrigued to know what connection the current Thorens has with the firm who made the likes of the TD124... Any more than a Trademark? I'm not doubting their expertise, but we should count them as different OEMs if this is the case.
>didn't have great arms or suspensions
Data, please, not opinion.
(NB - I've changed many an arm on a Technics. I do not think they are the last word in arms. The DD mechanism is a different question)
>a cutting lathe has different requirements than a reproduction table and they rule out a >belt drive. DD is the only technology that makes sense.
Ironically, having extolled the virtue of DD mechanisms for cutting, I think you will find that in the real world, respected cutting engineers will tell you that it's not that cut and dried. As I wrote, Abbey Rd, The Exchange etc. use the QL Technics SP-02 system. However, there are more cutting rooms still using the original BD Lyrec system... And some of these are cutting acclaimed records, so I don't think they'd agree that 'DD is the only mechanism that makes sense'.
edit - in case it appears that I'm directing ire at Thorens, I'm not. They are one of the titan TT OEMs, along with EMT, Garrard - as well as Technics. I will direct ire at a certain company which has gas-lighted / tricked the hifi world into believing that its feedback-prone cat litter tray is greater than a humble SL1200, in pretty much any capacity. Its main skill is relieving the buyer of substantially more cash than the Matsushita product - and the myth has certainly been influenced by the advertising spending power of said cat litter tray OEM.
And I'm sure if I dig into the AES archives, there most likely will be peer-reviewed articles submitted by Thorens. Along with EMT and Technics. Who else put their theory forward for independent scrutiny?
Ironically, having extolled the virtue of DD mechanisms for cutting, I think you will find that in the real world, respected cutting engineers will tell you that it's not that cut and dried. As I wrote, Abbey Rd, The Exchange etc. use the QL Technics SP-02 system. However, there are more cutting rooms still using the original BD Lyrec system... And some of these are cutting acclaimed records, so I don't think they'd agree that 'DD is the only mechanism that makes sense'.
edit - in case it appears that I'm directing ire at Thorens, I'm not. They are one of the titan TT OEMs, along with EMT, Garrard - as well as Technics. I will direct ire at a certain company which has gas-lighted / tricked the hifi world into believing that its feedback-prone cat litter tray is greater than a humble SL1200, in pretty much any capacity. Its main skill is relieving the buyer of substantially more cash than the Matsushita product - and the myth has certainly been influenced by the advertising spending power of said cat litter tray OEM.
And I'm sure if I dig into the AES archives, there most likely will be peer-reviewed articles submitted by Thorens. Along with EMT and Technics. Who else put their theory forward for independent scrutiny?
Last edited: