Dear Lewm: +++++ " So, I don't know what's going on, but I like it. " +++++
this is all about.
I like to have very precise answers on the why's of what I'm hearing in some kind of quality performance but many times I can't have those precise answers ( IMHO no one have it. ) and what I have to do is just enjoying it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Alec:+++++ " Hi, has DD a "theoretical" advantage over belt drive that will translate into better sounds? " +++++
IMHO the opinion on DD advocates can tell you " several " advantages " and in the other side the BD advocates can tell you too the " advantages " on this design and maybe and only from the theoretical point of view both ( some way or the other ) can/could be right about each single advantage.
Now, a TT audio item is not a set of " single/aisle " advantages/disadvantages but a whole finished audio item with intrinsic trade-offs ( there is no perfect TT. ).
Where reside ( mainly ) those trade-offs? ( certainly not on the TT drive design. ) and this is a hard question with many answers, example: type of bearing, TT plinth, kind of motor choice, platter build material, arm board build material, TT " system " vibration/isolation ( external/internal ) mechanism, whole TT quality/build execution,.
These and many other factors are the ones that makes the " differences " and IMHO you can get/have the quality performance you are looking for with either TT drive mechanism.
Some people here and there try to put " things " in a very simple manner/way but the TT ( stand alone ) quality performance can't be judged in aisle way because this audio link is only a part ( important one ) of the whole analog chain where our ears and music/sound priorities are part ( too ) of that analog chain.
I'm almost sure that if you/we take a top BD ( like the one you own or a Walker. ) and a top DD ( say Mónaco ) with a matched tonearm/cartridge and care to set up ( the same for both TTs. ), same arm board build material, same suspension/isolation mechanism, same mat and an un-biased attitude you /we can't hear any detectable difference other that what we " want " to hear.
Now if both TT are designed the same ( mainly on build materials ) my " almost " sure can convert on a simple " sure " no detectable differences only because the TT drive system.
The Jfrech comparison help to tell us that the differences ( IMHO ) comes mainly for the TT design differences more than for the TT drive mechanism and in the case of his friend due that the tonearm in the TT's were different!!!!
The analog imperfections like an audio chain makes extremely complex to have a " simple " answer to your question: the whole subject is very complex and till today I don't read/know ( anywhere ) a precise answers that can be corroborated in a scientist/theoretical/mathematics model. Till this happen the best way to go is to have first hand experiences and decide ( take action ) in consecuence.
Btw, a good alternative is to own/run BD and DD in the same audio system and forgeret about useless " controversies " on that subject.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike: 0.00001%? WOW!!! this is nearest to " perfection " on speed accuracy and that the design had 14-15 years speaks a lot of Rockport designer.
Congratulations to be a happy owner.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mikelavigne: I don't argue of what you heard through your first hand TT drive experiences but what does not make sense to me is that you made statements/conclusions ( same as Albert. ) of the superior DD performance when ( even between your DD experiences ) all those different TT drive designs are not only different because of its drive designs but because are different overall " input to output "!!!!, in these circumstances/enviroment what are you comparing with?, IMHO not its drive system design but the TT as a whole and with each one tonearm mounted ( that were different too. ).
Years ago when I was " new " in this forum I posted several times of the " superior " DD TT technology over the BD one, several people laughed ( including people that today " die for DD ". ) for say the least.
I was an advocate to DD systems ( and still I'm. ) but over the time I learn on the whole subject and today I know that that single factor ( drive design. ) can't tell us the true about TT differences/performance.
I posted here/in this thread:
+++++ " Now, a TT audio item is not a set of " single/aisle " advantages/disadvantages but a whole finished audio item with intrinsic trade-offs ( there is no perfect TT. ).
Where reside ( mainly ) those trade-offs? ( certainly not on the TT drive design. ) and this is a hard question with many answers, example: type of bearing, TT plinth, kind of motor choice, platter build material, arm board build material, TT " system " vibration/isolation ( external/internal ) mechanism, whole TT quality/build execution,.
These and many other factors are the ones that makes the " differences " and IMHO you can get/have the quality performance you are looking for with either TT drive mechanism. " +++++
Mike IMHO you can't prove ( any one can't. ) that DD systems makes " per se " the difference!
+++++ " The analog imperfections like an audio chain makes extremely complex to have a " simple " answer to your question: the whole subject is very complex and till today I don't read/know ( anywhere ) a precise answers that can be corroborated in a scientist/theoretical/mathematics model. " +++++
Even Dertonarm agree that the drive principle can't tell the whole " history " and I say even because I know the Dertonarm " bias " about and Teres confirm:
+++++ " This is how I believe that the drive topologies stack up. But it actually says little about how turntables using these topologies will compare. With any turntable you are hearing the whole package and the drive topology is just one of many pieces. " +++++
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike: As you agree too the LP performance is surrounded by many factros that have an intimate relationship and that makes almost impossible to aisle one of that factors/variables to have some kind of measure/opinion nof its relative " weight " in the full LP quality performance equation.
Yes, timing/ryhtmun is essencial and makes a difference in quality performance.
+++++ " when the speed is better.....every time. " +++++
but the timing has influence on the other factors/variables, the TT speed ( accuracy ) is one of the factors in the timing it self and if the speed accuracy ( better speed?? ) could define that timing then why three different TT: SP-10, Monaco and Walker ( I can't find the spec on the Rockport. ) with the same spec on speed: 0.001%, sounds so different?
What I'm trying to say is that that timing ( critical ) in what we hear is not only speed accuracy/stability. Of course that we prefer 0.001% on speed accuracy than 0.003% or at least our mind will be " calm " with the better spec, could we hear differences with these two speed specs everything the same?, hard to say and interesting to find out.
Anyway, no doubt of the critical importance that the " timing " has in our music perception and that we know when the timing is right on target.
I always support the DD systems and still do it but I'm convinced that we can have or we can achieve stellar/top quality performance with either TT drive system if that TT has the right design and the right execution design.
It is clear that for you the Rockport system has a better design an better execution design that almost any other TT out there and this is a challenge for other TT designers.
I hope that in the future we can have " affordable " TT's ( either drive system. ) that even and surpass the Rockport one: we need grow-up about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Jfrech: +++++ " And while I do agree with you the only 100% proof on DD vs belt is only to change one varible. " +++++
that's all I'm talking about not questioning what you or other people heard.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Dertonarm: As is usual in almost all your posts you talk,talk,talk,... on different subjects where you use some times technical language or like in your last post in this thread what your thoughts/guessing are..
Your last post states: +++++ " as long as the record has any chance for a relative movement to the spin of the platter, there is no way to discuss speed stability, stylus drag or dd vs. belt/thread, idler wheel drive. " +++++
where is/are the controled tests that can confirm that movement of the record relative to the spin of the platter if we don't use some clamp mechanism? where we can be sure that that record movement even exist? with which TT platter build materials? with which cartridges? which kind of set up on those cartridges: VTF/VTA, etc.. ?, which differences between 33rpm and 45rpm? how affect the different recording velocities at which each record track was recorded? which differences are on the subject with 200gr/180grs/120grs Lp weights? where affect and how at out side grooves, middle ones an inner grooves? which TT mats were used ( if any ) on the controled tests? is there any " enviroment/stage " where with out a clamp mechanism there is no record movement? which one?
+++++ " there is no way to discuss speed stability, stylus drag or dd vs. belt/thread, idler wheel drive " +++++
why? because you say so?
IMHO your guessing is only that a guessing ( that can or can't be true. ) with out no foundation if you can't or don't answer at least all those questions with scientific controled tests that can speaks by it self.
I always use some clamp mechanism, from a simple clamp/dead weight to vacuum hold down system. Well, in the last few months I don't use any kind of clamp any more, either in my DD and BD TT's, with surprising results for the better. In all this time I don't detect any single problem that is related of what you posted.
Btw, any one of you can make the test in your system with out using any clamp tool looking for a related problem because no clamp ( movement record relative to spin of the platter. ).
You can find other kind of " problems " because no clamp but I seriously doubt you can find the " problem " that dertonarm put on the table.
Btw, somewhere in some thread I posted my " controled " ( not very scientific ones. ) tests about that cartridge drag with different TT's, different cartridges, different stylus shape, different VTF and even with one, two, three and four cartridges running at the same time: my conclusion was that I don't have to worry about.
Now, if you have all those controled tests then bring here and share with all of us. Honestly I hope you have it because that could be a great information where almost all of us will learn about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Dertonarm: +++++ " That you do not use any kind of clamp anymore.... " +++++
I don't posted to say any one is wrong or something, just like a " datum " but forget about it is not important as is the post subject.
++++ " be so obvious that they do not need discussion nor controlled tests the way you put it. " +++++
useless to follow: is so obvious!!!?????.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear friends: IMHO we can't " live " with out measures, more on this latter on.
+++++ but the only thing that really matters is how the equipment meets your individual requirements to connect with the musicians. " +++++
" individual requirements ", this subject is the one that makes the difference and the one that makes everything extremely complex an almost impossible to have " measures " that can predict why something can/could like me or not.
I can't argue why you like something that I don't but I can argue if what you like is more or less accurate or not.
The Universe and the " Mother Nature " works with accuracy in all " orders " , with out accuracy things can end on " caos " and disaster.
In audio things are not different accuracy and accuracy levels are essential: a TT must spin at 33.333rpm not at 34.06rpm, the electrical voltage in USA has to be 117v ( or whatever. ) not 220v , a RIAA eq measurement must be accurate and measure in the 20hz to 20Khz range not between 10hz and 12Khz, etc, etc.
Measure accurate measures help to the audio item designer to know and meet his design targets, he needs to measure and try to design with accuracy on: frequency response, noise level, harmonic distortion, etc, etc,
Today it is extremely rare that an inaccurate audio item can sounds great, of course that due to our each one " individual requeriments " could sounds great but this is not the overall subject.
Me like all of you likes " good sound " / " emotional sound " but I like more ( an always looking at. ) accurate " good/emotional sound ".
There are a lot of good electronics that " sounds good " but are or have serious inaccuracies: amplifiers with high output impedance ( say over 0.5 ohms. ), amplifiers with differences on its frequency response and output voltage on both channels, same with line stages, phono stages with RIAA eq deviation over 0.1db ( designers of phono stages with RIAA deviation on the 0.5db that not only does not cares about but that are proud of that spec!!!!), snesible differences between channels in frequency response and RIAA eq deviation in phono stages, etc, etc, etc. I say inaccuracies that put severe colorations to the sound we are hearing.
I'm very sensitive to inaccuracies/colorations and I'm training/trained to detect very fast and do not tolerate when I can do something about. Some of you know that this " tool " is true because I was at your places and speak on system " colorations ".
Because I like accuracy and neutrality do you think that I don't like " good/emotional sound " ?, " good/emotional sound " is my prime target along accuracy.
Many of us that have " good/emotional sound " even not know how accurate is that sound and many times we don't care about.
The MUSIC has the magic to move us even through a " walkman " in the subway but this is not the subject either.
For me it is a myth that measures has nothing to do on what we are hearing and I have to add: if you know what you have to measure.
When we were on our self Phonolinepreamp design and before ( way before ) we start to hearing it we use the more digital/computer advanced tools/models to " measure " each single stage on our design from different approaches: noise level, THD, IMD, bandwindth, frequency response, etc, etc. We made it first to have what a " perfect model " predict on performance at each single electronic stage, second for when the first unit was build we can compare real measures looking for differences against that " perfect model ", third to have standard measures if we want to build more than one unit, fourth to guess how beat those measures through design or changes on parts.
We made several scientific tests looking for differences between a signal at the input ( with out any electronic line stage process. ) against that signal at the line stage output.
With out tests, measures and the like we are in hand of " random " ( like many people " likes " to " live ". ), accuracy?: what's that?
I'm the " harder " critic of what I hear/heard in my audio system even harder that what I can be with other people systems. I hate mediocrity but I hate more when the people accept that mediocrity.
Like I say: I like " good emotional sound " but I like more accurate good emotional sound!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear dertonarm: Agree, so many of us has a lot to learn on the whole subject and try to go up faster in each of us: audio learning curve.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear breuninger: +++++ " And Raul
no clamp? You shame the turntable PHDs.... " ++++
I made several/lot of tests with different mats and clamps even with vacuum hold down systems, in any case/combinations I detect advantages and disadvantages then I made/make a own design mat with a propietary blen material and I test too where I find that with this mat design not only reduce/minimum the trade offs on performance but that the overall quality performance was/is better with out clamp. I have to say that I never try a ring platter mechanism.
I wish I can/could have our mat design with an integrated vacuum mechanism, this could be great!!!
I repeat again again and again ( many times everywhere ) that the mat/platter build material where the record/LP seats directly is almost the more important subject/factor to achieve the highest quality performance, no single doubt about.
Till today in my knowledge the TT designers and DIYS don't find yet the right build material or blend materials that IMHO is responsable of the recording/play back quality performance ( everything the same. ).
We can see in this thread and other ones where everyone is " worried " about TT drive system, heavy/ light mass, plinth, suspension, etc, etc but no one of these people address the importance ( critical ) of that intimate relationship between that mat/platter and the LP, well maybe I can't explain good: I know that one way or the other these people address that TT " characteristic " but they don't find yet the right one.
IMHO here is where the TT ( as an audio item. ) could give a very high jump on overall quality performance that no one of you could even imagine!!!
If I was in the TT design this single target will be the one where I put all my " energy " because all the other factors/characteristics/targets in TT's are almost know, " invented " and achieved. Btw, the same on tonearms and cartridges.
If we think/make the same normally we achieve/obtain ( more or less ) the same results. We need to " change " if we want to grow-up.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Regards ad enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Jj2468: +++++ " No aversion to measurements here. It's just that I tend to put more trust in our ears. " +++++
+++++ " I agree that our ears and our perception are more important than a number on paper. " +++++
well, yes and no: in an strict point of view where the target is to achieve a performance with the less " colorations " ( where colorations means: noise, distortions, inaccuracies, etc, etc. ) those two statements are untrue.
I know several audio system owners that are really proud of each one audio system quality performance where they have severe " colorations " because they have an unmatched speaker electrical impedance curve with an amplifier(s) with high output impedance or whatever other " problems " around. That they like it does not means the performance is right because that performance is " wrong ". First step to be confidence with our ears is that we have an in deep experiece/knowledge about music and how it sound or shoul be to sounds, what we like has nothing to see with what is the real thing if we like the " wrong " music presentation.
Problem with measurements is that not many people " understand " it. Many measurements say almost nothing alone and only make sense when we " combine " two or more measurements.
The match between amplifier/speaker impedance as a RIAA eq. deviation are only a few of the measurements examples that alone can tell us part of what we are hearing, normally we have to combine several measurements to more or less understand what's happening.
IMHO today ( in these times. )it is pathetic to read elsewhere that what it counts is only what we hear, it does not matters that what we hear is wrong way wrong!!!!!.
This kind of thinking has a price very high price that all of us ( the high end audio world. ) are paying: mediocrity, that's what we overall have in our home audio systems. This is a fact not an opinion: take a look to almost all the audio links in the audio chain and we can find that in the last 20-30 yyears we don't have almost no improvements or signs that the industry is growing-up in quality performance. We are extremely proud and happy because our SP-10s are wonderful or because the vintage MM/MIs are great alternative, my God!!!!!!!
Shame of us and shame of industry we have ( with exceptions. ).
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Teres: I agree on that 70's electronics example.
I want to argue not what happen in the 70's with electronic designs but what we have today. It is clear even today that there are audio items that could measures good but sounds awful because different factors: bad design, bad parts selection, bad execution design, wrong layout, bad quality circuit board material, use of negative feedback in the wrong place or exesive one, use of op-amps or IC chips that for lower distortions use hundreds of negative feedback, etc, etc; but with a decent design and good execution design with the right parts selection and the like something that measures good normally sounds good too.
The understand of mesures and its correlation with what we are hearing is difficult because ( example ) we can have an audio item with very low distortion figures and could sound bad because the distortion measures alone don't tell me the full " history ", we need to know which kind of distortions are generated on that audio item: even/odd harmonics and at what output level, many items has problems because inadequate phase frequency response and many other " ocult " factors that the manufacturer normally not disclose and only through specific measures we can know the why's/where what we are hearing.
Sure that could be that an amplifier with low output impedance ( say: 0.05 ohms. ) can/could sound bad and many examples like this tell us that our first step is that we have to understand what each single measure means, second step we have toknow what to measure, where to measure and how to measure and third ( not last step, there are more. ) how some of those measures are related to give us an answer of what we are hearing. I know is not an easy task but IMHO we all need to start an overall understanding about, this understanding IMHO could help to each one of us to improve the quality performance of what we have at home.
Teres, I'm for accurate good emotional sound: nothing less. If our ears are true trained on music we can discern between a good sound ( colored one ) and a good accurate sound, which one do you prefer?, certainly an accurate one if you are trained to discern it. Problem is that this is more easy to say that to achieve because to have this very high grade of discern require wide experience not only on music but on understanding of the different audio link performance in an audio chain, this means a wide experiences hearing a lot of different audio systems in different environments, in a few words: be an expert! with all what this word means.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
