Nude Turntable Project
Hi Halcro, I admire this path you took, few would go this this route. I like your selections of tonearms and look forward to future input on what headshell cart combinations you like best with the MA505. I have a MA505 and a MA202L I would like to add to a new plinthe for my 301 in the near future. Here is a good compilation of Micro Seiki tonearms I recently came across. http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.analog-forum.de/wbboard/index.php%3Fpage%3DThread%26threadid%3D4711%26boardid%3D2&ei=SgLbTOXhNsqBhQf1lonQAg&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CC4Q7gEwAA&pre Brad |
Good Evening, Halcro, Thank you *very much* for your hard, painstaking work and what appears to me to be scientific detachment in researching plinth --and nude plinth-- options. I have an SP10 and want to get it spinning discs. On another thread I'm considering plinth options, but to do full diligence --and thanks to Raul for his encouragement-- I need to looking into a Nude configuration, too. When I settle in to listen at home, in my room, I want to know that whatever I spent, it was well considered. 1) Can you tell me how you support your Victor, perhaps with more detailed photographs? 2) Did you have to build a base of any kind for it, or does it rest on your shelf by itself? (I've looked at your photos and can't tell from their viewpoint how the table is supported) Did you have to have a tower made to support your arm? or did you make it yourself? 3) Was the tower free standing? and of what material? 4) How is the proximity of the arm tower determined and maintained in relation to the table? 5) Did you treat the underside of the Victor TT with any resonance coating or treatment? if so, what material, affixed how? I look forward to your response, and thank you again for taking the time, not only for inquiry, but to share your results on the 'Gon. with Best Wishes, and Happy Thanksgiving, David Kellogg |
Dear Pryso, I'm sorry if it wasn't clear but in my Intro to this Project I provided a Link to my System Page where I stipulated that I would NOT be testing the TT-81 with a plinth. To quote..... .Now this will NOT be a scientific test in the sense that I wonÂ’t (at this stage), be testing the TT81 in a plinth. You see I can't grasp the purpose of a plinth in a Direct Drive Turntable? For an Idler Wheel or Rim Drive I can see that there are gears and rods and metal moving parts to support as well as the thrust bearing for the platter and similarly with a Belt-Drive there is the support for the thrust bearing and sub-platter assembly as well as support for the motor (usually) and of course there is the mounting required for the arm-board and arm. With a Direct-Drive where the motor is in-line and supports and turns the sub-platter directly, I see no physical necessity for a plinth other than to perhaps support an arm-board assembly? In any case, thanks for your comments and I apologise again if i wasn't sufficiently clear in the beginning? |
Dear Ecir38, Thank you for your kind words and also the link to the info on the Micro tonearms. I find it frustrating to find any 'history' on all these vintage arms, turntables, and cartridges as I think Google does not include many Forums in its searches and that where most of this archival information is now to be found. I simply love the Ma-505s not only for its sound but for its looks, design ideas and superb manufacturing quality. It has all the looks and feel of a pre-war Leica camera but the ingenuity of its VTA (on-the-fly), Antiskate (on-the-fly) and unique VTF (on-the-fly because of its Dynamic weighting), makes adjusting 'by ear' the easiest I have ever found in any arm. |
Halcro, no apology needed. I should have read your prior posts for more background. I have great respect for Raul's experience in audio but he is definitely swimming against the tide regarding DD plinths. Even Technics introduced three Obsidian plinths during production of the Mk 2 and 3 tables and each one was more massive than the one before. Also, every other post I've read on DD plinths claims sonic improvements when more massive plinths replace original light-weight versions. I'm way overdue in building a plinth for my SP-10 Mk 2 and have only listened with it mounted on a 3/4" particle board to provide a platform to mount the tonearm. I must admit that sounds very nice so perhaps 40+ pounds of plinth are not necessary after all. I was just hoping you might be doing the more direct comparison. And based on the thoroughness of your review, I'm certain it would have been helpful had you done so. ;-) |
Dear Halcro: First I want to congratulate you because of your really " open mind "/unbiased/non-comercial attitude to decide test/try the " naked " DD TT project, second for your detailed follow-up of your project implementation through those pictures in your site and third for your great post about the " naked " quality level performance. The " naked " project comes to my mind several years ago when I tested with my Denon DP-80 and DP-75 ( similar looks to your Victor. ) and where I had a great success against the Denon wood/MDF plinths and against two heavy ( 40kg eac one. ) and beautiful plinths made one from green marble and the other from beige Onyx ( I still have it. ). Then I try it with my SP-10MK2's and confirm the high quality performance that the approach has against same plinted TT's that I heard it. The naked road has some " edges " where IMHO the most important is what we are looking for. Any plinth IMHO has its own " distortions/colorations " that put it away from true neutrality/inert, that we can think there is no such " colorations " because we can't aware easyli of them does not means does not exist, we have to remember that the phono cartridge is a very sensitive ( way more sensitive that our own ears. ) microphone that " sense " and detect tiny very tiny " colorations " that the plinths have. Your experiences only confirm the fact: +++++ " The first thing I noticed about the TT-81 DD turntable was the distinct absence of ‘colouration’ or ‘signature sound’. " +++++++ this is what is supposed/should be a TT: a neutral audio device!. No plinth at all means one less stage ( with a plinth in reallity we have more that one stage. ) to contaminate the audio signal. Seems to me that the best plinth is no plinth at all. Yes the naked/no-plinth way could be not as beautiful looking as those very fine plinths out there but IMHO if we are looking for Excellence in quality performance then the naked project is very very good " un-expensive " alternative. The other advantage that like me with the naked/nude approach is how easy is to add two or three tonearms!. I confirm my congratulations to you ( btw, thank you Nilthepill. ) because you don't thinked: " well that naked alternative that Raul speaks could be interesting but maybe not and forget it. ", instead of this you want to be sure what happen through that naked project and as my friend Jorge you have success too, good!!! Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Bpoletti and Raul, Thanks for the kind words. Dear David, A lot of your questions can be answered by looking through my 'progress' postings on this site. You will see photos as I procured arms and cartridges and designed the arm-pods and then had them cast in solid bronze and then had them painted in an automotive shop. 1) the TT-81 sits on Tip-Toes (3) which are important to pack to get level. Also important is to position the cones so that their centerline is directly under the pressed metal wall of the motor housing. This maintains the utmost rigidity and transfer of loads so that no twisting or movement of the casing is possible. 2) No base. The TT-81 sits on a 33mm laminated shelf cantilevered off the brick wall via aluminum brackets. 3) Towers are free-standing and made of solid cast bronze each one weighing 25 lbs and fitted with screwed adjustable spikes for leveling and isolation. A 10mm solid aluminum top-plate to the pods has a centre hole drilled to suit whatever arm you might have and this plate is screwed to the bronze pod. 4) The proximity of each arm-pod is determine by the individual arm's spindle to pivot distance geometry which comes with each arm. A Feikert aluminum distance gauge is essential for setting these up. Once set, the weight of the pods sitting on 3 spikes makes them virtually immovable in general arm use. 5) No treatment to underside of metal curved motor shield of the TT-81. If you still have further questions after looking through the progress "links", please feel free to ask. Good luck. |
Thanks again Pryso, Yes you're right. The shelf is certainly 'mass' loaded but with the actual turntable isolated on spikes, there is theoretically a de-coupling from this 'mass'? And don't the adherents to massive plinths require direct 'coupling' via bolts or screws? Although I do recall someone making plinths who advocates that the turntable merely 'sits' on the plinth without mechanical connection? |
Halcro Just recently I was introduced to the play back sound of a direct drive Technics SP-10 MKII mounted in a Panzerholz plinth. This experience came about from a purchased item from this fellow audio enthuses with pick up only. To make a long story short we chatted about audio related stuff and listened to music before I went on my way. I have similar to your investment for a modern turntable and during the couple of hours of listening to his table and system a realization quickly came over me that made me pause........... What was first apparent was the tonal balance ,rhythm, pace and overall life in the music that my system only hinted at but never breaking through into that new vinyl play back territory, well new to me. In other words this direct drive table, so to speak, punched through a cloud cover that I was not aware of. 30 plus Gs for my current front end is serious bread for anyone and right now I feel foolish. Halcro you bring up some good points here 10-31-10 which prompted me to go through old issues of the Absolute Sound, late 1970s and early 1980s issues though some are missing I did come across a mention of a Harry Weisfeld of VPI fame and his modified Technics SP 10. I need more time to go through them.........Maybe it wasn't all about the search for the absolute sound after all. In any advent, I have shamelessly invited myself back over for more listening of this direct drive wonder. BTW great work and interesting topic. Regards William |
Thanks William. As I intimated in my conclusive post, I really feel that the cartridge is possibly more important than a well executed turntable design of any type? And the arm may be just as important? At the moment I am listening to the the Empire 4000D/III on the FR-66s on the Raven AC-3 and it is quite literally sublime. The Fidelity Research 12" arm is definitely the "King" of tonearms as it has been described. It really beats the Continuum Copperhead which itself beat the Phantom II and DaVinci 12" Ref Grandezza. So as with all things in audio, there are no absolute "absolutes"? |
Hi Halcro, I was going to suggest the FR66s to you when you started your NUDE project I saw you already got a 64s so I did not bother recommending the 66s to you. Yes, the 66s is something else. At least you came to a solid conclusion. I have been using the 66s for a long time and it is definitely something else. Last year, Dertonarm gave me some good tips of setting this beast up and it definitely made a heck of a difference (Thanks Dertonarm!). Please get yourself a Dennesen Soundtractor. You will need it to properly setup this tonearm. There are several versions to this tractor so before you buy one, please check with him to see if it is a genuine one. |
Dear Halcro: IMHO I think that the source always is the most important factor/subject and then each one of the links that surround the source, in the cartridge case: tonearm, phono stage, TT, cables, etc, etc What you are experienced with your D4000III is a confirmation of the importance in the tonearm/cartridge match. Till today IMHO does not exist yet the best tonearm but the best cartridge/tonearm combination. Of course that is not easy to find out that best combination because we need to own a lot of tonearms to test cartridges there. Could that Empire cartridge performs better in other tonearm?, certainly yes but you have to find out: hard task. Anyway, good that you are enjoying your system with that source. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hello again, Halcro After looking through your thread, reading your kind forum response and looking at your system photos I have a few more questions, please. 1) is there a "materials" reason to prefer cast bronze over aluminum, steel or brass? 2) are your tonearm towers solid or hollow? 3) where are your tonearm wires? inside the tonearm tower? 4) I didn't understand your term "packed" when applied to leveling the Tip Toes --a linguistic difference 'twixt here and there? 5) judging from your system photos, the shelf you mention is 'melamine', Formica or some kind of laminate over what we call particle board. Is that accurate? 6) How much did it cost to have your machinist fabricate the tonearm tower? Would it be remotely reasonable to have your machinist make two to send to the US (surface mail, no hurry) since he's already done yours? 7) What type of adjustable feet did you use for the bottom of the tonearm tower? made from what metal? Thank you again, in advance, for any further support you can provide. A couple of close-up photos of a tonearm tower might help a lot. Best Wishes, David |
Hi Halcro, having been engaged in many other topics for a while I am a late runner up to this thread. This seems to be a wonderful project you are doing Halcro, diving into the world of experimenting with old school arms and TTs. I am still focused more on MCs as TBone seems to be too. Nevertheless when you have the chance why not going for an old EMT 997 Banana ( NOS) and using the wonderful EMT cartridges, they are not expensive in comparison to most modern MCs. One of my favourites is the TSD 15 lzi - sorry this modern MC is for SME, not for the EMT connectors. A very good start without investing into a new arm. Maybe we see more fantastic arms on your Victor in the future... |
Good Morning, Halcro I know we're well launched into the Holiday season, so I don't expect an immediate response to my query from Nov 29. When you have time, I am most interested to learn further about the mechanics of your setup and the [metallurgical] reasons for it, as in the questions from my earlier post. Trusting that you and your loved ones are well, I send thanks in advance for your assistance, and Best Wishes, David |
Welcome Thuchan, It's always good to have you drop by. I know you've been busy with your own Project (horn speakers I believe?) but you were responsible for me getting the Fidelity Research FR-64s arm and after hearing how great it was, I wasted no time in obtaining it's big brother the FR-66s. You of course discovered the joys of great 'vintage' analogue gear long ago (how many RX-5000 turntables do you now have?..............five?!!!!!) just as other dedicated audiophiles have like Cuong Pham in Vietnam who has 4 or 5 Thorens Reference turntables in every colour available? So I'm quite surprised that you have not progressed onto the great vintage MM cartridges especially when you've had the Empire 4000D/III for 3 months now? Just mount it in your FR-66s and you will see what all the fuss is about? Yes, now that I have the Victor TT-81 with my own arm-pods, I am able to mount any arm I can obtain. Who knows what the future will hold? Good luck with your own Project. |
Dear David, As Ecir38 mentioned, a lot of your answers are to be found in earlier postings where the arm-pods are shown in the 'raw' cast form with all the holes and cable entry points clearly visible but re-cap:- 1) Aluminium is too light and mild steel is magnetic. I needed to make sure that the arm-pods could not be easily moved once the geometry of each arm had been established. I investigated machining stainless steel, brass and bronze but they all need up costing about $2000 each, so I went for casting (either brass or bronze) and bronze is cast here in foundries on four out of five days of the week compared to limited casting of brass. 2) Arm-Pods are solid except for 55mm diam hole in the centre to accommodate all the arms I could think of? 3) See previous photos. 4) I just meant to make sure the table was level by using packers under one or more Tip-Toes. 5) Yes the shelf is 33mm thick laminated particle board. 6) Not practicable. Apart from all my running around to organize, the height of the pods are determined by the height of the turntable you are using. SME recommends that the mounting height of the arm is 41mm below the level of the platter although most modern arm are mounted 30-35mm below the platter. I found that with vintage arms, a height of 47-48mm below the platter allows for more flexibility in getting the arms level. 7) Screwed spikes were drilled and tapped into the bottom of each pod. The are chrome plated brass and are leveled by screwing in and out. Sorry I can't be more helpful but you are really asking me for my 'intellectual property' which took me 3 months to design and have fabricated. Good luck. |
Thanks Halcro, you are right, I got the Empire thanks to your advice and I will have it mounted like you recommended - Xmas lies ahead of us! Maybe I am a bit reluctant to compare new cartridges after having sold my Grand Slamm. Now I know how good this loudspeaker was. Nevertheless when I received my latest master tape from The Tape Project ( little hatch - rock with my baby) and I did listen to "Baby please don't go" I realized that the sound is still acceptable... It is wonderful to have many options, in analogue as well as in life. With my second home bases now in Vietnam I am getting closer to you. :-) |
Dear Halcro, First, an apology: I thought I had seen the whole thread, pictures included. You and Ecir38 were right in sending me back to the listing: I've seen your entire posting again, now with all the pictures, and have much better information than when I asked my questions. Sorry to have been hasty. Even so, you answered the remaining questions thoroughly and I feel sufficiently equipped to delve into trying a nude setup of my own, thanks to your generosity and Raul's gentle prodding. Thank you again, so very much, for sharing your hard-won intellectual property. When I try to recreate your success I will certainly credit you and Raul for the work, most gratefully. with Very Best Wishes, and for Happy Holidays, David Kellogg |
Dear Halcro, Came late to this discussion but kudos to the review. Ever since I read Raul's piece about nude turntable, I have tried it on my Rek-O-Kut idler turntable and I am very much amazed at what I am hearing. I have the turntable placed on bricks. It looks ugly but the music is beautiful. Any chance you want to try an idler turntable if you have a spare ? Thanks for confirming what I have been hearing with my stock idler turntable. |
Hello everyone and especially Halcro and Raul. Raul for your continuing posts to try out going plinthless (against what is the norm to use a plinth) and Halcro for your excellent experiment and what ultimately convinced me to try it on my Technics Sp10 Mk II. My sp10 was in a 7 layer birch plinth with two arms - ET2.5 and VPI 12. I have three cartridges - Dynavector XV1, Clearaudio Virtuoso and a Benz Micro MC-3 cartridge. I was very happy with the sound and was looking at getting another plinth as a next step. I gave the plinthless set up a try since it cost very little to experiment with. I was not expecting what I heard when I went plinthless with the ET 2.5 arm using the the Benz Micro MC-3. I won't go into subjective words reviewers use. All I can say is less distortion, very neutral sound. A big improvement. I constructed a pod for my ET arm out of a block of steel 4 x 6 that weighs 18 lbs and sits on spikes. It cost me about $100 from Metal Supermarkets including the hole drilling. The Sp10 is sitting on 3 BDR cones for now. All of it sits on 4 inches of solid maple. It is still a work in progress project. I may be into a plinth again one day again but for now am very happy with this set up and I will have a pod built for the VPI arm. Halcro are you still enjoying your set up? To all - I would like recommendations on maybe using another material for the second pod recognizing I need to drill for the arm plate and spikes, and which of the three cartridges I have you feel would work best with either the ET and VPI arm. The Xv1 and Virtuoso cartridges are currently being re-tipped. Is there a cartridge that would be a perfect match for the ET2.5? Halcro and Raul - Thanks again and to all for recommendations on which of the cartridges to use. Chris |
Dear Ct0517: Good that you are enjoying your TT plinthless set up. Chris IMHO the " merit " comes from your self that decide to tryed. +++++ " All I can say is less distortion, very neutral sound. A big improvement. " +++++ IMHO this is all about: " less/lower distortions ", I posted several times that our each one " goal/target " ( main one ) to attain excellence level on system quality performance is trying to obtain ( at each audio link in the system ) the lower distortions we can. As distortions goes lower ( elsewhere/anywhere. ) as MUSIC takes its real " overall meaning " like that " very neutral sound " you already experienced. Any TT plinth has its own " distortions " and unknow behavior for all of us when we go plinthless we are taking out/switch-off a " distortion place/center " where the cartridge signal was and is degrade. +++++ " I gave the plinthless set up a try since it cost very little to experiment with " +++++ this is exactly what I posted several times in this forum on the plinthless subject: everyone can try it with almost no " money " to invest. I think that this plinthless subject is more an each one attitude for test it. To all the people that support DD TT plinths I always ask them: do you already tested a plinthless set up ? why don't you try it?, no one till today give an answer about and follow their " road ", fine with me. Something that is really nice is that all the persons that already try the TT plinthless set up all reported ( just like you ) that the quality performance beats the normal TT plinth set up. This plinthless subject is just that other ones like DD TT that a few years ago no one cares about and in those " all times " I posted that the DD alternative could and can beats the BD one or that the MM/MI alternative is more than an alternative but a " superior " analog source against the LOMC alternative or that the way to go with LOMC was and is through active high gain phono stages instead setp-up transformers or that the way to go is to playback cartridge analog source alternatives through phonolinepreamps ( integrated ) instead stand alone phono stages or the latest " electrical power system source direct connection " instead all those " electrical power conditioners " or...or.... Over the time like what you are enjoying " things " takes its right and true " perspective ". here in my country people say: " things fall by its own " weight " ". I hope that in the future people gives to it self the opportunity to test and hear what happen with all those " audio subjects " and decide according, in the mean time the ones that already did it will follow enjoy the greatness of those " alternatives/subjects " . ¡ Happy New Year for all of You ! Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Chris, It's interesting to hear your conclusions on the 'nude' Technice SP10Mk2. It seems to indicate, as Raul has been urging, that people should at least try things before arriving at conclusions....especially if trying is relatively easy? I was concerned at using steel for arm-pods because of the possibility of magnetic interference with such a 'lump' of ferrous material? It may be interesting for you to try a 'non-ferrous' arm-pod next as a comparison? Of course that will not be as cheap as the steel option? I still enjoy my 'Nude' TT-81 as well as my big Raven AC-3. As I mentioned, my experiences indicate bigger differences in cartridges and arms than perhaps well executed turntables of different drive philosophies? Happy New Year to one and all. |
Dear Raul and Halcro – thank you for the info. Halcro excellent point on using a non-ferrous metal– I was so obsessed with anchoring the ET arm with weight that I overlooked that. Wish I had asked earlier. I hear no audible noise but my MM virtuoso cartridge would have told me more about any noise and it is being retipped. Instead of making a second pod for the vpi arm I am now thinking of doing another ET pod in a non-ferrous metal. :) Can’t tell you how much fun this has been – Like it has been said before there is so much real estate to work with - any arm can go on a pod and be switched in and out. Once you have a reliable drive system the possibilities and options are huge not being limited by plinth space and arms that will fit it. I like all my cartridges with the ET arm but are there any sleepers I can try ? Thank you again -Happy New Year to all |
Great post, Henry, and I was not aware of this thread until this moment. As you know, I was one of the many who was and is in disagreement with Raul regarding the necessity for or value of a heavy, dense plinth to go with a DD turntable. But as Pryso says, you have not addressed this issue here. What I would like to know, however, is what IS your Victor tt sitting on or in? Raul makes a point that he uses the rare, and no longer available new, Audio Technica feet under the chassis of his SP10 Mk2. (As an aside, altho Raul evidently did own a Mk3 in olden days, he does not now own one and has not owned one since before he began his and our MM/MI saga. I really defy anyone to use a Mk3 with no plinth at all, because the torque of that motor will rotate the unfettered chassis at every start-up, thanks to Newton's Third Law, and screw up the alignment of all those tonearms you have stuck on outboard arm pods.) I would also like to know what is the make-up of that white shelving upon which you place your gear. Is it possible there is some fortuitously beneficial coupling between the shelf and the un-plinthed Victor? And finally, were you ever at any point able to compare the same tonearm/cartridge combinations on any two of the turntables you tested? By the way, I would rank the Victor as high up among the best of the mid- to upper level Japanese DD's, but like the Denon DP80 and some of the Kenwoods and Sonys, it has not gotten much attention compared to the SP10s. It is not obvious to me that the TT81 would be inferior in any way to an SP10 Mk2. (I would rank the SP10 Mk3 on the highest plain, along with the P3, the L07D, etc. These tables DO kick ass.) So far, we have you and Albert Porter who have each compared a "good" vintage dd turntable to a current top line belt-drive turntable, with surprising results. I would guess there are others who have done a similar comparison and reached the opposite conclusion, but since they heard what they expected to hear, they have not bothered to comment. As you know, I am firmly in the idler- and direct-drive camp based on my own experiments in my own system, but since I never owned a $10,000 belt-drive in the first place, there is always some residual curiosity. |
Hi Lew, I'm surprised this 'Nude Turntable Project' has escaped your eagle eye for so long? As I've said during the postings, I don't presume to extend any of my findings to idler or rim- drive decks as the mechanics of those are quite different to direct drive. I also defer to your observations on the SP-10 Mk3 due to it's initial high torque although once correct speed has been attained I can't see how its stability is very much different to the SP-10 Mk2 or the TT-81? If you have the time to read through all the posts and photo links, you should be able to see the TT-81 sitting on 3 aluminium tip-toes directly on the 33mm thick laminated paricle board shelf. This shelf is sitting on patented aluminium cantilevered brackets called T-Brax (from England) which slot into adjustable aluminium support rails screw to the masonry wall. There is no question that this 33mm shelf is 'mass-loaded' by the weight of all the equipment thereupon, however both the Raven and the TT-81 are effectively decoupled from this shelf by the Tiptoes. The closest I've managed to hear 2 same arms on both decks is with the FR-64s on the TT-81 and the FR-66s on the Raven. The same cartridges have been swapped in for both these arms. These comparisons have led me to conclude at this stage that the cartridge/arm combinations are more important than the drive systems employed assuming competency in those drive systems is equivalent? |
Dear Halcro/Raul Some impressions - Having had this setup going for a few weeks now this is what I believe has happened in laymans terms. Bear with me. We all know the needle in the groove moves back and forth, causes good vibrations to happen, which are then picked up by the stylus and sent down the phono cables along the tonearm to the rest of our gear to make beautiful music. “Any” other vibrations that get introduced into play are bad, a problem, and we hear that as distortion in the music itself. Other vibrations come in from at least two directions. 1) Up from the platter into the cartridge, down the arm as well as 2) up from the plinth, up the arm pod where they meet with the other vibrations and cause the havoc we hear as distortion. I believe I have reduced vibrations going up the platter with this setup - but MORE SO going up the arm - by isolating it more. Further - A plinth is by definition any structure. I still have a plinth that my sp10 and arm are coupled to. Its the 4 inches of solid maple. It can be seen in this link. http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/view_userimages.php?user_id=5181 Both sp10 and arm board are coupled by spikes – they are not on separate audio stands and the sp10 itself being plinthless. The above is why I believe I had improvement in sound. A fantastic plinth that the DD and arm sit directly in or on will also reduce both direction vibrations but this is a much more complicated solution and costs a lot more $$ to implement to get to this level. I believe it also introduces colorations to the music itself as it has been said by you before based on the material used. This setup is much more simpler to actually implement – and for the average guy or gal “ me “ that has a good DD TT the isolating of the arm got me to a place that would have cost me much more $$ to implement the other way. Does this reasoning make sense. It has been said before I realize but I wanted to put in simple words for others implementing this setup. I wanted to also mention that having this setup reminds me of computers – Desktop versus laptops. Heavy plinths are like desktops and rarely moved if at all due to weight and their structure. This set up is portable and can be moved very easily. This is a big + as I have 3 systems in two physical locations. This has allowed me to enjoy my vinyl in multiple locations. Final thought is that I have been experimenting with different feet for the sp10. Currently using mapleshade spikes. I find it very easy when setting up to first - put the arm where I want it to be and then 2) just move the sp10 into alignment rather than messing with the arm. It takes about 3-4 minutes to line up the ET arm once I have changed feet. Thank you for bearing with me – appreciate the feedback. Cheers - Chris |
Dear Chris, I agree with your perceptions and also am convinced that your isolated tonearm base goes a long way to explaining some of the improvement. An explanation for that reasoning is contained in a new thread i have posted "A Copernican view of the Turntable System" HERE Cheers Henry |
Is this a plinth? PLINTH The NVS direct drive turntable which Albert Porter and Mike Levigne have bought after ditching their SP10 Mk3s mounted in expensive plinths. Discuss? |
Halcro, I'll bite. The answer is that YES the NVS is a ring holding the table, with that ring mounted on legs. It serves the purpose that what is commonly thought to be a 'plinth' also serves. In principal, if you think of your TT-81 and what the original Victor plinth was like, it was a rigid frame into which the motor was screwed. That plinth had legs/footers which stood on the ground. The motor hung out over the empty air - quite similar to the NVS. I would suggest that the idea of a 'plinth' could be boiled down to whether it serves the purpose intended. As an architect, you would know the purpose of the original meaning. It should be a rigid mount for the thing above it. The question is whether the plinth for TTs is sufficiently different in that it is at the same time a "base" (and in Japanese, the word is a Japanese version of the English word 'base', not 'plinth'), and a weight which loads the TT to absorb resonance, or to conduct it to the next level below. In that sense, a 'plinthless TT' might mean something different for different people. |
Uh-oh. Albert's got one? Is that in fact a photo of Albert's? (Looks like a 12-inch SME mounted in Panzerholz arm board, both favorites of AP, so I guess the answer is "yes".) Nuts! Now I have to ditch my SP10 Mk3. Janis Joplin, where are you now? (Channeling her lyric: "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz. My friends all got Porsches, I must make a-mends.") Just kidding. No way I can afford an NVS. But that NVS structure qualifies as a plinth in my little turntable book. |
Henry: It may not resemble a conventional plinth, but function is not necessarily restricted to specific forms. To me it looks like the NVS structure will function as what is commonly called a "plinth", and this particular implementation possesses a substantial amount of moment-inertia so as to better resist motor ripple torque. It appears that the designer is aware of the basic technical aspects that are desirable for such a structure. cheers, jonathan |
Dear Halcro and friends: WOW ! WOW ! and WOW ! I can't believe it. My Denon's ( DP-80 and 75. ) were on the " closet " for a lot of years that I can't remember how many, well two weeks ago I thinked: why not tested today? and that's what I made. First I test and mounted the DP-80 and of course plinthless ( with different footers than your Victor but looks very similar. ) using the same AT pneumatic footers ( 3 ) that with my SP-10s. First take: outperform easily the Technics one and obviously the BD TTs AS. Well I was really happy and enjoying the " new " fabolous toy when I decided to test the DP-75 ( tha's almost a DP-80. ). Second take: please don't ask me why ( both units in perfect operation condition. ) but outperform the already great DP-80 quality performance level. Well, that one unit outperform the other or that one audio item beats other one has nothing of extraordinary. The main subject is what means that " outperform " and in the case of both Denon's means in one word: a totally different performance on what I experienced in my system and with any other system out there I heard it. The word accuracy it its wider meaning seems to me adequate. Both Denon's gives a new dimension to the music listening experience and I mean a NEW DIMENSION that only when you experience it could understand what I'm trying to say. Halcro, now I understand better your excitement when you test for the first time your Victor 101. I compart with you that excitement that i don't share before because I wnat to be absolute sure about and now I'm; absolutely amazing for say the least. DISTORTIONS ALMOST DISAPPEAR. GONE FOR EVER, at least the ones coming for a TT. This you can see what Denon design means and where you can see that the only difference on specs between the DP-80 and DP-75 is mainly on the rumble number that in the DP-75 is a better one: http://www.thevintageknob.org/denon-DP-80.html http://www.vinylengine.com/library/denon/dp-75.shtml ( the brochure is a need to read. ). Both TTs have bi-directional servo with double-platter design. Is there any single justification/reason to use these Denon babies with a plinth?, IMHO none: plinthless is the name of the game. Halcro and friends: we are in the road!!!!! Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, I'm truly happy for you :^) As you say......it's quite hard to imagine the differences until one actually hears the purity and absence of previously 'unrecognised' distortions? It was your encouragement which first made me test a 'nude' DD turntable. I believe that a plinth would certainly 'change' the sound. How can that be a good thing? As far as I can see.......any 'change' in sound from the 'nude' TT....must be an 'addition' to that sound? Is that not a colouration/distortion? What are you using as an armpod with these two turntables Raul? Cheers Henry |
Dear Raul, What mat? What tonearm? How was the tonearm mounted? What cartridge? What music? Let's see: you pulled two turntables out of storage, set them up without a plinth and they sound "great". (I'll take your word for that.) And this proves something about whether or not a plinth can be used to good advantage with a direct-drive turntable? You are too smart to believe that this is good science. Anyway, very glad to hear from you. As you know, I am very fond of my DP80, as well. On its excellence, we can agree. |
Apologies to Raul, I think I am guilty of asking Raul to prove a negative, which cannot be done. Anyway, more data would be nice. Particularly I would like to know what mat was in use on each turntable (75 vs 80). So far as I know there is very little if any difference between the DP80 and DP75; I think the DP75 was essentially a DP80 motor supplied with a plinth and tonearm, usually the Denon DA307. T_bone would be the authority on this. If you hear a difference between the two tables, I would first suspect that the inferior sounding one might have a problem. Carry on, Raul. |
Dear Halcro: Agree with you and IMHO the naked fashion in many ways has lower distortions. The footers here play an important role and the AT pneumatic ones works splendid. No, I'm not saying that's a must to have, I understand there are other alternatives and like almost all things in audio we have to test and compare. I never tryed with tip toes like footers like you, maybe in the future. Regards and enjoy the music, R |
Dear Lewm: First I don't took the TT and decided to go naked as first option. I check both with three different plints before naked: my custom made and beautiful 40kg green marble one alond the 40kg beige onyx one and the own Denon hard wood. Both custom made plynts were over four of my AT pneumatic footers and both " sounds " the same and outperform the Denon one. After that I tested in naked fashion and decided that nake/nude is the way to go, differences are important it were not tiny ones. In all cases I use it my LOMC reference cartridge and ADC Astrion, Sonus Dimension 5 and AT ML180 OCC. I used two identical tonearms ( our prototype design. ) and two identical arm pods ( more on this latter. ) and same cartridge to phono stage wiring. I tested too with my AT 1503-3. Obviously that I tested through my own test procedure ( that continue the same with the same recording tracks. ) as always. No, both TT Denons are in perfect condition and as similar as they are are not the same. The measure rumble figure in the DP-75 was measured by a friend that own a DP-75 and he found out was/is: -88db at the same standards that Denon took it. Even on brochure the DP-75 has better specs than the DP-80. Other difference is that the DP-80 has higher motor's torque that means in some ways higher energy to dissipate or latent. I use our self TT mat design that I'm using for last 2-3 years and that through my experiences with other mats is unbeatable. Arm pod: I'm still using an Acoustic Signature one. If you take a look to my virtual system you will see where the tonearms are " seated ", well I took the whole AS arm board that is screwed at the TT plinth at the bottom. Well this was to compare against the AS ones and with the stone's plinths the tonearm were surface mount ( mine not the AT. ). As you can see I took things seriously about or: could you think for a moment that I come here to make such statement with out real facts and real foundation?, a mistake from your part if thinked that way. You can take a look to the MM thread and you will find that in the last times there are almost no posts from me. I took almost three weeks only in this comparison. Maybe in the nears future I will make a better arm pods but right now is fine with me and I have no time to change. Yes, both Denons are great and IMHO better than the SP-10s, at least in my system. Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
