Skeletal vs Plinth style turntables


I am pondering a new plinth design and am considering the virtues of making a skeletal or closed plinth design. The motor unit is direct drive. I know that as a direct drive it inherently has very low vibration as opposed to an idler deck (please do not outcry Garrard and Lenco onwners coz I have one of those too) but simple facts are facts belt drive motors spin at 250rpm, Lencos around 1500 rpm, DD 33 or 45 rpm. That being the case that must surely be a factor in this issue. What are your thoughts. BTW I like closed designs as they prevent the gathering of dust.
parrotbee

Showing 12 responses by parrotbee

Hello Richard - thanks for your contribution as I know that you've probably forgot more than most people know about decks. Most of the 1970's DD's of yore seemed to all consistently have heavy plinths. The decks having been designed at the height of vinyl when the multinational companies really threw all their resources at turntables - so they probably knew a thing or 2 I guess.
Not being funny when I say this, but I also consider the SME range of decks a skeletal design - albeit with high mass. I personally quite like the idea of combining reasonable mass, intelligent damping, and suspension.
I have read around, and some people take just one concept, be it mass, suspension, a single tasty material - and then they use it to the absolute extreme thinking it is the be all and end all. By way of developing my point if mass alone were the way forward then one would fix a turntable into the stonework of their homes.
I am going to have to read a bit more on propogation - in laymans terms does that relate to how a material in fact transmits, or absorbs a given vibration or sound?
Hi Richard
I said the SME's are skeletal on the basis that they are quite open as you observed. I must say I do quite like SME's. My problem with the double deck turntables is that dust can gather - however clean your room -trust me I have one such deck.
I have in mind the use of adjustable oil filled motion control dampers (used for microscopes) and heavy elastomer springs. It will hopefully allow me tune the deck but not be too springy or overdamped.
Who knows maybe I can rope some local gonners into doing some listening tests at my home...
Hi

I must say that I am not a big fan of arm pod mounts for turntables because then you are reliant on the platform to couple the platter cartridge arm loop - I am sure some will outcry at what I have said, but I think arm pods are quite a clumsy solution to a problem.
I had a look at few different large microscopes, and they have motion control dampers - I am looking into the best VFM/performance ratio.
I am gonna post, at some stage, a full set of pics from my drawing board plans to the build.
Halcro and Lewm - it's like those two old men on the muppets - always arguing - probably really the best of friends/enemies??? Funny thing is that both write about some of the best posts on this forum from my reading.
What Halcro says then explains why people like Mike Lavigne are using very expensive microscope stands in their systems.
That said don't RIAA filters etc cut out above 2-5 hz?
I guess I am gonna have to put theories into a design, and then tune using my ears.
Hi CT0517
Hijack the thread all you like - ;)
You said a few interesting things about the Platine, because the base is very much made of a similar material, by the sound of it, as the Technics Obsidian Bases or the Sony Reisinamic Plinths - both of which use 'resins and stones'.
Likewise Townshend Audio used to use Plaster of Paris.
I have to say I auditioned a Platine, and at the time I was not seduced by its charms - I found it a bit too warm for my tastes. That said - I am not knocking what floats your boat.
With regards to filling in the SP10 - Can I just suggest that you are a bit careful - why not try some lightweight damping such as acoustic foam first of all - what frequencies are you trying to damp?
Dear CT 0517

you say:
I used to say to myself ...hmmmm looks like a hole / space there. Wonder what would happen if I filled it ? When an audiophile based on theory alone, said don't do that, its not right because of xxxxxxx, but showed no real direct experience with it himself...... ..Hell..the more reason to go and do it.

This is a tad unfair given that you don't know what I do do, and what else I have built and fiddled with.

But FYI i have made a few Lenco plinths, and have also fiddled (that's what I call it) with a few belt drive decks to. In addition to this I have built quite a few speakers. In my experience when you keep mass loading you effectively just restribute the vibrations to a higher frequency often. The strangest/worst thing one can do is fill up a plinth with some type of permanent resin, and then be unable to remove it, or indeed sell the component due to the over-enthusiastic 'intervention/innovation'

As to the Obsidian - I never knew it was glass - I had always thought it was a non-resonating composite like the one on the SONY TTS - learn a new thing every day.
Hi CT
I just love Parrots and Bees - nothing too sophisticated about that.
When I use my real name I have always had some bizarre report from Hong Kong telling me about starving children needing $1000 usd in 24 hours to a foreign bank account.
Sorry for taking offence in the earlier post.
I am also fiddling around with some cheaper DD's so I may experiment with other plinth materials - who knows - I only have so much time on my hands to potter around like a maniac
Shifting away from the pod part of this thread, I am wondering whether to put together a panzerholz (clearaudio style) sandwich, or even try a different sandwich such as using acrylic instead? What say you?
Hi ct
I have read the articles by catsquirrel. They are theoretically quite sound, but there is a big BUT - that lenco is the only plinth(less) deck he has made and propagation changes with mass. In other words theory and no practice...
All said and done it's gonna be a mixture of theory and magic...
Hi CT
Not a believer in magic - not even david copperfield? paul daniels?
I guess a bit of experience may help as well...
LOL
Hi Aigenga
In all fairness I am not a fan of armpods as I think they are a bit clumsy and add-on in my view as opposed to those being part of the plinth. Likewise forming part of the whole plinth/turntable just strikes me as a heck of a lot tidier and means that it can't be knocked out of the way so to speak.
Armpods of themselves don't render a plinth as skeletal - likewise, one can be skeletal like the Rega (Naid I think) and not have a pod.
Hi Lewm
Just to give all parties an update. I have gone with a bit of a balanced mix of compromises so to speak in my grand plans. But just so as to whet a bit of your appetites I have ordered 6 pieces of aluminium thus far - they are to be chamferred then anodized.
In addition to this I have sourced panzerholz as well. I have also ordered some pieces of Corian.
I will add that I now have access to CNC machining facilities, and have been banging out dimensions on my graph paper (can't figure out Autocad)
It must be said that sourcing parts can be a real pain in the neck - especially in small numbers.
I am still umming and ahhing about the use of some Lexan in its construction.
I can't say much more save to say that it is not all about mass or damping. I am not going skeletal either, because I cannot abide dust getting into anything.