Hiho,
Nice research. Somehow, somewhere I came away with the belief that at least the TT81 motor is coreless. Don't know anything about TT71. But I agree with you that the photo seen when I click on "picture" does suggest that the motor has visible poles, therefore not coreless. Moreover, in the exploded views you reference, it appears that the TT71 and 81 motors are more cannister-shaped, whereas TT101 motor is wider and flatter, consistent with Dual-like coreless design. Anyway, Halcro will chime in, I'm sure.
I think I had trouble Timeline-ing my SP10 Mk3, because of a misfit between its spindle and the female receptor for the spindle on the Timeline. That's when I posted that Sutherland ought to offer interchangeable spindle holes, for his $450 price. The Timeline definitely does not fit my Lenco spindle. Maybe THAT was the problem I had, not with the Mk3. |
03-25-14: Lewm:
"... do you perceive that the TT-101 and the TT-81 have exactly the same motor? It looks from photos that the TT-101 motor might be different in size or in some other way from that of the TT-81. I know they are both coreless types." I have only owned the TT-71 before and I do know the it uses a core motor. Based on motor model numbers (TT-71 = M932A, TT-81 = M922A, TT-101 = M926) and pictures I gather online, it's possible the TT-81 uses a similar motor like the TT-71, which is NOT a coreless motor. If you look at this picture in vintageknobs.com the TT-81 appears to be an electronically more sophisticated TT-71 with similar core motor. I think the TT-101 is a different animal with different motor (coreless) and electronics. Drawings of each motor in exploded view: TT-71TT-81TT-101Of course, the best way to find out is for Halcro to take a picture of the motor or innards of the motor of TT81 once and for all. If we see the coils wrapped around an iron core then, of course, it's a core motor. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 03-25-14: Lewm:
"Hiho, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel, as regards a report on how the QL10 ensemble "sounds". Whew! Just reading the travail you went through is adventurous! I look forward to an eventual sonic evaluation of the TT101 comparing to your other DD tables. _______ |
Peterayer.
Yep, I went back and had a look at the posts, 05-29-12. on "Turntable Speed Accuracy" thread
Heavy platter and thread drive. |
Thanks Richard. If this is using the thread drive and I presume a vey heavy platter, I'm surprised by the result. |
Peterayer.
Further data for the list.
Way back on the "Turntable speed accuracy" thread, Dover posted results of stylus drag on his Final Audio TT.
From memory, this came out as 2mm movement per rev on a 400mm radius, when stylus lowered. Don't recall a video being posted, but this is still worthwhile info. |
Yes, early on I did receive some private emails suggesting that a few more people would try to upload videos, but this has not happened. I think the test can be quite revealing of one aspect of a turntable's performance, and it is a shame that not more people want to add videos.
I friend just bought an SP10 MK3 and perhaps he will let me film it. I have another buddy with a TW Raven.
The thread drifted into other subjects and became more than just a video database and this might have halted the momentum. |
On topic: The well seems to have gone dry as regards posting of Timeline results on this thread. Given the many months of its existence, one would have thought there would be more videos by now. When I finalize the modifications I am making to the QL10 plinth and arm board, and then put the QL10 back into operation, I will test my own TT101, see if can do what Halcro's did. |
Yep. I guess my posts on the vicissitudes of the TT101 belong in the "Living Dangerously" thread. |
To short-circuit the hijacking of this Thread any longer.....I have re-awakened the 'Vintage DD-Are We Living Dangerously' Thread.....
Lew, will Email you shortly re your questions. |
"Your" = "You're", of course. I hate when I do that.
Henry, Can you make me one of those free-standing cradles for my TT101? Who makes your arm pods, etc? Based on your first hand inspection, do you perceive that the TT101 and the TT81 have exactly the same motor? It looks from photos that the TT101 motor might be different in size or in some other way from that of the TT81. I know they are both coreless types.
Hiho, I can see the light at the end of the tunnel, as regards a report on how the QL10 ensemble "sounds". I am dealing with some amplifier problems that appear to have been resolved. One amplifier for each of my two entirely separate audio systems has been "down" on my workbench. |
TT81 for others, maybe. I've got DP80, L07D, SP10 Mk3, Lenco for "back-up".
TT101 is looking good. I am leaving it power up. Your quite right that the innards are a veritable rat's nest. I have observed that it is difficult to pack all the wiring back into the metal canister, after working on the circuit. In particular, the AC cord has to be folded just so, otherwise it won't fit. Plus there are all those interconnecting wire harnesses. My hypothesis is that the workers who built these things knew precisely how to lay out everything for final assembly. Then, after 30 years of aging of solder joints and PCB traces, we come along and take the tt's apart and cram them back together when work is done. It is my observation that incorrect routing of the wiring harnesses and AC cord followed by "cramming" can cause the various PCBs to bend a bit, thus putting stress on solder joints and tracings. I would bet this has a lot to do with our problems. |
The moral of the story is if you own a TT101, it is best to own at least one other reliable tt. When you realise that the innards look like this....there is certainly value to your 'moral'? On the other hand.......the much cheaper and simpler TT-81 may be the answer to that 'back-up' turntable? Sounds just as fine to me...... |
Richard, So many of my "conclusions" as regards what the hell is going on with the TT101 eventually prove themselves to be false or only half true, that I am loathe to make any pronouncements, but I do see with my unit that keeping it powered on all day yesterday was a good thing to have done. And in fact it started the day from "cold", malfunctioning with the tach in Hold position. It was warmed up when I switched into Run mode. One might argue that had I switched back from Run to Hold later, after it was warmed up, it might have worked fine. Thus my conclusion above that my unit works correctly only in the Run mode could be incorrect. Frankly, I don't care, so long as it does work.
Now you are going to make me run home tonight and turn on all my DD tt's. They have been sitting idle for quite some time, because I have been using only the Lenco on the Beveridge speaker system. There's no room to set up a second tt anywhere near the preamp. |
Lew
Bill T advises that electonics of that era be kept powered continuously to improve longevity.
From memory it was something to do with the substrate used in IC's of the time.
Others have noticed sonic benefits when doing this regardless of the vintage. Maybe worthwhile for reliability as well ?
Could imagine reliability benefits simply by avoiding the heat cycling switching on and off causes.
Good luck. |
Hiho,
Simple answer: I have not yet listened to the TT101, ever! Mine came as part of a QL10 (TT101 + Victor laminated wood plinth + Victor 7045 tonearm). The ensemble is in "like new" condition. I expect to listen to the TT101, at first, in this context. An assessment of the QL10 plinth, at first glance, is that it is "adequate". A big weak point, IMO, is the armboard, which is laminated wood and not terribly dead. My first goal would be to replace the armboard with one made of either Alu or brass. I just looked up the cost of the brass... more than $100 for a slab that would then need to be machined. So, perhaps alu will do for now. I have a piece already suited to it.
So last night I installed the TT101 motor into the QL10 plinth. For my personal preference, I re-set the tach to read out in "Hold" mode, rather than "Run" mode. In Hold, it reads out the steady state speed. In Run, it re-zeros itself every few seconds and then runs itself up to actual speed, over and over again. Interestingly, I got it back from the last repair guy in Run mode; I had never used it in Run mode prior to now.
When re-set in Hold mode, my unit malfunctions exactly as it did when I sent it off last time: it gets up to speed and holds it for about 90 seconds. Then it starts to show a very tiny speed error, e.g., 33.32 or 33.34, instead of 33.33. That event is premonitory to total shutdown. The tach goes blank and the "off" light goes on. The platter coasts to a stop with no brake effect. I initially blamed the recurrence of the old problem to the fact that I had had to tighten the tiny screws that hold the big metal outer chassis cover onto the lower motor assembly, in order to fit the TT101 into its plinth; otherwise the screws foul the wooden rim around the opening for the TT. I had previously observed that the unit works "better" when those screws are loose. I was about to take the TT101 out of its plinth again, to remove those damned screws entirely and leave the cage loose, but I had another thought at the last moment to see how the TT would work if I re-set the tach mode to Run. Sure enough, the table has been working beautifully and consistently all day long, on either 33 or 45 setting. This is consistent with Bill Thalmann's remark that the servos are slaved to the tach read-out. Also, I note that when the TT101 is working really well, as today, the platter comes to a complete halt immediately when you press Stop. This suggests that both the forward and reverse servos are doing their jobs. (There is no mechanical brake, to those who do not own one of these beasts, unlike in the Technics and other tt's.) When it is failing, and if I depress Stop before the failure mode kicks in, the platter will drift counter-clockwise for about one revolution and THEN stop, again pointing to the reverse servo as a culprit. It's all well and good to analye the problem, but finding the glitch and fixing it is a daunting task. I will leave mine alone as long as it works in Run mode.
This must be boring as watching paint dry, to anyone who does not own a TT101. Sorry. And I guess it's OT as well, but Halcro owns a TT101, so maybe he does not mind. The moral of the story is if you own a TT101, it is best to own at least one other reliable tt. |
Lew, this is the first time I ask such question: how does it sound?
_______
|
Well, what I have is a huge improvement compared to the way the TT101 was behaving before I sent it off to New Jersey. It does work fine about 90% of the time, and if it prematurely terminates, it seems to need only a re-start to get it up and running properly again. I feel confident enough to use it now, whereas it was a complete dud before shipping back and forth to NJ. Here's to UPS; they know how to kick around a turntable so as to improve it. (The repair guy in NJ candidly admits he did nothing; it would not even malfunction for him.)
The problem has got to be some micro-fracture in the soldering, as someone else suggested. Since I have 4 other perfectly good tt's, I do have time to go in there again and just re-solder everything in sight that has not already been re-soldered. |
Lewm
Just had to take a look and see how things turned out,
I see it could have been better.
Mine has a slight squeak on start up but the display is
so far consistent. |
Every time I pass through the kitchen, I fire up the TT101 once or twice to see if it's decided to go nuts again. This morning it finally did, once, from "cold" (power off overnight). Then it worked again on re-start for the duration of my light breakfast. I think the two technicians who have worked on this thing have simply left it running for days on end in their respective shops and therefore have concluded that they cannot duplicate my problem. The failure mode occurs at start-up, or not, so once it gets up and running it does seem to be fine. Perhaps the best approach is to leave power ON at all times or at least to wait a bit before starting the motor up after having applied power. And the failure mode is the same: If the tach displays "33.34", it's going to die within seconds, no braking, tach goes blank except for the decimal point. Bill Thalmann told me that the circuit is slaved to the tach, I think. Something in the circuit does not like to see overspeed, which makes me think the issue resides in the reverse servo mechanism.
But on the other hand, as regards Power, the thing malfunctioned consistently, every time no matter what, cold or warm, within about 90 seconds after start-up, before I sent the unit out this last time. So there goes my hypothesis. Yep, Gremlins in the basement. |
More fingers crossed here!
_______
|
Lew upstairs it may work fine bring it down stairs where the gremlins are lurking waiting to attack! LOL
Lawrence
Fidelity_Forward |
Sounding good so far Lew.....
My fingers are crossed for you... |
Lew: fingers crossed for you! Congrats. |
OK. When I finally got home at 9:30 tonight, there was a big box sitting outside my front door, left there by UPS. Apparently my dear wife had not even peeked outside all day, or at least since late afternoon. As you may have already guessed, my prodigal TT101 was inside said box. I just now unpacked it, and guess what. The SOB is working fine here in my kitchen. I am not going to breathe on it.
Apparently the TT101 is a lot more complex than the TT81, thanks to the unique reverse servo mechanism in the TT101. Thus I have no doubt that the TT81 would be less problematic. But nooooooo; I had to have the "best". Serves me right.
Should I run and borrow that Timeline from my neighbor, while the TT101 is working right? The tach is set in the mode where it counts repeatedly up from zero to set speed, over and over again. I prefer it in steady state mode, where it reads the speed with no re-cycling, but am I going to flip the switch that changes the mode? Not on your life. That may have something to do with this fragile triumph. |
Halcro, Did you not report earlier some issues related to removal of the outer cage? No....none whatsoever....... |
Lew.
Good points raised. Perhaps I should have said "little doubt" Experience has shown that doing away with shielding, provided their is no problematic external RFI, is "almost always" better.
Don't kick it too hard. |
Halcro, Did you not report earlier some issues related to removal of the outer cage? Either this had a bad effect on the tt itself or on some nearby components. And Richard, since we had concluded rightly or wrongly that the outer cage is an RF shield, why would you have no doubt that the TT's work better without them? I would say it's a toss-up, without knowing the real why of the cage, other than to provide physical protection for the working bits inside. The motor is a well enclosed unique and separate structure, by the way. Possibly its radiation is shielded from the circuitry thusly, even without the cage in place.
I will receive my TT101 tomorrow. If it malfunctions, I will try removing the cage. If that does not work, I will kick it. |
Lew and Mr krebs,
This RF issue is real.... I have a DD turntable outside its chassis for experimentation and experienced weird speed issues(sometimes)and when sometimes the system does not play good or sound right...... but your AM radio will not pickup 900mhz and higher where wifi lives and cell tower transmissions...
good luck
Lawrence
Fidelity_Forward |
Halcro
I have no doubt that they are better au-naturel.
It makes sense to eliminate this material from around the motor. Imagine the fields set up in it due to the power supply and the rotating magnets.
Fields acting on sensitive analogue circuits.
It would likely be better still to move the PCB's away from the motor.
I remember you talking about this?
Removing the shield though does open the very remote potential to outside RFI issues. But I suspect, as earlier, a very big leap. |
No problems with Halcro's "birthday suit" Victor.......:-)
Running both TT-81 & TT-101 without the metal casing is preferable to these ears........ |
Lew
I know that it is a leap but, we have experienced problems with servo feedback systems in our, hydraulic industry.
This where shielding has been inadequate. ( yes I thought of Halcro's birthday suit) while simultaneously being exposed to RFI.
A famous one was where the Cats hydraulic lifted stage in London would move all by itself. Problem was traced to poor shielding letting in transmissions from the ubiquitous London cabs outside.
When the obvious causes are exhausted we need to explore the path less travelled.
Good luck |
Dear Richard, If anything, the tt itself generates RFI internally. I think Halcro noticed some related issues when he ran his "naked", without the metal casing. In fact, I think we all concluded that one function of that casing is to shield other components from RFI. But how could extraneous RFI account for my problem? (By the way, I do use the AM radio as an RFI detector. Moreover, my TT101 malfunctions exactly the same in our kitchen on the first floor as it does in the basement, which I should think is a much more inherently protected environment, because it's all below ground.) I don't say you cannot be correct; I just wonder why and how. Your further thoughts are welcome. |
About a million of them, Halcro :). Here are some quotes from my tech to perhaps narrow things down. The PCB is two sided but without plated through holes. It looks like they put eyelets in and then solder on both sides. I found one that was open but by the time I pulled the PCB it was connecting. I resoldered it and now the 45 light comes on and that speed works. The 33 light never comes on so I think there is something wrong with that flip flop.... Doing just the few that looked suspect did not work (it did work but only for a day and then the gremlins reappeared), so after trying several other types of fixes, he ended up doing them all: There were no bad parts, just bad connections. I ended up resoldering all the feed thru eyelets, then flipping the board and removing the solder with a sucker, then resoldering them with much less solder. They all look pretty clean now. I know other companies that used the eyelet method had reliability problems. For some reason the solder cracks around the eyelets, probably related to different coefficients of thermal expansion. So, look for the joints that utilize 'eyelets' (I'm not sure whether that's a subset of all the joints or all of them). I think it took him a couple of hours to do them all, so not too bad. |
Lew
A crude but effective test for RFI which is perhaps worth trying.
If you have a portable AM radio. Tune it off station and move it around your room listening for increased static. Maybe something there that is not at first apparent. |
FWIW, my unit has all new electrolytics. That's the first thing we did during the first round at Bill's shop. On the second go-round, Bill re-soldered all those suspect solder joints. When it then failed in my house, I myself re-soldered yet more of the connections, to no avail. (There wasn't much left to do; Bill was very thorough.) To Richard's question: there are no obvious sources of RFI in my basement in my suburban residential neighborhood. Maybe we missed something as regards solder joints, because transport seems to be associated with the problem's elusive nature, suggesting that shipping trauma can rattle some connection that is tenuous. Hence, I will give it a good swift kick as soon as I get it back home. That should do 'er some good. |
How many solder joints are there to check Banquo? |
Have your tech check and re-do solder joints, Halcro. The gremlins live in those joints. |
Lew
Apart from static issues, which I'm sure you have considered, are there any transmitting devices near by? Something with more output than a cell phone?
VHF, RT, radio ham neighbor? |
Lew,
Perhaps you should just take some records and listen at the Tech's place?
But I also think the TT-101 is just devious?
My Tech has had mine running perfectly to correct speeds for over three days without any problems?
He will now just replace all the caps and see how it goes?.....but I suspect that once back installed in my system....the gremlins which have not revealed themselves to others.....might re-appear? |
Yeah, I thought of that. This last guy made about $150 and can freely admit he's done nothing. Yet I still have to pay for his time. What a country!
However, in Bill's case, not only is he the salt of the earth in terms of honesty, but I did see my TT101 work in his shop. We played with it for about 15 minutes, turning it off and on, changing speeds, etc, and observed no issues.
Interestingly, I asked this last guy (whom I have never met in person) about lubricating the bearing. He virtually laughed at me, said they were made to last forever. He wouldn't even think of taking the bearing assembly apart. When I pointed out that Victor probably did not contemplate that anyone would be using the TT more than 30 years after its build date and so could not have envisioned that much life span for the bearing, I was dismissed. Just as well. I'd rather do it myself, or not. |
Lewm: the only plausible explanation is that there is a conspiracy amongst techs to gaslight you. |
The big question is, what's a "turnable"?
Here we've all been talking about turntables, and Halcro wanted to discuss turnables all along.
Some few of you might want to know that after sending off my own TT101 for its third fix, the repair person (NOT Bill Thalmann; I could not bear to tell Bill that his fixes don't work at my house even though the TT101 works flawlessly in his shop) reports to me that in HIS shop, my TT101 also worked flawlessly, for weeks on end. He cannot make it malfunction, so he cannot fix it. He is sending it back to me. Gremlins afoot, no doubt. I am keeping my fingers crossed that it will decide to work for me when I do receive it. |
Ack,
I'm not sure that I understand your comments?
In all my videos with both Victor TT-101, Victor TT-81 and Raven AC-2......the Timeline and KAB Strobe are shown with tonearms lowered and raised.
In fact they are the only videos in this Databank which show this situation.
As Lewm has stated.....the weight of the Timeline clamp or the record clamp are irrelevant as weight is not a factor in stylus drag and certainly weight over the platter bearing plays no part.
Stylus drag is caused solely by the friction of the stylus hitting the walls of the record groove with enough force (and on enough occasions) to slow down the rotational speed of the platter. This will occur more noticeably with heavily modulated passages where the vinyl walls can be almost perpendicular to the path of travel of the stylus.
With both Victor DD turntables....it is apparent that even with 3 tonearms lowered or raised in any combination......no change to platter speed is visible with the Timeline.
With the Raven under the Timeline....it can be seen that the platter runs slightly slow with the stylus engaged but runs perfectly to speed when the tonearm is raised. However with the KAB Strobe in place......it appears that the Raven runs perfectly to speed with or without the tonearm engaged.
Based solely on the visual results of the KAB.....one could possibly claim that 'stylus drag' is a myth?
The Timeline however proves that it is a reality.
Now the AMOUNT of stylus drag with the Raven is very small........and because it appears to be relatively consistent....it is inaudible.
So it bothers me none that the KAB Strobe is 'good enough' for all practical purposes and if Lewm and others are happy to rely upon it.....who am I to argue?
My only disagreement comes with the claims that it is as accurate as the Timeline?
Now if I have misunderstood the points you have raised.....perhaps you could put them another way? |
Ack, I follow your reasoning right up to the last sentence. The Timeline per se is not even as heavy as the "typical" record weight, and the mass of a record weight/Timeline is concentrated at the center of rotation, where the motive force has a tremendous mechanical advantage, compared to the mechanics of overcoming friction forces applied at the outside edge of an LP via the stylus. Any tt that would be appreciably slowed by the Timeline would be one that is very prone to any effect of stylus drag, as well.
Plus, I may be wrong, but I do think Halcro did the proper control in this case. He will tell us. |
Halcro, It would really be interesting to see how long my TT maintains the correct speed. Unfortunately I don´t have the devices mentioned available and am not planning to purchase them in near future. Furthermore, I´m not running the Salvation motor in way the Salvation decks do, mine is merely an implementation to a different TT. The motor works more precisely with uber large platters like the Salvation.
And I quite often have issues on mains voltage stability in this remote frontier.
My video wouldn´t do justice to Vic´s magnificent TT.
I would like to see the original Salvation TT in action instead. |
Anyone tried the timeline with a Brinkmann table? |
@halcro:
> Contrast that to the same Raven AC-2 with the TIMELINE where stylus drag is confirmed and differs to the KAB results?
Your test and comparison has a potential fundamental flaw - you must first re-set steady speed with the Timeline and the stylus off the record, before you can make the claim that the Timeline is showing a drift due to stylus drag, that the KAB does not.
The reason that is in your KAB video you have a record weight which is NOT necessarily the same mass as the Timeline, in your timeline video.
A properly executed test will first set speed with whatever device is being tested, with the stylus off the record, then with the stylus on the record.
There is a likelihood that the Timeline itself is actually slowing down the playback, in your Timeline video, not stylus drag. |
Dkarmeli, If the KAB locks in at slightly LOWER than correct speed, as you say above, that means my Lenco was running even faster than the KAB revealed it to be, because, as noted, the KAB indicated overspeed, not underspeed. Which means my friend's sense of pitch is not as perfect as he may have thought, since he perceived the tt speed to be slightly "slow". The whole anecdote was noted just to poke fun at ourselves as a group, and the idea that we can perceive tiny errors in tt speed.
It's possible that there would be some minor variation in the performance of the KAB strobe, if there is some minor variation in whatever hardware is used in the strobe to induce it to flash with some exact frequency. Given the nature of such ICs, I would posit that the error there is very tiny, indeed. |
Peterayer, At one point I had 3 KAB strobes that I was using and I use and saw some slight variations of frequency setting with each one. I use an industrial grade voltage/frequency converter to control the speed and since I had AC strobes, I didn't much of it before and the variations were small nothing to be concerned about. I only got the Ortofon unit in recently and compared to the KAB it locks the speed very slightly higher. Then I compared both to the EMT 927's strobe and the Lock speed of the Air Force One and they both fell in between the lock speeds of KAB which is slower and the Ortofon which is faster but dead on with my AC strobes. The speed variations are very small and unlike your friend I don't have perfect pitch and any of those 3 speed settings work for me. |
Dkarmeli, that is interesting. It is the first I've read of variation among samples of the KAB strobe. I don't mean to defend the KAB, but I don't know anything about the Ortofon units. How do you know that the Ortofon is accurate? Have you tested it against a known reference? |
