Turntable speed accuracy

01-22-12: Lewm
We interrupt this program for one comment on tt speed accuracy: For those of you who have been holding your breath for a report on the speed accuracy of my SP10 Mk3, results are in: Perfect!

Same for me, in fact the MK3 is the only turntable we have tested so far that has zero movement.

01-22-12: Ketchup
Lewm,

Congratulations. Is that with the stylus in the groove?

In my case no movement either way.

In fact, I can play an LP all the way through, 33 or 45 speed and the Timeline laser is still beaming at the same spot on the wall when I cue up the arm at the end.

01-22-12: Halcro
Good news Lew,
But are you sure the Timeline is accurate? :^)

I can answer for Lew, I test each and every Sutherland Timeline by putting them on my MK3.

If the Timeline holds true and steady for an entire side of a heavily modulated LP, it passes and is ready to be shipped to the waiting customer ( :^D )

Dover,

A drink is cheaper than a shrink, hope you enjoy the joke along with me :^).

Clarification of my post (above).

I bought the Ultimate Analog Test LP for the Fozgometer and found track 10 worked with the Feickert iPhone App.

Both it and Feickert test disc have the steady state 3150 HZ test tone.

Dover,

In all fairness the stainless steel arm board seems a logical upgrade. I think the hugely (is that a word?) larger format of the new NVS required a more rigid arm board material.

The original NVS could not accept 12" arms, at least not SME or other that require a large footprint.

Changing the "format' of the tonearm mount required the factory to rethink the mounting material to something more rigid than wood.

I'm not criticizing your post, the change was indeed made by the NVS people. I'm just saying that sometimes a redesign to accommodate a new arm length requires a rethink of material design to maintain stability.

Dover,

Good post, I agree there are many, many variables in this game of making a turntable, arm and cartridge right. The other variable is personal taste. I certainly have my prejudices.

Lespier

I'm more interested in how some touted belt drives(SME, Basis, Verdier, Micro Seiki etc) have fared when tested with the Timeline.

Perhaps the silence is telling us something.

We had some very interesting things show up with our Timeline tests.

I've read all the arguments about the Timeline only showing "that" one single revolution, and not what happens to the speed in between.

I get it, but if the laser is moving steadily along the wall in one direction and consistently it seems obvious that speed variation is a fact.

An even more bizarre thing happened some weeks ago during a test with the laser splashing on a wall about 18 feet away.

Anyone interested in duplicating what we did would be welcome. Just play an LP with fairly benign (soft) passage and note the laser position on the wall.

As the needle begins to enter the more difficult and complex musical passages note not only the position of the laser but it's actual "length" as it paints the light.

It finally occurred to us after some time what (I think) was happening. Would love to read reports from others including your conclusion if you do this experiment.

Halcro,

I assumed the same thing you did and heard the result as reduced dynamics and slurring. Funny you detected the same phenomenon.

I agree, Ron has a winner, http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue58/awards2011.htm

Scroll almost to the bottom.

I gave Ron Product of The Year for the Timeline. I'm pretty sure I stirred up some of this when I began posting results of my own tests last year.

The Timeline may not be a "perfect" product but it sure reveals errors that a printed disc and strobe miss. I would go so far as to suggest the Timeline supports things we hear and previously could not prove.

It seems to me if the tt slows down momentarily, the laser spot would shrink, not lengthen.

Albert, I take all your points in support of the NVS, but the bottom line is what do you think of it in action? Does it blow away your SP10 Mk3?

The laser line lengthens and shortens and the line progresses clockwise (indicating + speed error) in the test I did. We have checked multiple turntables.

The MK3 did not show any error in any test.

I should add to my last post.

No, the NVS does not blow away the MK3. I'm trying to remain neutral, there are already hot comments flying around on this topic and I don't understand why.

If a particular table is doing well for you, why take the effort to crush another brand? Something that another person may be enjoying and thinks is wonderful?

I'll state this, the MK3 is still my overall favorite turntable of all time, regardless.

Now that I've said that, remember the MK3 have not been manufactured in more than a quarter of a century and at least one part in it has no current replacement available.

If that parts fails and you cannot find used, the table is dead.

So in spite of my fondness of the MK3, it is expensive, difficult to obtain and requires a COMPLETE rebuild and (in my opinion) one of our specialty plinths to get the performance I'm speaking of.

Just putting things into perspective on both sides.

Lewm,

I guess I misunderstood your riddle. I thought you wanted to have an explanation for a theoretical condition where the laser beam appears to lengthen whilst remaining fixed in its location on the wall. My explanation would fit that condition, I think.

I wanted to read reports from others that experimented with Timeline to determine if my test was unusual. Appears you got similar results with at least some of the turntables you tested and I appreciate your input.

Your conclusion about belt slippage seems accurate and in any case, indicates potential speed error (regardless of design).

I had the same result as you report with Timeline vs Mk3. (As you know, my Mk3 was purchased NOS and then completely serviced by Bill Thalmann.) Could not make it show any error whatsoever.

I too got zero errors on every test with MK3 and of course, I use Bill Thalmann for my rebuild. Anyone that asks about rebuild job on a MK2 or MK3, I always send them to Bill.

I realized after I wrote the post that I may have put you on the spot in asking so directly for your opinion about Mk3 vs NVS, because of your potential commercial interests. I apologize for that. In any case, you were kind enough to respond.

You did not put me on the spot any more than other posts at Audiogon. I also receive plenty of email requests for an opinion on these but I wonder (other than you and I) how many people actually own a fully and properly serviced MK3?

Don't forget that Mike Lavigne is in love with his NVS and there are very few systems at Audiogon that are equal to his in effort, detail and quality.

Mike had a Rockport, a table that could be called best of the best, although I never had one to compare. Mike has no commercial interest in NVS, he does not sell them or represent them. Sure, he's friends with Jonathan Tinn, but many people consider Jonathan a friend, including myself.

There are going to be differences in opinion on some things. I'm trying to be honest but with a firm grip on reality. Most people want new, reliable product with warranty and support. The NVS fits that description and I imagine will have many satisfied customers.

Others will persue Micro Seiki, Pioneer Exclusive, Technics or other golden audio era products. The argeument over this will never end.

I think Grr6001 summed it all up pretty well.

Unoear,

Regarding:

I heard that you are looking to sell your NVS; are you going to still be planning to continue as a dealer for NVS and JTinn?

In this economy I'm not sure it matters. If you have interest in the NVS I'm sure I can get one. Yes, I have been trying to sell a NVS, the one I have and/or another from stock. In fact I would love to sell about six of them if you know any interested parties.

I just purchased a new car, spent more than I should have, but all of them seem to be too much these days. The warranty on my old car was expiring and it was sink or swim.

Maybe cash flow is not an issue for you, it is for me. I still have a kid in college and my wife lost her job.

Mike L mentioned to me last year that he paid the same for his NVS as you did for yours...was your price around the $12k, or so, that JTinn was selling the NVS for earlier last year?

I speak to Mike Lavigne occasionally, he is always busy because he has about a hundred employees he has to deal with. Frankly I don't see how he does it.

As for price, I have no idea what Mike paid, I never ask.

The price for the NVS that I have, large halo and all the other upgrades is (and has been) always $45K as far as I know.

Not to be snooty with you, but if I owned a DD Rockport I would not give the slightest damn what anyone else had. I would just spin it and listen to some LPs.

From Peterayer

As this is a thread about turntable speed accuracy, I'm curios to know if Albert or anyone has tested the NVS with a TimeLIne?

From Dev

So when using the TimeLine on the NVS what are the results?

From Halcro

Albert and Lew,
You don't specifically mention it......but I assume the SP10-3 maintained its speed with and without the cartridge tracking the groove?

Also Albert......you don't specifically mention if the NVS passed the Timeline test with equal aplomb?

So far, only the Technics MK3 passed of all the tables I've checked. The laser is absolutely steady state on precisely the same spot without LP.

Repeat again, cartridge in the groove and heavily modulated material (Massive Attack, Heligoland) and still on the same spot. In fact, the MK3 can play the same LP (either 33 or 45) two or three times, all the way through, picking up the arm and re cuing to the beginning multiple times. Same spot on the wall in the end.

We used Scotch painters tape on the wall to be sure we don't mistake where the laser is supposed to be.

The NVS did not pass the test. However, neither has any other table so far. Either the MK3 is highly accurate, or whatever it's errors, it's in precise conjunction and sync with the Timeline.

Halcro mentioned rim drive. I've posted my opinion before on this, apologies in advance to those that have read it. Each design has strengths, perhaps a diagram should be made up so you could view what each contributes to the sound.

Mind you, this is opinion ! I do not have scientific data. It's much like my support for aftermarket power cables here at Audiogon in 1999. I got in trouble for that too :^), although that seems to be more flame proof as time goes on.

OK, what we want in a turntable:

(1) Enough torque that it ABSOLUTELY rocks through the material without even a microscopic slow down.

(2) Consistent speed, preferably perfect but not a deal killer if "slightly" and consistently fast or slow.

(3) Freedom from speed error. Wow and Flutter. This stuff matters a lot, we pick this up.

(4) Last and obvious, freedom from all noise, both mechanical and electrical.

Probably other things or variations of these but you get the idea.

What each design does:

BELT DRIVE: Typically poor on #1, some are good on #2, varies on #3 by brand and condition of parts. Typically great on #4 due to separation of motor from platter, although some can have noisy bearings.

RIM or IDLER DRIVE: Many are excellent on #1, typically good on #2, varies on #3 (some not so hot), dependant on model and parts condition. Typically less than ideal on #4, motor in direct contact which is difficult to keep absolutely silent.

DIRECT DRIVE: Varies on #1 depending on power of motor and design of system, from near perfection to bland. Typically excellent on #2. Typically good on #3 with some models approaching perfection. Good to near perfect on #4 depending on model and condition.

What I've discovered about myself and from long term listening is I fall distinctly into the "high torque" consistent speed category. That means my favorite sound is a high torque direct drive with idler right behind. A low torque direct drive is next and belt drive last.

Of course my comments are easy targets. For instance, a well tuned Micro Seiki has more torque than other typical belt drives.

Error number two, some direct drives have electronic noise leaking through their platters which make them sound "cold" or what some describe as jitter. Electronic noise can be really bad as it "flashes" the cartridge.

My statements are GENERALITIES that are ripe for picking, it's complicated but this is a very rough start and only a simplistic attempt to explain why turntable designs "tend" to sound a certain way.

I know all the holes that can be poked in this, discussion of arms, set up and such. I'm just saying that these rough rules for turntables are like clumping horn speakers, cone speakers and electrostatics into categories to explain why they behave a certain way.

Unoear ask:

why do you think that the NVS was not up to task? ... It appears that is not an issue with the quality of the mains being presented to the motor controller; otherwise, I guess that Technics Mk3 would also have an issue...what do you think could be the issue with the NVS?

So far no turntable has passed the test as I conducted it, except the MK3. The NVS was up to the task as the rest.

Have you checked your DD Rockport?

I have a huge bias in favor of that table. I wish to know if it's as rock solid as I imagine it to be.

Lewm posted:

Albert, EMI picked up by the cartridge from the L07D motor was rumored to be an issue. It seemed improbable to me, because the platter and mat constitute two solid slabs of stainless steel which ought to afford some decent shielding. Nevertheless, I made an LP-size shield out of "TI Shield" (Texas Instruments), the best shield around for a combo of EMI and RFI, and I inserted it over the spindle and in between the platter and platter mat. This actually did result in a noticeable but small increase in transparency even though I heard no "noise" per se prior to installing it. The Mk3 ought not to have any issues in this area, because its thick brass and SS platter is an even better natural shield than is that of the L07D.

I use the TI FerriShield too, although it had no affect in tests with the MK3. With the MK2 the results were astounding, I imagine the holes in the aluminum MK2 platter looked like a strobe light to the phono cartridge.

When I say FerriShield was effective with MK2, this assumes the stock rubber mat, the Funk Firm mat, Boston Carbon Fiber or other mat that offers no blocking from RF and EMI.

Looking back I now realize some of the amazement of the Micro Seiki Cu-180 was the hard surface and superior design, but also the total blocking it provided, equal to the Texas Instruments in my tests.

My current mat is the TTM from Japan and is the highest performance mat so far on my MK3. I suspect it's mass is too much for the MK2 but the MK2 does well with the Micro Seiki Cu-180 and negates the need for FerriShield.

I have not gotten into this much in forums, but the center weight or clamp, plus mat is almost as much affect on sound as tonearm cable (and in some cases) the cartridge itself.

Maybe I'll make up a list of combinations of mats and clamps and what I heard. I sometime wonder if this variable plays a role in cartridge preference among members.

If any of you have tested same, I would love to read your results. I've been doing this for several years, it's a tedious process since one must be VERY careful to insure VTA and other variables are not more result than the parts in play.

Unoear:

No, I did not get a chance to try a Timeline with Rockport Sirius lll while it was here last year. However; Tim Sheridan, was here late last year for a visit before I shipped the Rockport to its new home...where it joined a few other Rockport TT siblings in the UK.

I can hardly believe after all the work and effort you put into obtaining the Rockport you sold it. Your post is the first I've heard about that.

Mmakshak,

The plinth is important in that it provides a solid platform for the powerful DD motor to operate without vibration or oscillation. I had one direct drive table here that was so light it almost sounded digital.

You are correct that what a DD table sits on could be discussed more. Truth is all turntables react radically to outside forces and the stand, platform, spring base or whatever plays a huge role.

For me it's most important to isolate my table from foot falls and effect of my powerful sub woofers. I choose Vibraplane and I am totally satisfied with what it provides.

I was so moved by the performance upgrade from Vibraplane I bought a second one for my Studer tape machine. Surprisingly it provided almost as much upgrade there as the DD table.

I think we still have quite a lot to learn about isolation. I wish I had more money and time to experiment. Seems an endless task with all the variables.

Lewm,

Are you in contact with Bill regarding the modifications on MK3?

Dover,

Considering the shipping risk and time needed to get in line at Music Technology I don't have that luxury. Should I be worried about the electronics mods?

The oil and paper is the only change since my MK3 has already had every possible electronic part and adjustment performed long ago and I'm completely familiar with the sound of that.

I'm skipping the lead block mod on the bearing well. I'm nervous about the sound of lead plus I have my version of that as damping rod and block on my Panzerholz plinth.

That leaves only the oil and paper mods I think. Bill says they are harmless electrically and only provide damping. Do you have any listening experience with these mods?

Thank you Dover.

Bill says the mods should make the transformer, motor and sense coils more reliable (longer life) so even if there is no appreciable performance upgrade it's still a worthwhile venture.

If it sounds better I'll be doing the victory dance.

So what are the issues with this method?

I kept hopping someone else would chime in. I have the Feickert App and the Feickert LP but also have the new Quality LP from Chad (Ultimate Analog Test LP, track 10) that both work with Fozgometer.

Test result is different with each test record and I don't want to get into multiple page (guessing game) explanation as to why.

The Timeline shows what's happening very easily and quickly with minimal hassle. I'll continue to test but the results with iPhone are dubious.