Thanks for the reply Lewm. I am based in the UK (Wales) where the world's finest slate comes from (apparently) but it's still very expensive here. Hopefully I can source a decent fireplace plinth or something of similar size. I have a local stone mason who specilises in headstones, so he can help with finishing, just need to find someone to cut the holes.
I have inverted the plinth onto an A2 sheet of paper and traced the cut-outs for the motor unit and tonearm. How are you intending on securing your chassis and tonearm to the slate exactly? I was thinking of perhaps some bore holes with an m5 cabinet insert secured/glued inside.
Please post some images of your slate plinth when you are ready. |
Treehugga, I don't know what the "world's finest slate" is. I did see many months ago a long drawn out argument between Jonathan Weiss of OMA and the Slate Deck guy in the UK, over whose slate was "finer". OMA use Pennsylvania slate; I am told by Vermont slate guys that VT slate is actually "harder" and more dense than PA slate, but I selected PA slate, because others have had great success with it. After all, the real question is what slate is best for a plinth. IMO, the best slate is NOT likely to be the hardest, densest, type. I will leave it at that.
I am/was planning to fasten the DP80 into the slate using the same three screw-holes provided for fastening it to the DK300. How to do this is very crucial to the outcome, because good coupling between the chassis and plinth is essential. If I work up the courage, I may drill additional holes in the DP80 chassis to allow use of more than 3 fasteners. The other potential problem is that those holes are perilously close to the edge of the cut-out needed for the chassis to fit. I fear that the slate will crumble or crack during drilling. I am going to try to get a consultation on that problem from an experienced slate worker, before doing any hole-drilling. |
My 'finest slate' line was written in jest, it's just a marketing gimmick in my opinion, and I can no-way afford Slatedeck's prices anyway. Yes I agree that the fastening holes are very close to the inner edge of the cutout, and this is a concern, it's certainly a job for a pro.
The person who sold me the DP80 is a dealer in all things japanese dd and he told me that the 80 has a sapphire bearing which is superior to that employed on the SP10mk2. I have the original manual and what looks like a press pack type thing, but it still gives little away in terms of detailed spec for this deck, it really is a somewhat closed book, and that has probably kept the interest in this fine deck to a minimium compared to the SP10.
I was interested in the torque measurements between the DP80 and sp10mk2, but I cannot find anything, what I do know is it is a great deal higher than the SL1210, it takes a fair bit of finger pressure on the platter rim to register on the strobe. |
If you know that the Denon DP80 bearing is sapphire, then you know more than I was ever able to find on the subject, or anyone else here. Thanks. I am going to try to get to visit a slate cutter on Friday. (He has a CNC machine and is just getting into the business of cutting slate.) I've had one local water-jet guy back out of the job, because he was afraid of damaging my slab.
Based on the literature supplied by the respective companies, I would expect that the SP10MKII motor has more torque than does the DP80 motor. In their blurb, Denon imply that there is an ideal amount of torque, in their opinion, i.e., too much can be a problem, but they don't elaborate on the subject. Their given numbers are lower than are those of Technics. |
Dear Treehugga: I don't have any comparison measures on torque between the DP-80 and SP-10-MK2 but playing both it seems to me that the torque in the Tehnics is higher and this makes me sense because the SP-10MK2 was designed for studio/radio use where one of its needs was a very fast TT start and stop too.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hi Raul
Interesting stuff, you are a lucky man indeed to have both decks to play with.
I was under the impression that the DP80 was also designed for professional/studio use, and the DP75/M was the domestic version. It doesn't matter as they (Technics & Denon) are both superb decks and make me wish I had discovered direct drive years ago before I wasted all that time & money on suspended belt driven decks. |
Dear Threehugga: +++++ " and make me wish I had discovered direct drive years ago before I wasted all that time & money on suspended belt driven decks. " +++++
one way or the other your experiences on BD designs were a learning ones.
Now, IMHO, as good as are the top DD TTs there are some very good examples on BD ones. Today and for what are my experiences on the TT subject I'm not totally convince that the DD systems ( If I recall I was/am one of the first persons in this forum that " supports " the DD systems. ) out there are better than the BD out there.
I think that both drive systems are and have similarities more than differences.
Both, are " roads " that can take " us " to the same performance target when everything the same ( I'm talking here on that very top-end TTs on both drive designs ).
A very " healthy " stage for many of us could be to own both drive systems.
I read on other threads that some Agoners change its very top end BD TTs in favor of a DD ones, IMHO this was a mistake and sooner or latter they will take in count that the BD ones are not lower performers than the DD ones ( everything the same ).
Unfortunately ( for them ) those people that already made the change IMHO never had the opportunity to heard both drive systems in exactly the same conditions where the only difference was the TT and nothing else.
I'm fortunate to have several TTs ( both drive systems ), tonearms, cartridges and in some cases I own two samples on each item ( tonearm/cartridge ).
This fact give me the opportunity to test and work on the subject ( a lot of fun ) and that's why ( in my system, everything the same ) I'm not convince on one drive system over the other one.
We have to remember that nothing is perfect and that always are trade-offs, certainly both drive TT systems have its own trade-offs.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
The real subject is that IMHO we can't take the TT drive system alone for to know which drive system is better, the subject is more complex than that and have an extremly close relationship with the tonearm/cartridge ( between other things ) behavior. |
Raul, I would like you to listen to a state-of-the-art restored idler tt, e.g., a Garrard 301/401 or a Lenco L75 in a proper plinth, using one of your own tonearms and cartridges. Your opinion of how these tts compare to BDs and DDs in your experience would interest me. But it's very important to be sure the idler is properly restored and in a proper plinth before any judgment. |
Dear Lewm: I already heard some very good 301-401 samples ( not on my system ) " properly restored " and in a custom made plinth.
I can't say when I will have the opportunity to listen at home.
+++++ " in a proper plinth before any judgment. " +++++
IMHO till today ( not only on Garrad/Lenco ) no one ( including Monaco and DIYs. ) TT designer has the real/truer/scientist/proven ( vintage or modern ones ) answer of which is the " proper plinth " ( between other crucial things ) to each TT drive system.
IMHO almost all judgment on " this plinth is better than that " and judgment like this are only that " a simple opinion " but nothing that can tell us that that is the " proper plinth ".
If you, me or some one else analise how much in deep/scientist/proven research/results were made on TT designs ( any ) in the last 30 years we can find that the whole " production " is very poor for say the least and IMHO that's why almost any vintage/today TT design needs a lot of customer tweaks to perform in a better way.
If not, please tell me 3-4 different TTs ( at any price ) that does not needs any single tweak to perform at it best.
All this subject can/could tell me that the near " perfect " TT coming in a comercial way ( any drive design, it does not matters. ) is very far from today ( that's why you, me and many other person's efforts are trying with self alternatives: SP-10, DP-80, Garrad, Lenco and the like ), the very good news is that the best about is forth-coming, when? I can't say it.
I already say it on other threads: the advance on TT, cartridge and tonearm over the last 30 years is very tiny-small ( for say the least ) and I can't see ( yet ) that person/manufacturer/designer that want/can take the " flag " and makes the difference real differences about, I hope sooner or latter some one (s ) do it, in the mid-time we can go on trying to " invent " the best plinth or the best TT platform/footers or anything else: good fun btw!.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I agree with most of what you say. How did you or do you rank the best idler tt you've heard vs the best DD, and what do you think are the qualitative differences? In any case, I am having a lot of fun with vintage TTs these days. That in itself is ample justification for pursuing their perfection. |
Dear Lewm: The last time ( and the best ) I heard a Garrad 301/401 was at Louis place along the Triplanar/XV-1, as you can see a first rate analog rig and the speaker/electronics/room just " according " with.
How do you think that system " sounds "?, yes you are right: it sounds really good. Well, I heard ( other than in my system ) DD TT that performs really good ( at least same level. ) in different really good audio systems and I never heard a Garrad on my system. You ask " how do you rank....", well I can't.
In almost all those different ( top ones and with different cartridges and phono stages. ) systems either DD/BD/Idler performs very well.
Right now in my system I can't say for sure if I prefer DD over BD: overall I can't see an absolute winner yet!, a hard and complex " call " for say the least. It is ( at least for me ) very dificult to " aisle " the TT performance it self to rank a drive system per-se.
Today I'm a firm advocate ( if we can ) to have and enjoy all those TT drive systems.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Good answer. I don't really believe there is any one "best" drive system either. Perhaps one may be more cost-effective than another, but that's about it. (Up to say $3000, I think you can beat out most BDs with any of several DDs or idler set-ups. Of course, one reason for that is that I am comparing a brand new BD to tts that one can buy used for quite a discount off their long-ago cost.) I think we are lucky to have different "flavors" of vinyl reproduction with all these different modes for making the platter rotate. |
Dear Lewm: Yes, all of us are so lucky about!
regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I sourced a nice big slab of slate for just £30 on the weekend from a reclamation yard, it's 2 inches thick and the plan is to cut in in half and double it up, so it will end up being 4 inches deep which is the same depth as the DK300. The upper & lower layers will have different cut-out to refect the shape of the motor unit, with the lower (base) layer having a larger surface area for greater flexibility fo locating footers.
This plinth is going to be monsterously heavy, I would imagine total weight with DP80 motor unit will approach 100kg. I am intending to use Clearlight RDC cones and combi-bases as footers, but I am wondering what to use between the two layers of slate (if anything at all) if the two layers dont sit absolutely flush with one-another. Does anyone have any ideas as regards the best approach, i.e. a thin layer of compliant damping compound to isolate or something solid like small spikes to tightly couple the two layers? |
Treehugga, The weight of all that slate so dwarfs the weight of the DP80 chassis that the latter is irrelevant. The big thing is how to couple the DP80 to all that mass, so it can do some good. Are you going to drill all the way through both layers of slate, so that three very long bolts can couple the DP80 to both layers? Are you going to use any adhesive between the two layers of slate or only the force of gravity, which is considerable in this case? How will you mount a tonearm? (I ask these questions, because I am thinking along the same lines.) |
Hi Lewm
These are all interesting challenges as you are no doubt aware. Coupling the chassis to the plinth is the trickiest challenge. I like your idea of bolting the chassis right through to the bottom where it can be firmly anchored underneath - good one! The bore holes will need to be precisely aligned and ideally drilled through both layes in one go, which could be tricky. I had considered glueing 3 cabinet inserts into boreholes in the slate that would accept a small machine bolt as I'm not convinced that a good enough thread can be cut into the slate for a bolt/screw to bite into.
I'm not convinced that the two facing layers will be completely flat and smooth, so I wont be glueing them together, also I would like to keep the plinth modular because of the sheer weight. I'm more inclined to try sorbothane between them.
The tonearm hole also presents the same challenge, do you think a threaded hole can be cut into slate that will be good enough for screws to bite into? |
(1) I have done the thought experiment as regards threading the slate. I don't think it would work. I am not going to try. I think the only choice with slate is to just drill a hole thru and then use a nut and bolt. There IS some appeal to the idea of threading the slate, because it would make for better coupling in theory. But I think the slate would just crumble if you tried to tighten down the screw. You might experiment with a scrap piece of slate, though.
(2) If you have the slate slabs honed, the sides would be plane parallel to each other and there would be a close fit between the two pieces. Most mills can hone the slabs, at least here in the US. (I had it done in Vermont and in Pennsylvania, by two different companies.) I don't think you need adhesive, but I do think that sorbothane is a bad idea. It would essentially de-couple the two pieces of slate, when what you want is good coupling. Just my 2 cents. |
I've had a look at a similar thread on another forum, and agree with you Lewm that bolts are best for this job! I have decided to bolt both chassis and tonearm through the top layer only, I will drill a rebate/countersunk hole into the underside in order to secure a washer and nut, that will remain flush when placed on top of the base layer. |
It turned out that in my stack of un-plinthed TTs, I had a DP-80 that I had picked up a while ago. This morning, on a whim, I put it in a solid wood DIY plinth that someone had built a number of years ago with a couple of SAEC armboards, and sold on the net for $50, and I installed my SAEC 407/23. Using the old "eyeball-it-and-guess" set-up technique, I got a wonderful TT in about 10mins. It has great stability, and I was reminded yet again how good the SAEC arm is. Upon returning home this afternoon, I spent a bit more time on set-up, and it turns out I was really lucky the first time. After several records, I continue to be surprised at how good it is. I think I need to look into a better plinth, but I am going to keep this TT in rotation for a little while. |
T_bone, Raul used a minimalist plinth like that with both an SP10 and a DP80 and liked the results. It would be interesting to use your first effort as a reference, if and when you try to build a heavier/denser plinth for the DP80. I think the DP80 and other top line Denons are under-appreciated in the recent upsurge of interest in DD tables of yore. |
Just a quick update.
I've handed over my template to a fella who runs a mill and specialises in slate. I'm going for a monster one-piece 100mm thick 'headstone finish' type slab. The cut-out is tricky (especially at the front where it comes with a couple of inches of the edge, and it will have to be cut with a water-jet, but I'm hoping he'll come through. At the moment I've decided to go for threaded inserts glued into bore holes for the anchoring points. |
Treehugga, what are you going to do for tonearm? Get one hole drilled for the tonearm of your choice? Put in a slate insert so you can put multiple slate tonearm boards in? |
Hi T_bone
I spent some time scratching my chin on this one. I was toying with the idea of having a corner piece cut out of the plinth, rounded off and bore it for the arm, whereby it would 'sit' inside the concave rounded corner without actually touching the plinth, much like the Michell Tenodec, this would allow the arm to be moved idependently of the plinth to accomodate different arms. But it would be very costly, so in the end I have decided to commit to one arm (10.5" S-shape Jelco) and have a hole drilled out in the one-pice plinth, so no going back now! |
Treehugga, I've done the same thing in my Denon slate plinth, which is not quite so massive as yours (50mm thick vs 100mm). I use a Triplanar, so all that's required is to locate and drill the three bolt holes for its base. It's easy to drill slate with a masonry bit as long as the hole is relatively small in diameter. I have identified several very fine tonearms that can be surface-mounted, like the TP. These include the RS-A1 (which needs no drilling at all), the Terminator 2, and the Dynavector 505. I'm sure there are more that I don't know about. I reckon my plinth weighs 60-70 lbs AFTER cutting out the hole for the Denon, so yours is a true monster in terms of mass. Stay tuned. |
Lewm
How did you get on with the tricky holes on the edge of the motor unit cut-out? I can't find m4 bolts / machine scews longer than 60mm, so unless I bore slightly larger holes from underneath to a dept of 50mm in rder fasten a nut on each bolt, i'm stuck. That's why I'm going for threaded inserts. Thanks for the heads-up re: surface mount arms, I had no idea such arms existed. Isn't the Terminator a linear tracker arm? there is a guy over here using one of them with an SP10 on a slate plinth, it looks totally brutal. |
Thanks Treehugga. If you wanted to have slate cut out at half height partway into the block, does that work? Or does it have to be the same vertical cut through the piece? In a simple example, I am thinking of a cylindrical cut out with diameter of 6 inches going halfway through the block, stopping there with a horizontal plane, and then having a further cutout of 4 inches' diameter going the rest of the way through. If so, that makes for some interesting possibilities, but I do not know how these things are cut. Perhaps the only way to do that is to cut two pieces with super flat surfaces (with cutouts beforehand) and bond them. |
Treehugga and T_bone, As I now understand the operation of a waterjet, it cannot make router-like cuts and patterns; it can only cut the material all the way thru. This obviously imposes some limitations for plinth designs. I would have liked to have been able to create a recess into which one could insert a tonearm mounting platform. T_bone, I am not sure I understand your idea, but I think it cannot be executed with a waterjet. You'd be able to do it with separate layers of slate. Treehugga, at my suggestion, the CAD guy designed the program so that the three holes for mounting the Denon were cut FIRST, before the major central cut-out was done. This worked out fine. |
My post of 01-26-09 should be ignored. I later learned that using a CNC milling machine to cut the hole for the Denon would be very very expensive vs using a water jet and probably less precise. |
Lew, I was asking about routing, for the armboard recess, inside the main plinth, rather than making a second plinth for an armboard (which should be possible with a waterjet as it could simply be two pieces of the same single slab (a large rectangular with a square cut out at one corner), though small adjustments could be difficult to make using a large block of slate... |
T_bone, that sort of an idea for an armboard went thru my mind also. But how are you going to support the rectangular slate armboard, once it's been cut out of the main slate slab? It could be done, but nothing I thought of seemed satisfactory, given that I believe it's a good idea to have solid coupling of the tonearm to the bearing. If you like to de-couple the tonearm, which some people do, it is more do-able. The best compromise would be to use two slabs of slate, one on top of the other. Then the armboard could be created by cutting out a corner of the topmost slab, with a commensurate hole in the bottom slab to permit passage of the tonearm shaft and wiring. |
A revovable arm-board would be desirable, I did consider trying to get a square or circular hole cut through the plinth with a lip half-way down for the arm board to sit on, but this would depend on the type of kit used to cut, Given what Lewn said about the water jet cutter, I imagine that the cut-out will be quite rough and the 'plug' will be equally rough if not in pieces so a new block of slate would need to be sourced, cut and finished off to sit the arm in. Perhaps a circular hole would be better, as a conventional drill could be used, and I dont see why a 'lip' couldn't be incorporated.
What do you guys think would be the best type of footer to use under these hefty slabs? I intend to use RDC cones, cups and combi bases. Would a solid 'less compliant' footer be better perhaps, The chap who sold me the Denon suggests cerupucs or still points, but I'm looking for a less expensive solution. |
I am having some slate cubes made using the piece of slate that dropped out of the slab when the hole for the Denon was cut. It was easily large enough to give birth to a dozen cubes, each 2X2X2 inches. But I am also thinking about feet that provide better isolation or decoupling from the shelf. I like Herbie's Audio feet, but they are not high enough, as I would like at least 2" of clearance. Rollerblocks are another option. |
Well it been a while now, but the slate plinth for the Denon DP80 has arrived and I'm getting it together.
It's 100mm deep and a considerable weight. I have managed to drill the 3 fixing holes (m6) up close to the inner edges and glue m4 threaded inserts into the holes, this has worked out easier than expected with the slate being easy to drill, There are twin arm holes with a deep rebate on the underside of the plinth to allow my fingers in to adjust, I am using an ex-broadcast Denon DA309 at the moment, but the other hole will accomodate a Jelco 10" in the near future. I have done the same on the underside with threads to accomodate RDC cones. Once I have cleaned the plinth with WD40, I will be finally rubbing it down with bees wax to protect it and bring out the grain. Here are preliminary snaps.
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/2.jpg
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/p1-1.jpg
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/007.jpg |
Wow, totally impressive piece of work. please keep us imformed on how "new TT" sounds once assembled. |
Treehugga, so how do you like it (from the last picture, it looks like it is already spinning tunes)?
I would love to do the same but unfortunately, while the tables come from Japan (where I am), the slate does not, and I fear the slate plinth is going to be expensive to get shipped to Japan... |
Treehugga, I've just gotten around to assembling my DP80 in its slate plinth. My slate slab is only 52mm thick but it appears to be a little larger in dimension compared to yours. I am sealing the slate right now (today) with a concoction of turpentine and certain additives. I am going to mount either a Dynavector DV505 or my Triplanar, or both. (The slab has room for two arms.) I will post a photo as soon as the seal dries, in a few days. I have been listening to my Technics SP20 Mk2A in a similar slate plinth with an RS-A1 tonearm for about a month. It sounds so good that I had forgotten all about the DP80, until now. Your slab must have weighed nearly 200 lbs before you cut out the hole for the DP80; I am impressed. (One sq ft of Pennsylvania slate, one inch thick, weighs 15 lbs.) |
Thanks for the feedback fellas.
T-Bone, I took those 'action' shots the other day, however neither the motor unit nor the arm were secured into the slate, and it was sitting on large temporary sorbohane footers, but it sounded rather good considering with more romance in the mids and intimacy and presence in vocals. It's a shame you cant source slate easily in Japan, how about marble?
Lewm
I wanted this plinth to have a smaller footprint than the Denon DK300 plinth, which was hanging over the edges of my rack, I was looking for something a little more compact, although in hindsight I wish I had left a bit more room to try a 12" arm in the future. I need to source a bespoke acrylic / perspex cover for it now, to sit on top. Interesting concoction you have there for sealing your slate, it's a beautiful material isn't it...even if it is just compacted mud, but it scratches so damn easily though. Yes this slab is very heavy indeed, I can hear the rack groan when I first heaved it up there.
Lewn I and Im sure others here would love to see some pics of your effort, especially with those tremendous arms you have lined up for it. Ill post some more in a few days.
Thanks all |
Treehugga,
Marble and granite are available in Japan. I've always been afraid that either one would ring like a bell... |
Thanks, Tree. I should have written "SP10" instead of "SP20", but I guess that was an obvious typo. I admire your guts in drilling those three holes for the Denon; I had the guy who made the CAD file incorporate them into the program, then the waterjet cut them FIRST, before making the huge cut-out for the Denon chassis. That way there was no chance of the slate crumbling during drilling of the mount holes. Your waterjetter had the additional challenge of going thru 100mm of slate. That alone must have been a bit scary and requires skill with the machine. Next up will be my Lenco L75 in slate with the PTP top-plate (see Lenco Heaven for description). The slate is cut perfectly; I am now having the platter and the PTP painted satin black to match the plinth. But this is about direct-drive, not idler-. |
Dear T bone: It happen that I own a DP-80 and DP-75 that seats in a 70-80lbs plinth of green marble and white onyx, beautiful stones.
Yes, like the granite mable/onyx " ring like a bell " if you " exited "/hit it but with a normal TT playing there is no problem.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Forgot to reiterate that I think it is a good idea to dampen the resonance of that cosmetic ring that surrounds the platter on all Denon dd tables. If you're going to the trouble and expense of making a slate plinth, it behooves you not to overlook this detail. As I think I wrote way back at the beginning of this thread, I inverted my DP80 chassis (sans platter) on some blocks of wood for support, so as not to put weight on the spindle, and I filled the ring with some melted beeswax (or whatever was used as potting material in a KLH9 electrostatic speaker power supply). This worked very well; with the hardened beeswax filling, the ring does not "ring" any longer. |
Lewn. I forgot to mention that I have filled the ring or skirt with isodamp compound (blacktac) as used in speaker cabinets, this is actually in contact with the plinth, and has given a deadening effect and added mass (not that I needed any more).
The dp80 is really singing now, I have stunning presence and intimacy to vocals. I cleaned it up earlier with WD40, that brought the natural grain up very nicely, and finshed with bees wax that gave it a nice shine.
Here are some more pics.
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/dp6.jpg
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/dp8.jpg
http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee15/indypepa/dp5.jpg |
damn fine lookin' table ya got there treehugga.
Question for the people who fill the ring... What does that do to the ability to fix your electronics/wiring should it go...? |
T_bone, I made sure that the beeswax stopped flowing just short of the part of the ring that houses the controls. It solidifies rather rapidly as you pour it, due the fact that it is cooling at the same time, so there was no problem controlling its dispersion. No wax in the electronics. I am sure Treehugga was able to do the same, since his damping compound probably was never very liquid.
Treehugga, That's loverly. You might try a different tonearm some time, just for kicks. |
I've just finished my second evening of listening to my DP80 mounted in a 70-lb slate plinth with Triplanar tonearm bolted directly to and thru the plinth (no discrete armboard) and a Koetsu Urushi. I am ecstatic, as you might guess from the fact that it is past 1 AM here on the East coast US, and I have not yet gone to bed. This thing is sweeeeeet. I just got done with Chick Corea, Return to Forever, on ECM, a recording I bought new in the 70s. I re-experienced everything but the chemical high of those days. It has a BIG sound (certainly in part due to the Urushi/Triplanar) but also incredible drive and rhythmic presence. I will post photos in my system, as soon as I get a new camera, in a couple of days. Awesome is a cliche', but so be it. |
Lewm, I anxiously await pics. If you have any comparisons against other tables, I for one would love to hear them. Mine remain in wood plinths (both my -80 and my -75) so I can only expect what I would hear (though an air-bearing or magnetic-float isolation platform works wonders on both). |
I think a large dollop of the goodness of this set-up is bolting the Triplanar very firmly to the slate. In theory, any energy put into the tonearm by the Koetsu is going to be traveling down the tonearm and into 70-lbs of slate, where it would easily be dissipated. I can't easily mount the Triplanar on either the SP10 Mk2A slate plinth or the forthcoming Lenco/PTP in slate, because the respective chassis' simply do not allow the tonearm to get close enough to the spindle, so I probably won't be making comparisons among the 3 tables using this tonearm. (It could be done with the SP10, but I would need to raise up the Triplanar on an additional small piece of slate, about 3/4" thick.) I may be able to do a tt comparison with the RS-A1 or the Dynavector DV505. But what I am most surprised about with regard to the Denon is how completely open and rhythmic it is, virtues usually ascribed to sprung belt drives and idlers. Whereas, traditionally I think of the Denon dd's as being a bit on the dark side. There is no trace at all of that quality using slate. None at all. I briefly tried the SAEC ss300 platter mat in place of the Denon rubber mat. I am not sure this is a good idea, because the ss300 is heavier, and one wants to stay close to the mass of the stock mat. (In the owners manual, Denon specifically warns against using anything but the stock mat. This is because any tt servo mechanism is designed specifically to run a certain platter mass.) Anyway, I think the sonics may be even slightly better, cleaner with better bass definition, using the ss300. BTW, my slate is about 19"X23" and 2 inches thick. This calculates to about 90 lbs, before making the large cut-out for the Denon. |
Photos of my Denon DP80 in 2" slate slab w/Triplanar and Koetsu Urushi, plus a photo of my SP10 Mk2A in a similar slab with RS-A1 and Ortofon MC7500. Are now posted on my system site, since I don't know how to post them right here. |
Dear Lew: That Denon looks gorgeous, good job and good listening too.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Thanks, Raul. It is as simple as simple gets, just slate, turntable chassis, and tonearm. No armboards, no fancy suspension. Right now I am using 2x2x2 inch slate cubes for "feet", but I would like to introduce something with a little compliance. The Denon is sitting on a damped granite slab, as per Adona, on an Adona equipment rack, with which I am pleased. Adona damps the granite by adhering it to what appears to be a slab of high density MDF. This takes the ringing out of the granite. The Technics is sitting on a 1" thick slate shelf. I may have more slate shelves made; it works well on the Adona rack. I plan to mount the Dyna DV505 on the Technics slab. Eventually, I will have the Lenco in slate up and running. |
