2020 update : JC Verdier La Platine


A recent encounter with a JC Verdier dealer as well as a recent Audiogon discussion thread led to the start of this thread. He was in my house updating my La Platine which had been in storage for ten years with thread and oil. While he has high regards for the deck, his newer clients nevertheless prefer a Techdas iii than an 'old' La Platine. Given the proliferation of expensive decks in the past dozen years, La Platine has become very much under-appreciated. 

It's clear to me that the influence of the La Platine is everywhere to be found. Specifically, the magnetic suspension system that was employed 30+ years ago. Even SOTA offers their newer decks with mag. lev. features. And if you read this review: https://www.callas-audio.nl/Callas%20Platine%20Mod%20Kit%20Review.pdf, the Continuum Caliburn uses the same concept, which was not acknowledged in Fremer's review, albeit with more sophisticated , and expensive, execution.

It is also clear to me that there is much misunderstanding of the workings of the La Platine. I for one have contributed to this. The motor of the La Platine, for example, has been much maligned. The thread drive is another aspect of the turntable that have been described as inferior. With regard to the motor and thread drive, I have been set straight by Chris @ct0517 and Lyubomir @lbelchev. Experimenting with the different types of silk threads, the tightness to the platter  and a renewed understanding of the soundness of the Philips motor have been rewarded with better dynamics and transparency. 

The funny thing is that during the past two years of re-engagement with audio, I have questioned ownership of every components in my arsenal except the La Platine. It has always been a keeper. I wonder if La Platine owners would contribute to celebrating this 'old' deck with tales, advice, and insights?

Cheers!
ledoux1238

@thekong Yes, getting an isolation / anti vibration platform will indeed be the next upgrade for me. You have opted to put the table and motor on the  same platform. Have you tried motor and plinth on separate platforms? What pneumatic platform are you using?

Minus K had been a consideration. As I was going to put plinth only on it, I have read that Minus K does not like asymmetric loading. I wondered if any La Platine user might throw some light on this? Another contender is the Polish Stacore Pneumatic  platform, though very pricey. The two most likely Options seem to be  pneumatic footers by Pneunace Audio or a air bearing platform from FFYX, a Chinese  audio co. 

@ledoux1238  No, I have not try putting the motor on a separate platform, partly because it is not that practical in my setup, but mainly because I simply do not believe in it. I doubt that he remember this, but many years ago I had some email exchange with Thom of Galibier, where we talked about having the motor and plinth on separate platforms. I learned a lot about the drawback of such arrangement from him, and it all made sense to me. Even today, if you look at some of the top turntables with separate motors, such as the Kuzma XL and even the Walker, they all have their motors relatively close to the plinths. I think that is not a coincident.

 

About pneumatic platform, I have been using the floor standing model from TMC since nearly 20 years ago. I was thinking if it was good enough for Rockport, it probably was good enough for me. I have always been very satisfy with them!

 

While you can certainly test it yourself, I would strongly recommend against putting the motor on separate platform if you are using a pneumatic platform, and especially the MinusK. I have seen the MinusK working in my friend's system. It has very soft springs, so I am pretty sure the pull of the belt (if the motor is on separate platform) will affect its leveling. And yes, the MinusK doesn't like asymmetric load, so you may need to experiment with placing weight on different positions on the platform to achieve leveling. Also, it is so sensitive to the weight that if you use a record weight during setup, you will always need to use the record weight, or you may throw the platform out of level. It is because of all these inconvenient that kept me from using the MinusK, although, at least on paper, it performs even better than my TMC.

I would never recommend mounting motor and TT on two separate platforms especially if either one of the two is sprung or otherwise designed to move in response to external stimuli. In that case both devices must be on the same platform of course. (Minus K doesn’t use springs.)

The MinusK does use springs, but probably not in the conventional manner.

 

According to their website: "Vertical-motion isolation is provided by a stiff spring that supports a weight load, combined with a negative-stiffness mechanism (NSM)."

Thanks for the correction.  I wonder what is an NSM.  If you push on a Minus K, it does not behave as if primarily spring loaded, which is to say that a spring will exert a force directly proportional to its degree of compression or extension from rest, among other factors of course. So, if you push on a spring loaded shelf, the shelf will get more and more difficult to compress, and the reverse happens when you release the shelf allowing it to restore its steady state position. The Minus K seems to exert a constant force restoring it to its steady state location, up or down. For this reason, I intuitively think or thought of it as using something other than springs, at least primarily.