LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  September 2012

ARSCLIST September 2012

Subject:

Re: High-end turntable

From:

Clark Johnsen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:11:03 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (272 lines)

First time I heard a TT isolation effect was in rural New Hampshire, five
miles at least from the nearest Interstate. The device was called
Vibraplane and it dealt with vertical and horizontal vibrations down to
2.5Hz. A switch on the air pump allowed it to be activated or disabled in
seconds and man! did it make an improvement.  While "any decent isolation
feet should prevent them," true decent is going to cost because none of the
mere feet I've seen address the noisome lateral vibrations to any effective
degree.

The point is you don't need earthquakes to be in a seismic environment.

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> I think it depends on what kind of earth your turntable sits. I agree
> about a building in Manhattan over a subway line. I disagree about a home's
> concrete slab in a suburban area not known for seizmic (sp?) activity. The
> kind of resonances that naturally occur in the ground are sub-sonic and any
> decent isolation feet should prevent them. However, if you're having
> earthquake activity or even high wind activity that creates air-mass
> vibrations akin to a huge woofer, that probably can show us as rumble or
> skipping on most if not all turntables (maybe not those old Garrard console
> models that track at 5 grams and cut their own new grooves each time you
> play the record). Oh, HVAC systems will also cause rumble, especially on
> wood-framed floors.
>
> That said, floating the turntable platter (and the tonearm connection to
> the cabinet) and using a frictionless bearing (if such a thing existed)
> should, in theory decouple your spinng record and groove-reading cartridge
> from all external vibrations. Such a system doesn't exist, at any price,
> for any sized man.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clark Johnsen" <[log in to unmask]
> >
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 4:33 PM
> Subject: [Norton AntiSpam]Re: [ARSCLIST] High-end turntable
>
>
>
>  Footfall susceptibility is the obvious vibration problem with many
>> turntables. Left mostly unsaid is the pernicious effect of low-level,
>> omnipresent vibration transmitted up from the earth. Most built-in
>> isolation methods and suspensions fail to stop this and those that
>> somewhat do, then fail to account for the far more worrisome lateral
>> shaking... the stuff that fells buildings in earthquake zones.
>>
>> It is my considered view that much of the difference heard among
>> turntables
>> (apart from the clearcut stuff like rumble) can be accounted for by their
>> susceptibility to this unsuspected vibration environment. One class of
>> exception: The very, very expensive 'tables that do seem to address this
>> situation, but I can't say for certain. One thing I do know, though, is
>> that clamping a 'table down tightly to the earth only allows more
>> ground vibrations to proceed into the unit.
>>
>> clark
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>**
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Carl:
>>>
>>> You are right about the Philips with floor vibrations. Cheapo feet are
>>> the
>>> reason. I use an old IBM typewriter pad that used to sit under the
>>> Selectric typewriters so they wouldn't vibrate a desk. Plus it's on top
>>> of
>>> a heavy file cabinet sitting on a concrete slab, nowhere near any
>>> woofers.
>>> The touch-sensitive buttons were a koolio feature in the early 80's
>>> (along
>>> with big hair and "Flashdance"), but they get very insensitive over
>>> time. I
>>> now have to blow on my fingertips before operating them or they won't
>>> sense
>>> any touch. I'm not dead, but I do have dry hands and fingers. My mother
>>> (the original owner) had the same problem with those buttons. At her
>>> house,
>>> the turntable was in a cabinet that had cement under it and the speakers
>>> were in a different room, so no vibration feedback problems.
>>>
>>> In the case of both the Philips and the Technics servo systems, there's
>>> plenty of feedback to make speed accuracy and pitch accuracy if the
>>> system
>>> is functioning. One system that could get tripped up was Denon, which had
>>> two tape heads and a magnetic ring inside the platter as its system.
>>> That's
>>> only about one data point per second (2x 33 1/3 per minute), and some
>>> people can hear the system adjust speed on tracking-challenge stuff like
>>> fff to ppp on a good classical recording. I saw that tape-head and fixed
>>> magnet system used in one other place -- on AutoTec tape decks, that's
>>> how
>>> motion-sensing was done. Ampex used a light source, strobe wheel and
>>> light-detector on the AG-440C. I was taught old-school about tape
>>> spooling,
>>> and don't trust any motion sensing system. I always "rock and roll" to a
>>> dead stop, then hit stop. Diverging ...
>>>
>>> Anyway, as I've said numerous times, there is only so much "perfection"
>>> you're going to eek out of the _vast_ majority of LP records. Even a
>>> modest
>>> modern system (due to low-noise phono preamps and the general
>>> availability
>>> of decently compliant cartridges) will reveal how much rumble and hum and
>>> hiss is baked into the "golden era" records. Listen on headphones and it
>>> all hangs out. The early Westrex stereo cutters were tough beasts to
>>> wrangle, and the old lathes were rumbling to varying degrees of
>>> audibility.
>>> Plus the old tape machines had relatively high noise floors, old tapes
>>> hissed, etc. The problem with most "audiophile" records is that the
>>> content
>>> sucks and isn't worth hearing, performance-wise and/or recording-wise.
>>> Some
>>> reissue LPs of more recent vintage are wonderful exceptions to that
>>> admittedly blanket statement.
>>>
>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 3:11 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] High-end turntable
>>>
>>>
>>>  Pardon the imprecise language, professor. I mean to say the best
>>> playback
>>>
>>>> of LP I have yet heard. :)
>>>>
>>>> You mean the Philips model that used touch-sensitive buttons? I had one
>>>> of those around 1978. It was good, but the suspension was very
>>>> sensitive to
>>>> footfalls. Speed is not the only thing that's important, but it should
>>>> be
>>>> right. The original Rega Planar 3s ran fast! (Purposely?) On how many
>>>> TTs
>>>> can you hear the pitch go up after a loud passage? You're right about
>>>> the
>>>> Slovak stuff - they're toys. I'd rather have what I think you've got -
>>>> Technics? But then it would be fun to put yours next to a mid-range
>>>> Rega,
>>>> and compare them for overall tunage. The Technics would probably win for
>>>> value, but of course, that's a very personal evaluation.
>>>>
>>>> Small things mean a lot with this black magic stuff, and they cost. The
>>>> tonearm is important and so is the way it interacts with the rest of the
>>>> structure. The fewer you sell, the more expensive each is, forming a
>>>> commercial feedback loop. I know from working in high-end retail, that
>>>> nobody actually pays $170,000 or $35,000 for one of these things, unless
>>>> the buyer's favorite charity is his audio dealer. On the Clearaudio, the
>>>> customer could demand a 25% discount and the dealer would still make
>>>> $15,000. No dealer would say no, right?
>>>>
>>>> Now, the question of value, .... that machine looks absurd. Clearaudio's
>>>> normal stuff pales in comparison to SME's workmanship, but their stuff
>>>> generally is better than VPI or others at below 8k (my buddy is a dealer
>>>> for those makes and others). The SME's price makes some sense given the
>>>> scope of the market, inherent quality, and the performance you get.
>>>> Seriously. I have owned (of the good ones) Thorens, Luxman, Oracle,
>>>> Micro
>>>> Seiki, VPI, Nottingham, and now for some years the modest little SME 10.
>>>> They're all good, all different, and there is a hierarchy of
>>>> reproduction
>>>> quality that, to me, is worthwhile.
>>>>
>>>> In high-end audio, high cost also is its own priority. It is sometimes
>>>> money for nothing and when it is shysterism, that's wrong. I'm okay with
>>>> your populist sentiment, Tom. I've spent most of life on a shoestring
>>>> and
>>>> right now Micky and I are literally below poverty income - only
>>>> partially
>>>> by choice. So far, it has made sense to me to have a better TT than a
>>>> car.
>>>> Hope that doesn't change!
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>
>>>>  From: Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: Sep 19, 2012 1:17 PM
>>>>> To: Carl <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] High-end turntable
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Aside from obvious things like unacceptably high rumble, speed
>>>>> inaccuracy and tonearm resonances,
>>>>> which should only occur on cheapo junk among modern-production
>>>>> turntables, what exactly is the
>>>>> "sound" of a turntable? Shouldn't the "sound" of a turntable be the
>>>>> sound of the cartridge with good
>>>>> design rendering rumble and mechanical resonances inaudible and perfect
>>>>> speed accuracy eliminating
>>>>> wow and flutter?
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, use any objective test record (Analogue Productions, Shure,
>>>>> the old Command test record,
>>>>> CBS Labs, etc) and a frequency counter and see how inaccurate the speed
>>>>> is on the lower-end
>>>>> "audiophile" belt-drive turntables. I discovered this problem on a
>>>>> MusicHall turntable and then
>>>>> measured the same problems on all of those similar turntables made in
>>>>> Eastern Europe. I think the
>>>>> problem is a combination of a cheapo motor and a cheapo bearing, which
>>>>> makes speed accuracy
>>>>> impossible without a platter too heavy for the cheapo motor to move.
>>>>> The
>>>>> old Thoren belt-drives had
>>>>> it right -- if you're going to go that route (and I prefer direct-drive
>>>>> in the first place), then
>>>>> you better have a massive platter and a precision bearing. Philips had
>>>>> a
>>>>> clever system that they got
>>>>> down to very low price points by using a non-exotic platter with a good
>>>>> but non-exotic bearing and a
>>>>> DC servo motor driving the belt, so the motor would make up for
>>>>> whatever
>>>>> the consequences with a
>>>>> light platter. I've got one of those Philips turntables and it measures
>>>>> speed-accurate like a
>>>>> Technics 1200 direct-drive. Both have very low flutter characteristics
>>>>> too.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for tonearm resonances, that's another problem with the low-end
>>>>> "audiophile" tables coming out of
>>>>> Europe. Those hollow-metal tonearms very audibly resonate with many
>>>>> cartridges, especially on
>>>>> deeply-cut records and on warped records. Plus the premative
>>>>> string-and-weight anti-skate
>>>>> "mechanism" is a joke. For the same money, the Chinese
>>>>> Technics-knockoffs will give you better speed
>>>>> accuracy, a better-designed (but not necessarily better-executed)
>>>>> anti-skate mechanism and, if you
>>>>> get a real-deal Technics heavy rubber platter mat instead of a felt
>>>>> "skate mat" typically included,
>>>>> you get equal or lower rumble.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:48 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] High-end turntable
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  It's a statement all right, and so is the price. Makes the best record
>>>>>
>>>>>> player I've ever heard seem
>>>>>> cheap. The SME 30 is about $35k. Yes, if I had that kind of money, I'd
>>>>>> own one. Better than
>>>>>> wasting that much cash on an automobile.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  From: Randy Lane <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>>> Sent: Sep 19, 2012 11:42 AM
>>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] High-end turntable
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone own, plan to buy, or used one of these yet?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *http://tinyurl.com/5w2zw7*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager