|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
123.211.40.241
Interesting comments caught my attention in the latest Stereophile
Michael's review of the Brinkmann/A95 he mentioned
" in my experience,the less platform or plinth a turntable has the better it sounds"
Ahhh--Ok--so naked is good fully clothed --not good?
Really?
Then the review TT -- Brinkmann --the naked one measured
"low pass Filtered Numbers four times worse"
than a clothed competitor --a VPI
Yes but--
"While those figures were somewhat surprising and disappointing, the sound had been
anything but"
So we may conclude that measure is good then sound must be good lobby
has just lost a vote?
Food for thought
Des
Follow Ups:
1) plinthless turntable designs require a flat stable platform to stand on. Without it the stand-alone motor pod can't maintain proper position and attitude (perpendicularity) with regard to the platter bearing. Further, it is this platform that will interact with whatever mechanical vibrations are being emitted by motor pod and platter bearing. In this sense the platform, upon which the "plinthless" turntable stands. becomes integral and immensely important to the performance of the turntable. And, by the way, the Brinkmann Spyder does not come with a platform.
I found this out living with a Teres for several years. And I should note that rigid drive belts like those used on a Teres are far more sensitive to the alignment between the axis of the platter bearing and the axis of the motor shaft. Yet, even a flexible belt requires good alignment betwixt motor axle and platter axle or it refuses to hold position and tends to wander off its designated path. Just a physical reality that even Fremer's review sample (Brinkman spyder) will submit to.
2) Feikert smartphone app.
I've no opinion on this for now except to note that Fremer in this review seems to distance himself just a bit from it by saying....."Whatever problems the Feickert setup itself may have, using it to measure every turntable at least provides a level playing field"
There is further doubt about his 'test result' when he states..."I took those measurements after two months of listening to the Brinkmann. While those figures were surprising and somewhat disappointing, the Spyder's sound had been anything but."
Further evidence of a contradiction between Fremer's subjective listening observations and objective tests conducted with the Feickert app.
I won't attempt to translate or interpret this anomaly. However I have noted that many serious hobbyists are making use of the Feickert test record and his analysis software. I just wonder about the veracity of this method and I also wonder about the veracity of the subjective observations being reported. There seems to be room for doubt in either realm. Nonetheless I will defer to Fremer's accumulated 'subjective' experience in observing the differences between turntables as he has for so many decades.
-Steve
Ps: I've had, for a long time now, much admiration for the Simon Yorke Series 7 turntable. It too requires a stable platform to stand upon. A work of industrial art, imho.
Since my turntable sits on a shelf that is built into the house, it occurred to me before I built a plinth that maybe I should just bolt the SP10 directly to the shelf. In a way then, the whole house becomes the plinth and it seems like you can't do any better than that if you're going the high-mass route.
Excellent précis U510-- my own thoughts on comparison of the two constructions
is that both have strengths and differences -I wouldn't specify weaknesses .
The Yorke/A90 I owned and in direct comparison to I'd say a "Plinthed" example in situation as shown
I concurred that no obvious anomalies proved evident
Both were outstanding performers with possibly the cigar to the venerable 301 fully clothed--purely personal though
YVMV
Des
You have to understand the Brinkmann's plinth does not include the motor whereas a Garrard 301 and other idler drive tables have the motor attached to the chassis or top plate. So it makes sense if the motorless plinth's size should be reduced and whereas a plinth with motor needs the mass to sink motor noise. In this sense I agree with MF when the plinth includes a motor but reduction in plinth size cannot be blanketly applied in all genres of turntables.
Hi, Des,
Adding to the confusion/complexity is that some turntables use a design that's somewhat atypical, like the Michell Engineering Gyro SE. The plinth is nothing more than a small acrylic frame that holds up the suspension towers and probably has very little influence on the sound of the turntable. The platter bearing is mounted to a heavy gauge aluminum spider chassis that is suspended on those towers. The chassis probably has more effect on the turntable's sound than the plinth. So is this a "minimalist" plinth design? Or does the spider chassis count as part of the plinth? And is the combination still considered a minimalist plinth design?
And to make things even more complicated, some designs use a tonearm that is mounted to an isolated pod vs being mounted to an integrated armboard on the chassis/plinth. Which is better? Does the plinth (or lack of) contribute most of the sound of the turntable or does the arm board (or lack of) also have a significant influence on the sound of the turntable?
Regards,
Tom
I don't do any measuring of vibrations, resonances, etc. but I like the sound of my Dual 1019 with a butcher block maple plinth. I guess it depends on specific application...
"When we look into the deepest space with our most powerful telescopes, we see only the past"
An acoustical musical instrument. Everything on the turntable has some effect on the reproduction of sound. A change in any material, or using wood from particular trees, can have effects beyond expectations.Prediction time: in the near future someone will use 3D printing to create a plinth with virtually no resonance issues. It will be like the cartridge body for the short lived Ortofon MC A90.
What I know about 3D printing could fill up one side of a 3x5 index card, but I do know it is capable of creating assemblies that traditional machining would have trouble imitating.
By varying materials and the arrangement of those materials, a resonance free plinth could be made. I'm sure they have already created materials for other purposes in this same way, but the creation of a turntable plinth would be an interesting project.
NOTE: VPI has already done this with the 3D version of the Classic 10.5 uni-pivot tonearm. And from all reports it is a significant leap up from the same tonearm made from traditional methods.
I have no idea whether such a plinth would be musically agreeable but it might solve some issues that traditional manufacturing has trouble with. Looking at the photo of John's SOTA reminded of all of this stuff. That table's design is very interesting.
Turntable manufacturers have used a lot of design approaches for their products. They have utilized high mass, sandwiched materials, almost bare-boned setups, all sorts of suspensions, etc. A 3d printed, resonance free plinth would be the next logical step.
What benefits would a 3D manufactured plinth bring to the VPI Classic direct (or any table)? The VPI already has the 3D printed tonearm but I wonder what sonic advantages would be realized from such a plinth?
It would probably be one of those $100k plus monsters but, like Italian super sports cars, would be great to lust after.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Edits: 04/18/15
"What benefits would a 3D manufactured plinth bring to the VPI Classic direct (or any table)? The VPI already has the 3D printed tonearm but I wonder what sonic advantages would be realized from such a plinth? "
Just as soon as they can come up with the tech necessary for printing MDF, it will happen. 8^]
Currently 3D printing is limited to a couple of different plastics and a few different alloys of powdered metal. But the metal printers aren't cheap. The 3D printers that work with plastics will fit (cost-wise) into the niche of artisan manufacturers. It is still a long way off(unless you want your 3d printed plinth in ABS). But when someone can come up with an MDF 3d printer marketers will surely claim miraculous advances.
-Steve
> An acoustical musical instrument.
A turntable should not be thought of as an acoustical musical instrument. Unfortunately, some turntables are designed with that goal in mind. However, a turntable is a device designed to reproduce acoustical musical instruments. It is a scientific device, not an artistic device. At least the best ones are designed for accurate reproduction rather than music production.
> It will be like the cartridge body for the short lived Ortofon MC A90.
Actually, the Ortofon MC-A90 has evolved into the new Ortofon MC-A95 . It seems it's life span has been extended.
> And from all reports it is a significant leap up from the same tonearm made from traditional methods.
Not all reports! I have a friend who owns a VPI HRX and he just replaced his JMW 12-inch tonearm with the new 12-inch 3D tonearm. He reports the new 3D tonearm might sound a little better but it's nothing significant.
Well, I bet the 3D plinth might become a reality in the near future and it wouldn't surprise me if VPI were the first to introduce one. Of course, we all know that whoever makes one, it will be advertized as the greatest, most significant improvement in turntable design that has ever been introduced. ;-)
Best regards,
John Elison.
That last line has me LOL.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
So, if a Stradivarius plinth hit the market, . . .
Opus 33 1/3
I could not afford it..
Think Ed is right in that all material and weight impose some kind of signature on the sound of a TT. So carefully combining different materials are important. Thus it is very logical to think of it as a kind of musical instrument.
I don`t believe in massless designs. I think a turntable have to have stiffness and mass to be s stable platform for the platter and tonearm.
Rgds Jan
I won't be buying it.
Ed
We don't shush around here!
Life is analog...digital is just samples thereof
Put a heavy plinth on it and suddenly all the Feikert measurements will come good....
You need to get a grip.
I suspect John is correct about his turntable's design...especially the massive armpod...🎼
A turntable is basically a design exercise in minimizing vibration and resonance. In many cases a wooden plinth causes additional vibration problems. Of course, it all depends on the design, but turntables with hollow box plinths are generally the worst. Consequently, the less there is to vibrate and resonate, the more natural and transparent can be the resulting sound quality. I believe my Sota Millennia Vacuum turntable with SME V is a very neutral performer, partially because of its plinthless design that incorporates a 1-inch thick frame of machined aluminum hanging from four corner posts. It's massive armboard made from layers of lead and acrylic also contributes to damping and minimizing resonance.
good point John! As much as I have disagreed with Mr. Freemer in the past, I must side with him this time. There are better metals to help reduce the transfer of vibration (feedback), but also pretty expensive (Mallory metal for one). Not only do some plinths transfer vibration, but the also become an antenna gathering even more vibration just like a dust cover.
gary
Gary
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: