|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.201.43.31
We have not had one for a week or two...make a choice
or
and tell me why :)
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
Follow Ups:
Later Gator,
Dave
Great motor, nice arm ...rare ...what's not to like.
I like the Thorens, but not that arm.
I'll take the QL-8. Thank you. I'll sell my new Kenny post haste and expect the JVC this week. Looking forward to it !
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
What little info I can gather: The TT-81 is 2nd model from top of the line. The TOTL model was the TT-101. (And that was a broadcast studio model) Same everything between them except that the TT-101 uses a Bi-Directional servo and the TT81 doesn't have it.
One reason the TT-81 model isn't well known to us is that it wasn't marketed to North America. Japan and Europe only.
The TD125 mkII is well known and gets quite a lot of respect.
However, and this is conjecture, I suspect the TT-81 should be very good. It is not a PLL like the Technics models. Rather, it uses a servo to control its 12pole DC brushless motor.
The TT-81 could be sold as a motor unit only or integrated into a player config.
So......I'm going to choose the TT-81 because it is newer technology and shares most of its internals with the JVC broadcast model, the TT-101.
-Steve
I am reluctant to question you, because I think you have a broader and deeper knowledge of a wider variety of tt's than I do, but you wrote, "It is not a PLL like the Technics models. Rather, it uses a servo to control its 12pole DC brushless motor." If you're referring to Technics direct-drive tt's, surely they do use a servo mechanism to correct speed variations, regardless of the PLL. Those who don't like them seize upon the idea that they find the action of the servo to be audible. Second, I was under the impression that the TT81 has a coreless motor, like that of the TT101. I could be wrong there, but a TT81 owner is my source of info.
Firstly, I've no exp with Denon or JVC motor units. But I gather from one site on the web (vintage knob) that there are some similarities between the brands. One of those similarities being the magnetic strip, installed radially, to regulate speed. I presume this to be a different technology to that of phase lock loop.
So....I would say the JVC has more in common with Denon than it does Technics.
According to The Vintage Knob, the TT-81 and TT-101 share everything internally except for one feature, the Double Bi-Directional Servo that is unique to the TT-101.
Also, in one short blurb, The Vintage Knob does suggest that the Denon motor units may have indeed been manufactured by JVC.
See link below to the source I relied on for my first post to this thread.
-Steve
They have a PC etched system to create the timing signal for the feedback. When you take the motor apart, wether cored or core-less it is on top of the rotor and i think there is hall sensor above it. Not having the circuit diagram in the service manual makes it hard to understand how they control the speed, but there is a PLL int there somewhere :). I think even though the Denon tables were manufactured by JVC, the design s quite different. the TT 101 is amore complex design, i felt that the TT 81 is a nice pairing with the Thorens :)....
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
maybe I misread my single source of info. I am happy to concede every point to you.
as far as the match-up between the TD125 and the JVC TT-81, it seems a bit lop-sided to me.
Example; when the first SP10 (non PLL) was introduced, it only managed to compare with a TD125, not defeat it.
The TT-81 is, I presume, far more advanced than was that initial DD offering by Technics. The TT-81
From The Vinyl Engine, (link below)
Specifications
Motor: DC servomotor
Drive system: direct drive
Speeds: 33 and 45rpm
Speed detection: integrated frequency generator
Servo system: quartz locked positive and negative servo control
Starting time: within 1 second
Wow and flutter: 0.025% WRMS
Rumble: 63dB
Speed deviation: within 0.002%
Platter: 310mm diecast aluminium
Dimensions: 150 x 358 x 358mm
Weight: 8kg
----------------
The TD125 design was originally concerned about reducing rumble. And its published performance spec suggests -68 (weighted) db for rumble. That is a tad quieter than the JVC
When it comes to wow/flutter, we expect the JVC to win and it does with a published .025%. Compared to the Thorens at .04%.
Speed deviation for the Thorens isn't published anywhere handy. I'll just presume that the newer technology wins.
------------
What may have been a closer contested comparison would have been between your TT-81 and a TD126 MKIII. The MKIII has a DC Servo with feedback loop type of control system and does report much lower WoW/Flutter levels than did any of its predecessors within the Thorens line-up.
As I recall, the belt driven TD126 mkIII still came out 2nd place when compared to any high quality direct driven table from that era.
Specs aside.
I have three distinctly different drive types represented within my current turntables-ready-to-play line up. An idler drive. A belt drive with AC synchronous motor, and the SP10 mkII with its DC servo PLL drive system. Each type presents positive attributes that certainly manage to put forth an enjoyable listening experience. But each presents a very different character from the other. Except that the SP10 mkII seems to present little character at all. It seems, by comparison, to be damned near perfect in every aspect of its operation. It plays music impeccably. Perfect pitch on sustained piano. Always correct with rhythms. It certainly has excellent drive and when the music has energy, it presents it. Clearly a winner. Accuracy seems to be its defining character. For now, it is my reference.
I would be more interested in a comparison between a TT-81 and the SP10 mkII. Which one wins in that comparison?
-Steve
that you're conflating "PLL" with Quartz referencing? The SP10 (first version) is different from the SP10 Mk2 and Mk3 in that the former did not employ a quartz crystal reference for speed control by the servo. All subsequent high end direct-drives did that too, so far as I know.
Also, FWIW, the JVC uses a Hall sensor to regulate speed, as I think Penquin said, in the TT101 for sure. There's definitely no tape strip or external monitoring of platter speed. And TT101 motor is coreless, for sure. Hall sensor and coreless kind of go together.
Re your TT81 vs SP10 Mk2 comparison, I once owned an SP10 Mk2A and still own a Denon DP80. Both were completely serviced with new caps and other parts where necessary and both were mounted in slate plinths that were pretty near identical in mass, etc. Mk2A sounded great, but I slightly preferred the DP80, which is why I still own it. Of course, this is in my system and based on my subjective judgement only. However, Mk3 blows away DP80. I think there's more potential in the DP80 that I have not unlocked.
the Mk3 just sounds more "continuous" (to borrow a word from HP) than does the DP80, even more so since it received the Krebs mods. But the Mk3 is also in a 100-lb plinth made of slate and solid cherry; I could hear an improvement in its sound, with the addition of the solid cherry layer underneath the slate slab a few years ago, to my surprise. Keep in mind though that much of the mass of the Mk3 platter is due to the huge magnet that is fixed to the underside of the platter about midway from the spindle hole to its outer edge, not at the edge itself, which would be optimal for inertia. There is much about the Mk3, besides platter mass, that might make it sound better than a Mk2 or a DP80.
you are spinning 22 lbs of mass. a few DDs have hat much moment of inertia.
dee
;-D
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
An SP - 10 vs a JVC TT 101
I bet the JVC is a a better motor
True terror is to wake up one morning and discover that your high school class is running the country.
quote by Kurt Vonnegut
Keeping mine.
WW
"A man need merely light the filaments of his receiving set and the world's greatest artists will perform for him." Alfred N. Goldsmith, RCA, 1922
...and for what it's worth, when it gets down to hard choices, my SP10 mkII would be the first thing to go. And I'd still have a choice of Thorens players to spin my records with.
I'm certain I could live happily with this one if I needed to capitalize my TD124 collection.Not to worry. I'm still way deep into Thorens.
-Steve
Edits: 05/23/15
You may already be aware of this Steve but just in case...
Thorens is releasing 3 new suspended tables. See the link to Mike Fremer's website.
Most folk have never heard a Victor TT81...
Those who have are in no doubt....😜
N/T
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Oh man, it's huge!
THORENS!!!!!!!!!!
While I'm sure the upper JVCs were better, I had a JVC (can't remember the model or blocked it out)and it was terrible. OTOH , I had a TD 126 mk III and now have a TD 295 mkIV and both are outstanding.
enjoy,
mark
It and the Linn LP-12 are the two reasons I made my DIY FrankenLinn.
Dman
Analog Junkie
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: