![]() |
Vinyl Asylum Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: At a guess posted by Mark Kelly on August 11, 2006 at 16:33:36:
i figure, like most things audio, there's some point of diminishing returns.. kinda like the sapphire and tungsten disaster!meanwhiles-- i see your point about the difference between hardness and density-- much like the metallurgy of cutting tools-- hardness is definitely way different than density!
i wonder how one would go about calculating the acoustic impedances of various metals/ceramics/mystery substances, and their possible interactions.. obviously steel on iron is a good mix!
i wonder if tungsten carbide would make as good or better a union- or if undue wear on the iron OR steel would occur? or maybe zirconium on iron? hard to say.. but a neat question nonetheless.
on a related note, here's another question i was pondering on my way home tonight-- would a larger or smaller bearing make a better surface-- i thought at first 'well, smaller.. less surface area', but then i ALSO thought, much like you're saying about contact pressure, 'bigger= better mass distribution'... hmm.. once again the compromise.. slightly more drag on a bigger surface for better wear, therefore less pitting potential and long term flatness to the bearing surface, or smaller and less surface area.. and it would all tie back into the wear resistance of the push plate!
is there a published treatise on turntable bearings!?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: At a guess - stuck.wilson@gmail.com 17:22:54 08/11/06 (3)
- Acoustic impedance - Mark Kelly 19:36:22 08/11/06 (2)
- Re: Acoustic impedance - stuck.wilson@gmail.com 03:05:34 08/12/06 (1)
- Iron - Mark Kelly 16:49:45 08/12/06 (0)