As Manitunc and others here have suggested.........I believe that it may be the mat in combination with the rim weight which is the culprit here?
I removed the Millenium mat from my Raven AC-3 and placed the record directly on the copper top platter together with a centre weight and the rim weight.
All the life and magic, which had previously been sucked from the presentation with the mat in place, suddenly returned.
I am unable to repeat this experiment with the Victor TT-81 DD table as the aluminium platter has a raised outer rim to contain the thick rubber mat, and without it, the record's outer edge sits upon this rim and thus does not make contact with the platter itself.
Is the sound quality without the Millenium mat on the Raven but with the outer rim weight, better than a record without the rim weight but WITH the Millenium mat?
Not really.
So unless I'm playing a seriously warped record (and I only have a few which cause problems), why would I bother with the fuss and ceremony involved in the placing and removal of the outer rim? |
Perhaps some of the difference we hear with rim weights is due to whether we use a mat on the platter. On my Transrotor Fat Bob, there is no mat, just a vinyl layer which mates with the record. It is hard and has no give so the rim weight just makes sure the record is perfectly flat at is in contact with the platter at all points.
If a rim weight was used with a soft mat, I can see where it might press the record into the mat, causing a different resonant experience than just laying on the mat. I havent tried a soft mat on my Transrotor, and the only one I have is the Oracle mat which is quite soft and squishy.
for the record, I like the sound with the rim weight and center clamp. |
Halcro, thanks for starting this thread. Very ear-opening. It never occurred to me to try my VPI HRX without the periphery clamp as it came with the turntable. Based on one weekend of listening the table seems to sound better without it -- slightly bigger sound stage, more open and lively. This was with the Airtight PC-1 cart and 2 drops of damping fluid in the JMW 21.7 arm Tnx again!
P.S. - When comparing having the ring on or off I found it required a 0.04 Hz frequency change on the SDS to get speed to match. YMMV. |
A long thread. Took me time to read it. I just want to make a note that I have a few outer rings. I have the Kenwood outer ring which weighs about 1.3 kg and a RSR outer ring which if I remember right weighs 330 gms. What I have discovered is that is that an outer ring can be and mostly is benificial sonically (mind you I barely use it due to the PITA it presents)but that is in relation to the RSR ring. The Kenwood more often than not sucks the life out of LPs. That is why I purchased the RSR. I do use the Kenwood on severely dished LPs as the RSR is too light to flatten them. For a record clamp I use the Harmonix, my mat is a Mystic Mat and the TT is a Black Night for reference. Is is suspended very effectively.
What the RSR does is give you a touch more detail and dynamic agility.
I always wanted to design my own outer ring that would have weights that can be inserted along the perimeter to establish what weight is best sonically.
As for record clamps, I find a very slight sonic difference between using the Harmonix and not. But I do use it all the time. Otherwise the LP is not as well coupled to the platter and on startup the LP will spin on the mat.
On to mats, the Mystic Mat sounds very similar to the copper platter direct. What it does do is make the sound a hair more natural. Just a hair and blind testing if you adjust VTA I doubt most would hear it. Almost identical. I tried a Boston Audio mat and found it truncated the leading edge of instruments and made them sound flat. That is in my system. For others it might be different. As a result I am not a fan of graphite mats / platters.
As such we honestly need to look at the entire system to determine what is beneficial or not. I could see a turntable being designed where an outer ring would be beneficial provided the platter can transmit the energy stored between the LP and interface away from the stylus. |
J Carr:
The A.R.T. graphite mat that I have bonded to the TT-1000... Jonathan, have you experimented with the A.R.T graphite record clamp? It has awkward dimensions making it impossible for certain cartridges to clear the final few grooves of an LP. I have a feeling though that you are not using Koetsus :-). The above problem not withstanding, the combination of the A.R.T graphite mat and clamp is very rewarding on my Clearaudio Master Reference with magnetic bearing. On a related note, can you suggest a place that I can have that A.R.T graphite clamp 'shaved' so that it is compatible with all cartridges? |
Hi Emailists,
Thanks for the kind words.
Perhaps the differences we are hearing on both our Ravens with the peripheral clamp, are due to the fact that you don't use the Millenium mat and I do?
Interesting......I have to try it.
Cheers
Henry |
Wow - this is quite the thread!!!
I have no doubt that what Halcro (a valued poster) heard was true for his system.
However, as user of both a ring and clamp, I have found differently.
Here is an anecdote. On my current table (Raven 1), which came with a Millenium clamp and mat, I found I didn't like the sound of the mat, which seems in opposition to many people with the same table.
But, I don't run my Phantom arm with damping, though most people do.
I just feel like there are no absolutes, especially with analog.
I also run a strain gauge cartridge, which is different than most.
I appreciate Halcro's findings, and since the system here is about to change radically with the addition of the TAD speakers and new TTweights Momentus Duo drive table (I'm a new dealer for both - hear them both at the Axpona NYC show) that I will have to reevaluate the use the use of the clamp and super heavy ring the table comes with.
I will also be reevaluating the use of damping fluid in the arm, as it changes to the new Phantom version with a 12" arm. Lot's of changes, lots of testing, lots of listening, but no universal truths I'm afraid.
On another note, the new table will allow for either rim or belt drive. That's another controversy I am soon hoping to hear how it plays out. |
J Carr - thanks for the info - very thought provoking. The clamp discussion certainly has me thinking. The FAR clamp has a proud rim on the bottom so the force is applied to the out edge of the label. My FAR is up to speed in half a turn - so not sure on your set up - I'm using oscilator preamp with PS Audio power amp & MIT cable in the supply & Silk thread belt. I can only think maybe I'm tensioning the belt a bit more than you. I dont think mine has a polymer thrust pad. I'm using Motul V300 Power Racing oil which is a synthetic using double esters which is very slippery and has very high unctiousness- ie in a motor it will hold a film in the head even if the motor is not used for some time. My racing mate managed to boil his porsche engine, melt brazed oil lines and still the motor kept running with no damage. I love the Ikeda cartridge, though it can be difficult - be great to see this cartridge concept continued after Ikeda goes. |
Regarding clamps and rings, it all depends on the turntable, the type/weight of center weight and the outer ring weight. So many vaiables, no wonder YMMV...
For my table, the TT Weights Super ring and the clearaudio quadro clamp weight sounds best for my system. |
Hi Dover:
I agree that a not-so-clearly-defined contact between spindle and clamp (neither snug nor free) is not a good idea. One some turntables, you'd want physical contact between the clamp and spindle, as this is what would allow the clamp to terminate the noise and vibration of the platter bearing. Something like a collet-chuck mechanism should do the job well. However, the FAR's self-lubricating polymer thrust plate is pretty quiet as far as I recall, and shouldn't need special treatment.
A slight overbore of the clamp combined with a polymer sleeve should be good. But not with teflon. Teflon is soft and has low elasticity, and once it is deformed, it stays that way. If you apply pressure across a wide area of teflon it stands up pretty well, but concentrated pressure on a small area is another story. Delrin or some grades of modified noryl (PPO) should be better.
You may also try a tripod-contact between the bottom of the clamp and the LP surface. For whatever reason, I thought that this worked pretty well on the FAR.
Regarding your second question, with the s-l-o-w spin-up time and all, would you really want a peripheral clamp on your FAR? (grin) Sounds damn fine without one!
I haven't had a problems with graphite mats, by Audio Tekne, A.R.T. and Boston. However, I have fabricated some parts in graphite, and I know that there can be sizable differences in the materials sourced from different suppliers. Some lend themselves to machining, and others don't. Also, for best results, graphite machining should be done by a place that is familiar with the stuff, IME.
As an aside (Dover, you already know this), in Kitamura's original FAR design, the platter was aluminum, and it was topped with a mat of machined chrome-copper. Either piece would ring beautifully on its own (although you'd not see it in the measured frequency response from the cartridge), but place the mat on the platter, and pfft! No more ringing, and a quieter, more even-handed sound delivery with greater dynamic range (although you't still not see anything on the cartridge's measured frequency response). The Japanese phrase for this type of mechanism would translate to "phase-interference damping". No idea what you'd say in English.
FWIW, I'm using the same principle in some of my cartridge designs (pressure-fitting of dissimilar metals which are chosen to suppress each other's resonant tendancies).
cheers, jonathan carr
PS. On paper, at least, another approach would be to get a snug fit between the clamp and spindle, and put a stiff grease on the spindle. The grease would lock the clamp in place and quash any ringing. You'd have to remember to wipe the spindle clean each time before removing the LP, however!
Yet another approach that you can take with clamps is to use a container filled with small ball-bearings. Staggering the bearing sizes helps to expand the range of affected frequencies. |
My experience with clamps is that when I use my TTWeights Classic, I get noticeably better sound I think because the flatter records creates a more consistant azimuth, right? I lusted after the VPI center weight and when I got it it made my turntable sound horrible. Even my wife noticed a difference. You could play half a song with the VPI and then lift the cue and put the TTWeights on and immediately tell the difference and same if you did it in the other order. I think some bearings can handle a little extra weight but there's a limit. |
The mat was the Millenium, which has a smooth and rough side. I assume its off the rough side, but I dont know if the gentleman is using it correctly. Hence the question. |
Dover, how did the graphite mat get the "grey scale" onto the cartridge? I've used a Boston Audio Mat 1 (graphite) for years without problems and the only one I'd replace it with is a Mat 2. |
J Carr
Hi Jonathan, interested in your feedback on centre clamps. My main concern on the gunmetal Final Audio clamp is that the spindle hole has no sleeve so it has metal to metal contact and it is not snug. I have often thought it would be an advantage to mill out the centre and put a teflon or other polymer sleeve in, but this is a one way trip. Do you have any recommendations on heavy clamps.
The other query is that on the Final the record edge is ever so slightly proud of the platter/mat, therefore I assume peripheral clamps may not be ideal on this turntable - thoughts ?
Might as well ask a third - graphite mats - a friend had an unfortunate experience where his cartridge ended up gummed up with grey scale off the graphite - comments ? |
I believe the magnetic bearing in the Project RM10 only unloads the platter from the bearing and doesnt isolate it completely under the same theory that a drain path is desirable. So essentially you have a regular bearing with minimal load and therefore minimal friction and noise with the advantage of a heavy platter for rotational momentum |
"IME, the sonic benefits of keeping a mechanical path to drain away vibrations trump the lower noise levels of a floating bearing."
Would not the sleeve/platter interface provide a pathway to drain vibrations, or does the lubricant interface effectively prevent vibration tranfer? |
"IME, the sonic benefits of keeping a mechanical path to drain away vibrations trump the lower noise levels of a floating bearing. OTOH, if the finish and lubrication of the bearing points is such that significant noise and vibration are generated as a result of the mechanical contact, you may arrive at different conclusions."
That is an interesting explanation. May be that is why I tend to prefer mechanical bearing vs Magnetic bearing in my Clearaudio Master Ref analog set up. The Magnetic bearing may not have efficient vib drain path (just a spindle of some ceramic material) to the Everest Stand my CMR rests on |
Manitunc, Rockitman, magnetic bearings are another thing that I've done experimentation on. In my experience, using the magnets to unload most of the platter weight from the bearing, but leaving some mechanical contact intact sounded the best (a kilo or less, probably even a half-kilo would suffice).
IME, the sonic benefits of keeping a mechanical path to drain away vibrations trump the lower noise levels of a floating bearing. OTOH, if the finish and lubrication of the bearing points is such that significant noise and vibration are generated as a result of the mechanical contact, you may arrive at different conclusions.
Some of the La Platine Verdier turntables allowed the user to adjust the amount of magnetic levitation, and use the configuration that sounded best to him.
cheers, jonathan |
05-18-11: Manitunc
Rockitman,
I dont know if I agree with your statement that the additional weight will not affect a magnetic bearing. Depending on the strength of the magnet, it may not be able to maintain the separation between the bearing surfaces. That's a given Manitunc. I can easily see the clearance between the magnetic bearing and platter on my table...I agree, too much weight so that the platter makes contact with the bearing would be bad. |
Dover:
My TT-1000 by itself has a little less mass in the platter system than stock (I needed to shave down the top of the platter to get a flat surface for the graphite mat to bond onto). Add the center clamp, and the net weight ends up pretty close to stock - not enough to warrant readjusting the servo gain.
Still, your point is valid - the servo control of a DD is typically set up with a certain load range in mind, and if the user alters the load significantly from what the manufacturer originally intended, it is a very good idea to reassess the servo gain.
I will add that many DD turntables were designed with a specific lubricant in mind. Some turntables were even designed so that the spindle functions like a self-pressurizing, self-centering Archimedes pump (similar to many PC cooling fans today), and if you change the lube, you may adversely affect the self-centering action of the pump/spindle.
I know that various DD models by JVC, Yamaha and Kenwood fall into this category. I recommend reading http://37282.diarynote.jp/200708102338400000/ and http://37282.diarynote.jp/200708111505150000/ These pages are in Japanese, so you may need to send them through a translator.
The A.R.T. graphite mat that I have bonded to the TT-1000 (using a permanently non-hardening adhesive, causing it to function like constrained-layer damping) has a recess for the LP label, and yes, I have done much experimentation with washers under the LP. Here again, I suggest using these in moderation - only as much as needed to bring the edges of a dished-up LP back in contact with the mat (or platter surface). My testing has suggested that imposing physical stress on an LP while playing it (which is what too-enthusiastic use of washers is wont to do) will adversely affect the sound.
Dover, you have a Final Audio? So do I (grin). My unit predates the Takai-era Parthenon, but is new enough to have the SPZ plinth rather than the original granite. It also has the bi-phase motor controller. FWIW, Kitamura's preferred material for mat and clamp was chrome copper rather than gun-metal. I haven't done A/B tests on chrome-copper vs. gunmetal, but based on A/B tests that I have done on gunmetal vs. other metals, my conclusion is that gunmetal isn't a material that I would care to use for sonic applications. I prefer the results with phosphor-bronze or beryllium-copper, and I imagine that chrome-copper would also work well.
cheers, jonathan carr |
Dear Jcarr: Yes that was the meaning. Thank you. No, nothing to design , only learning about.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Rockitman,
I dont know if I agree with your statement that the additional weight will not affect a magnetic bearing. Depending on the strength of the magnet, it may not be able to maintain the separation between the bearing surfaces. And with some magnetic bearings which only lessen the load on the bearing surface, not eliminate it, the extra weight could have a negative effect. |
Raul:
I'm not sure that I completely understand you, but my observations suggest that peripheral, vacuum and center clamps can all be positive, as long as the clamping force that they impart can be adjusted to the needs of the individual situation. And in general my experience has been that too little is preferable to too much.
I will add that center clamps help to terminate the noise and vibration caused by the spindle bearing - these devices address more than just the LP.
Also, the material and construction of the clamp are definitely audible.
BTW, was this question a prelude to some Raul-designed clamps which will again show how the AHEE has led audiophiles astray? (^0^)
cheers, jonathan |
Manitunc,
I agree, magnetic bearing's like yours and on Clearaudio's bigger CMB tables are unaffected by the additional weight. |
To some extent, there is bound to be a trade off in using a record weight and ring. While you will flatten records and get better coupling between record and platter, you may increase bearing noise through the added weight of those two pieces. That added noise combined with better coupling of the platter to the record, may significantly increase the noise heard through the stylus. It may also render some bearings inadequate or non functional, such as an air bearing or magnetic bearing. On my Transrotor Fat Bob, which has a magnetic bearing, I havent heard a problem using both, but it already has a massive platter and magnetic bearing. On a Rega, you might have a different result. |
I also tried a few different center weights for my VPI (with and without the rubber washer). I found that none of them improved on the sound of the original one piece Delrin VPI clamp and washer. Most sounded worse.
I have not tried a ring because I only have a few rarely played records that show a warp with the Delrin VPI clamp. I do have a speed controller, which means the peripheral weighting would probably have a minimal effect on speed stability, so I find it hard to justify that extra cost. |
Jonathan Carr using a direct drive turntable,...WHAT!
Would someone please speak up and set this guy straight,...
Johnathan I am a recent convert to your Kleos cartridge and now I am hooked, that is not easy to do and now I have to listen to the Olympus.
Regarding centre weight's and or peripheral rings, I don't use them on my tables. I sooner play with special platter mat's, new and vintage. |
Thanks Jonathan,
I have a 450gm centre clamp on my belt-drive Raven AC-3 and a 640gm clamp on the DD Victor TT-81.
Both clamps seem to improve the sound but at least never do harm.
Based on your impressions I shall continue to use them :-)
Do you know if your adjustable weight clamp is still available?......and if so, do you have a link?
Cheers
Henry |
Dover -
Yes I agree and that is what my post was about.maybe I wasn't clear.
my post started by implying the manufacturer sold me a weight without a washer. 800 grams worth. It lifted the edges of dish warped records. The other clamps I describe all use have the washers underneath and work great. BTW regarding sp10's torque. People have stood on it in the old days and it spins them.
There is absolutely no concern (my opinion) to what a weight any weight will do to an sp10. It does nothing to the speed rock solid.
My post was strictly about flatttening the records.
No less no more.
Some weights sounded better in my rig then others.
To the others - Experiment and find out. |
Ct0507
With a centre weight you get rid of the lifting record edges by optimising the thickness of the washer under the record. When you get the right thickness of the washer you can get the records flat around the perimeter. |
On your direct drive you might want to consider the impact of added weights and peripheral clamps as it may be negatively impacting the servos which have been designed for the original mass of the original platter.
On my Final Audio Parthenon it uses a 1.2kg gunmetal weight which has a proud rim around the bottom. The copper mat has an indent for the record label.
A washer sits under the record and the weight goes on top of the record. What I have found useful is that I have made several washers of varying thickness to optimise the flattening of the record. Obviously a peripheral ring might be better. |
One more story - FWIW
A few years ago I bought a center weight to try in place of the threaded clamp on my VPI TNT. Did it make a difference – not sure. It did look nicer spinning around especially when the light caught it. It also did make the dishwarp records worse - since it was strictly a weight concentrated on the middle so the lp edges rose more. That is a fact that I didn’t realize till I brought it home. It bothered me that the manufacturer who must have known this didn’t say anything to me about it.
So I saw that another niche was created and ring peripheral weights had come out. Being a crazy audiophile guy I was ready to buy one of those rings too :( but it would not fit on either of my VPI or SP10 platters because my tonearm design was too close for clearance. So never got that far like some of you. Now from what I am reading maybe it was a good thing.
So I have tried a few more various center weights like all of us – and have gotten to the point where I don’t use any of them anymore except the following basic clamps for dish warp records. They are cheap and allow u to exert the force required to flatten the dishwarp record.
The standard vpi rubber washer/ threaded clamp for threaded spindles.
The michell record clamp is a clone or like the VPI one for threadless spindles and I use it on my sp10.
Both of the above clamps cure for me the slightly warped/dish warped lps. Many more modern records 70Â’s - 80Â’s and newer are dish warped because they are so thin as we know.
My records are also not that bad. If I had one or two that one of these basic clamps did not cure enough to play I would replace it or not play it.
Hope this helps at least one person.
YMMV
Cheers |
Dear Jcarr: From your lates post: could I infer then that the subject is not if the peripheral or vacuum clamp or even " normal " clamps are good or not but the " range/level "/push-down force ( quantity. ) of control?
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Hi Henry:
Yes, I've tried various peripheral rim clamps and vacuum clamps (both add-ons and integral). In this case I found that I usually preferred the sound without peripheral or vacuum clamps. Even on my Micro-Seiki SZ-1S, which has a 28kg machined stainless-steel platter and integral vacuum clamp as well as air bearings for the platter and motor/flywheel, I ended up keeping the air bearings engaged and defeating the vacuum clamp (although I did prefer to insert a mat between LP and platter surface).
However, this is probably due to the fact that I own very few warped LPs. If I had more warped discs, I suspect that I would feel a greater fondness for peripheral or vacuum clamps.
In fairness, none of the peripheral or vacuum clamps that I have used offered such fine-grained control over the clamping force as my adjustable magnetic center clamp. I suppose that I could design such a peripheral clamp, but I have far too much on my design plate already!
cheers, jonathan |
Interesting Jonathan,
Have you also ever tried a peripheral rim weight?
Cheers
Henry |
I most frequently use a Marantz TT-1000 direct-drive turntable with a bonded-on graphite mat and a Graham Phantom II tonearm.
In the past I tried a variety of clamps of varying construction, material and weight on this turntable, and have found that heavier isn't always better. In fact, usually it wasn't.
Today I am using a clamp that has adjustable clamping force. The clamp itself is fairly light and simply drops onto the record label (like a gravity clamp). Internally, however, there is a neodymium magnet which is positioned above the turntable spindle (which is normally steel). The magnet is mounted on a fine-pitch screw mechanism which allows the distance between the magnet and the turntable spindle to be adjusted in very fine increments. If the distance between magnet and spindle increases, the clamping force decreases, and if the distance decreases, the clamping force increases.
Since the screw mechanism that adjusts the magnet has nothing that binds directly to the turntable spindle, the clamping force doesn't need to be reset every time the clamp is removed from the record (unlike a normal threaded clamp).
With this clamp I have been able to experiment with clamping force and sound quality. I find that I prefer the sound when the total clamping force isn't so high. I'd guess that the clamp weighs about 200~250 grams, and I usually have the magnet set so that it adds another 250 grams or so (estimated). The clamp can be set for much higher clamping force that what I typically have it at, but I find that the sound quality starts becoming compressed both in dynamics and timbre when the clamping force is too high. Maybe someone who can't stomach any trace of edginess at all in their sound would like this. Me, I find it the sound less emotionally involving, less intellectually interesting, and far too polite.
Sonically, the difference can be pretty big. Enough to make you come to different conclusions about the same piece of equipment (or LP pressing).
I also find that some LPs benefit from less clamping force than others - it seems to vary according to label and production era.
OTOH, I have not found that leaving the clamp off completely is better - a certain amount of clamping force, but in moderation, is what I find to work best (in my audio system).
If any of you have a clamp which allows fine adjustments to the clamping force, I encourage you to experiment and experience for yourself how the sound changes.
cheers, jonathan carr |
Rockitman and I are in agreement :) |
Oh come on Lew.......we have agreed on other occasions methinks :^) |
It all comes down to the brand/model of the tables... whether a ring is beneficial or not. Lighter tables, platters with matte's are probably not good candidates. Heavy weight tables with big heavy solid platter's that use no matte are another kettle of fish. I have gone back and forth with the ring on my table... Clearaudio Innovation Wood compact with a 15 lb. Hard Duralin type platter material. So far the outer ring is winning ! |
Just came across this thread. For once, Halcro and I are in agreement. I have never liked the effect of heavy record weights in the first place. Then I got hold of an original optional outer ring weight made by Kenwood 30 years ago for use with the L07D. (The Kenwood engineers were quite innovative and ahead of the times in their design for the L07D.) This ring can be used either over the lip of the LP, as Halcro et al describes, or under the outer lip of the LP, where it just adds peripheral mass of the platter. There is no question that it sounds best under the LP rather than over the lip of the LP. The Kenwood center record weight was an immediate bust, too, to my ears. I have a SOTA clamp, which is relatively low mass but pushes down on the center of the LP. That is less harmful to sound, for some reason. |
I have played the same record side several times in a row when adjusting and listening for changes, how else could you determine a change?. A lot of times it is hard enough to hear any difference from the set up changes I just made and I am sure I can't hear the record changing sound from repeated play. |
I was just over at someones place for a listen who uses a ring, places the plastic template to assist to align etc.
Also uses a centre clamp and has a mat.
While listening, in converstion I asked if I could hear his set-up with out the ring, mat and record clamp, I first got a quick look. The look was like are you ... but he was willing.
Was not willing to remove the mat in question though because he said he would then have to make adjustments to the arm height for the allowance difference which I understood.
So now that pce of music is done and I was asked what would I like to listen to, I said the same cut.
He said NO NO that he would not do that, I then listened to his reasoning for this.
I really wanted to hear the same record cut again during this process but he just would not do it.
I'm a bit confused, can someone shed some light here or is this going to be another debate?
He waits 24hours before playing because of .... I guess who ever agrees with this knows his reasoning.
Isn't this whole topic just a mith? I play mine over again otherwise how and the heck am I going to really identify the differences in what I'm hearing or am I incorrect and actually hearing the record it's self sonically changing.
We actually got into a bit of a debate because of this. I said if you don't listen to the same cut again and wait to listen say 24 hrs down the road how do you really know what's going on, to really identify the over all sonic diffferences how does one then have a acurate refference point.
I said too many other factors come into play.
I'm curious how do you do your comparisons.
If you play a record and play the same cut over do you notice sonic differences, if so what.
|
Lespier, the peripheral ring I'm familiar with (a friend uses it) came with a mounting jig that centers the ring perfectly and then is removed before playing. |
What is difficult to know is the clamp changing the sound because of the 'clamping' or is something else going on.
The way I see it, a peripheral clamp is going to very difficult(impossible??) to centre PERFECTLY, even if machined with a particular tt platter in mind. If not centred perfectly you will end up having an eccentric mass around the outside of the platter which would have to have some effect on speed stability.
So is what we're hearing really due to the clamping effect at all? |
Hmmm.....interesting about centre clamps?
I lived happily without one for 25 years on a Rega Planar 3 but have since tried one on both my turntables (Raven AC-3 and Victor TT-81).
Whilst I cannot detect with any confidence any benefits to the centre clamp on these two decks, I also cannot hear any detriment?
What to do....what to do?? |
As with Doak up above, I seriously question the use of clamps and weights (never tried an outer ring and don't plan to). I used a VPI clamp on my TNT for years and one day tried one of those silly looking Ringmats without the clamp. I've abandoned the Ringmat but never went back to the clamp except now and then I'll try one just to confirm that I was right :-)
And playing records now is SO much simpler. |
never occurred to me that the ring might be the culprit. Same here Nilthepill. I also left off the outer rim by chance because the inbuilt stylus guard on the Technics EPC-100Mk3 was scraping on it for the first few revolutions at the beginning of a record and voila.............the magic was back! The difference between 'magic' and 'pedestrian' in analogue is ephemeral. Without it, there is no reason to persist with the trials and tribulations of the 'record playing ritual'. With it, all adjustments are a joy. |
Here is one more vote for NOT using the ring. I, too, found that my Clearaudio periphery ring was making the music more digital like than analog. Since I had bought it i kept using it in the beginning wondering what is going on- never occurred to me that the ring might be the culprit. Since 'common sense' will tell you that a flatter record should perform better. after trying many tweaks. adjustments, one day i just omitted the ring and Valla! Glorious Analog sound.
I still have the ring and use it with few warped records- reluctantly. |
Not to beat a dead horse but, For me this hobby is about voicing a system to your taste. We've all heard systems that measure great but arent satisfying to listen to. I prefer some systems to others depending on the type of music (classical, jazz, etc) or source. I think the OP's statement reflects his system. There are times when my unclamped ES1 sings prettier than my Cosmos IV but in general I prefer the Sota. |
Elizabeth: "we are all aware of the little flaws we can see in others, (and how hard it is to see our own!)". EXCELLENT! (standing ovation) |
