Banquo363,
Thanks very much. Yes, I've placed the power supply on the Symposium precision couplers and sat that on the Symposium svelte platform - which sits on the birch shelf. These viscoelastic platforms still work effectively under electronics (such as power supplies and amplifiers - also spectacular between stands and speakers).
On the Gould, I much prefer the 1981 rendition (1982 recording). His introspection and maturity just seem more appealing and engaging. I also think the recording quality is better and his habitual background vocals just seem to add to the 1982 recording in ways that his 1955 cannot.Maybe that's all just a reflection of my own aging perspectives finding accord with his. |
Banquo363,
Sorry, just to add on the 1982 preferance, you get much more playing time to enjoy on his later and much slower rendition and I think the fact that I simply adore the music makes this a plus (not to mention that the more time plus better quality really do appeal on the miserly 'value for money' front)! |
Dear Dgob: No doubt the naked TT and stand alone arm board is working, good.
Only as a " precaution ": check with a level/spirit that the tonearm be leveled exactly as the TT platter, I mean in the horizontal plane.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul,
Thanks for the warning. I did spend an inordinate amount of time ensuring that both armtower/arm and tt were levelled exactly the same, within the limitations of the small spirit level that I use for this purpose. If I can find an even more accurate method/tool I will definitely try to make it even more exact if possible. If you (or anyone) have a suggestion of how to improve on this, it would be gratefully received.
Thanks again for your kind help throughout |
Dear Dgob: I'm not expert on levels/vials but maybe a digital one could help and with high accuracy and easy to use for that purpose.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Dgob,
Wonderful post and illuminating descriptions.
For newcomers to this thread and the sceptics out there, it would be good perhaps for you re-cap on what plinth you had used with the SP10Mk2 prior to 'nuding' it? |
Raul,
Thanks. I'll look into a digital option. |
Halcro,
Thanks for the kind words. Regarding the plinths tried, I tried a birch, aluminium and acrylic composite plinth. I also tried various directly coupled arm boards. These included ones made of birch/aluminium, ash and MDF.
Of the armboards, the ash was the best performer (in view of the achievements and criteria that I have used for the nude approach). The bespoke plinth is of my and my artisan brother-in-law's design. It performed well but the experiment with the nude and stand-alone approach has meant that we're back to the drawing board and trying to see if we can incorporate some of the apparent lessons into a new design.
This is only an exercise to see what is really possible (plinth wise) for those who MUST have a more traditional arrangement. However, given financial and time constraints at present, it might be quite some time before any advances are made on this front. When they are and assuming that the results are worth noting, I'll definitely feed back.
In truth and thanks largely to your and Raul's initial suggestions, the nude and stand alone approach are (as I've sought to explain) all that I could wish to achieve. |
Halcro,
Sorry, I should have also said that I have also based my comments on the nude approach in the light of my experience with the various other TT's that I have owned, which I have referenced before. |
Dear Dgob: Which tonearms do you already try/test on the naked TT?
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul,
Only the Moerch DP6 and Audiocraft AC3300 LB. |
Dgob, You might try a laser-type device for assuring that the table and arm mount are plane parallel. I believe such things are now commercially available. I would not completely trust a small spirit level; a large long carpenter's level would be better. That's what I use to make sure that platters and plinths are perpendicular to the force of gravity and parallel to each other. |
Dear Dgob: I assume that in both tonearm quality performance is first rate as you posted, thank's.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Very nice review Dgob kinda makes use wish you had your sp10 back Banquo ?
I have been using the AT-616s for a couple of weeks. I was able to make my ET 2.5 arm fit by raising it to its highest point and using higher spikes.
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/view_userimages.php?user_id=5181&image_id=41263
The 616s adjustability makes leveling of the sp10 platter very easy. For those familiar with the ET 2.5 ensuring the air bearing arm is level is even easier laser guided or regular level not required.
I still believe the key to the improvement was and this is gut feel only 75% isolated armboard and 25% getting the sp10 out of its plinth. Isolating and mass loading the armboard I feel was key.
Dear Dgob you listened to your setup with the armboard attached to the naked sp10 first it improved the sound sure but wasnt the bigger jump in quality getting the armboard isolated and mass loaded ?
Any thoughts on this.
Cheers Chris |
Dear Ct0517: I think that you could be right about that " isolated " subject. As you I can't be sure.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Ct0517,
I'm not altogether certain. Moving the Technics onto the AT616s made an immediate difference to staging, pitch and tone. However, isolating and mass-loading the armboard definitely enhanced these gains and brought about the full potential that I've pointed to above.
AS you'll recall from my earleir comments, one of my key interests was to see if the isolation/decoupling of turntable from armboard and plinth would reap rewards. It now seems beyond doubt to me that such isolation offers a huge step forward. |
Chris,
Sorry but just a quick follow up. Did you try the arm tower on your fourth AT616 and, if so, what was the outcome?
Thanks |
Lewm,
I do have a long carpenter's level that I use for making measurements of larger areas (of shelves, turntable etc). However, the small precision vial that I use can be used to ensure the level at a variety of (often small and intricate - arm tower etc) places/points/spaces.
Not withstanding the noted issues regarding using the larger spirit level here, I think the laser level sounds a really interesting idea and I think would now probably be fairly cost efficient as you suggest. I'll look into the practicalities and thanks for the suggestions. |
I still believe the key to the improvement was and this is gut feel only 75% isolated armboard and 25% getting the sp10 out of its plinth. Isolating and mass loading the armboard I feel was key. I have the same gut feel. The isolated and heavy arm boards I believe, are a revelation. |
Dear Dgob, I alredy mentioned how glad I was with your post
and results. Not only because I own an very good arm pod but also because I somehow feel to have won at least one
argument from Lew. However while I am really happy with my
Kuzma Stabi Reference I also know about the existance of
Kuzma XL . Not sure about the plinth but well about the armpod (both huge qua weight and price). But I have never
seen any comment questioning this armpod. So Mr. Kuzma was
at least an half Copernican before Halcro.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob: Yes those AT616 are really good supporting the TT but IMHO not so " firm " for a tonearm, I use it too with my AS TT motors.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Do you know where I can get that lasser vial?, thank you in advance.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Re: laser levels.
For anyone interested I have an inexpensive solution. I own a Lazerpro (CL2060) which is a 16" (38 CM) aluminum level with a built-in dot or line laser light. Place it on a nearby surface (check for horizontal with the built in bubble level) adjusted for the height of your motor unit and use the laser line option to project the exact elevation for your arm mount.
I purchased the Lazerpro to facilitate speaker toe-in. That was several years ago but I'm certain it was less than $20. |
Dear Nandric, For what it's worth, there is no argument (because I have stopped arguing), and there is no winner (because the outcome is subjective). If you've noticed, I am not posting here as regards my opinion on outboard tonearms and plinth-less SP10s. (The SP10 and Henry's Victor seem to be the two tables for which there are subjective data, plus Nicola's Kuzma.) Further, I will keep my mouth shut until I try it myself.
BUT, what tonearms are you guys using? Given the rather large square "skirt" that surrounds the platter of the SP10 and the space needed for an outboard arm pod, it would seem to me that this can only be done with tonearms that are at least 10-inchers and longer, pivot to stylus. Yes?
Dgob, I wish I could see a photo of your set-up. |
Dear pryso: Where can I find it?, thank you in advance.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul, From where you are, I would go on-line at Sears or Home Depot or even eBay, and just order by mail. If that's not possible, let me know. |
Dear Lewn you wrote.
BUT, what tonearms are you guys using? Given the rather large square "skirt" that surrounds the platter of the SP10 and the space needed for an outboard arm pod, it would seem to me that this can only be done with tonearms that are at least 10-inchers and longer, pivot to stylus. Yes?
I would think anyone pursuing this wants the advantage of using any arm they want. My VPI pivot arm is 12 so I cant verify this but considering there is no real estate constraint here other than your actual platform, your armpod need only be big enough to accept the bolts that the tonearm attaches to and you can place it anywhere on your platform that it lines up. Maybe Raul, Dgob, or Banquo can verify the 9 tonearm ?
I realize there are some on this thread that do not support the ET and/or linear air line bearing arms in general so I am saying this for those reading with ETs as there are quite a number of us out there.
This combo sp10 / ET arm is a natural fit as both have straight edges. Alignment could not be any easier. The ETs multi adjustments allow it to be mounted on whichever side of the sp10 you may want it on. If you look at my link in the previous post you will see it was on the other side when I used a plinth. The space between the sp10 and ET arm collar is 2 credit cards.
Dear Nandric that Kuzma XL air line tonearm you mention sure reminds me of another tonearm?
Dear Dgob I agree with what Rail said about using the 616s for an arm pod they squish when pressed much like the feet of my VPI TNT table. I would have tried it anyway if I could to hear regardless there are no rules of engagment here but my armboard is 12 inches long and 4 inches wide on 3 spikes. Note the ET arm will fit easily on a heavy brass 3 inch or bigger round armpod.
FWIW - AT616 versus my previous setup Mapleshade Spikes - too close to tell really but the 616s are adjustable so there - I believe any real $$ should go into a better armpod anyway supporting the theory 75% armpod 25% plinthless DD TT as the reason for the sound improvement.
Cheers Chris |
Chris, FYI a Triplanar, and probably other 9-inch tonearms where the pivot is offset to the right of the vertical mounting shaft (e.g., 9-inch Reed or Talea), is virtually unusable with SP10 due to that "skirt", unless you can tolerate a really weird angle when the tonearm is at rest such that it extends over the right front corner of the chassis. Yes, a straight-line tonearm like yours does work fine with SP10, plinth or no plinth.
Raul, for the heck of it I went to the Home Depot website. There I searched under "laser level" and found 5 pages of choices at prices ranging from less than $20 (per Pryso) to more than $1000! |
Good info Lewn - I dont have a 9" arm. A dis-advantage of the ET arm is it sits too close to the platter and does not allow for a ring - if u wanted to experiment. |
Raul, and others interested in low cost laser levels -
This site offers a model that looks like mine with a slightly different model #, CL6062. Price is $19.95 There may be other sellers.
http://www2.dealtime.com/lazerpro-cl2062/products |
A 9" arm can work but some acrobatics need to take place. IIRC, part of my pod needs to be directly below the sp10's skirt in order for it to work.
Dgob: I was the one who wanted to try an AT 616 underneath my pod. It was just a thought since I have an extra footer and wanted to make use of it. I haven't tried it yet since my TT (and I) is in purgatory.
Chris: don't tease me. Since I took my TT in for repairs, I have bought the AT 616's, another tonearm, 3 carts, 2 tonearm wires, 4 headshells, and had 2 pods designed and fabricated all geared towards a sp10 that may or may not ever be repaired. Deadline is the end of this month. Either I get it back or I go shopping for another one (hope that one works!). |
Dear Lewm/Pryso: Thank you, appreciate that.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Banquo363/Chris.
Apologies for the mix up on the AT616 and arm tower issue: a mix of old age and inattentiveness I fear.
Lewm,
Both my arms are 9" or less and work perfectly on the Technics SP10 Mk2. Don't let concerns about size stop you trying this all out. It's definitely worth it. |
Lewm,
I will post photo's of the arm tower as soon as I can and let you know.
If you look at the design of Halcro's armpod, you can see how an off-set mounting hole can allow great flexibility (even more than my current arrangement) for mounting and locating any tonearm. Something for the future maybe. |
Dear Lew, I think that an arm pod for a 9'' tonearm is more
difficult to make then for 10'' or 12'' arms; one need to
cut the part near the platter. But more interesting is the
question about the material and construction. On my Kuzma
Stabi Ref. Kuzma used a sandwich of two layers acryl and
one of aluminium between them for the plinth and two layers for the armbase; aluminium (1x), acryl (1x). But for
his XL model he used only brass. The XL is all about the
mass (demping?) but the esthetics was obviosly also important. I wish I could afford one. BTW the TT and the arm pod are seldom offered second hand in contrdisticion to
the linear arm. As I mentioned elswhere my Reed arm pod is
made from different layers : steel (2x);cork (2x); granite
(2x) and acryl (1x). So it seems to me that there are 3
possibilitys: mass demping, no demping and sandwich constructions of various kinds.
Regards, |
Lewm,
I have posted a couple of photo's of the arm tower arrangement under the headings 'Arm Tower AS' on my System page. |
My apologies Banquo.
Actually I sort of understand how you feel as I travel between two properties weekly these days and only have vinyl set up at one. My TNT is too cumbersome to move there.
Considering the material needed for an armpod can be picked up, cut and ready to go by evening I am seriously considering another DD unit to set up plintless there with armpod.
|
|
Dear Dgob: I can see why you ask for other opinions on the MF-100.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
In the US there is an on-line business that can sell you a solid brass, bronze, stainless steel, or alu cylinder in your choice of diameters and pre-cut to your desired length (=height). Here is one page of their website that I have been looking at for armboard material:
http://www.onlinemetals.com/merchant.cfm?id=809&step=2&top_cat=79
Nandric, if you want me to buy a brass cylinder for you and ship it to you, I will be happy to do that. Or perhaps they will ship to you direct. |
Ebm if interested email me
I will let you know the steps to produce a basic arm pod / board for your setup. |
Raul,
I would dearly love to give it another whirl and so any feedback might enduce me to do so.
Thanks |
Dear Lew, Thanks for your kindness but I have a fitter(?) or technician with an lathe who already made some tonearm
parts for me. Besides if I needed an second arm pod I would
order by Vidmantas. But I can at last give you some advice.
Because we both own the Reed and the Triplanar I know what
you need to do if you intend to experiment with the'nacked objects'. You need just a bar of brass ,10cm wide, with 3
holes with thread on each side. Your sevings will be such
that you can afford the most exotic spikes one can imagine.
Regards,
Regards, |
Dear Dgob: I will do it, I share your same interest on the subject.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Raul,
Thanks and I look forward to reading it. I have also posted a comment on my System page about which I have questions. It would be interesting to hear other views on my uncertainty. Anyway, a paraphrase of what I posted there is:
"Following my above appraisal of the detached and nude set up, I should just add that I feel slightly sensitive to (or curious about) the psychoacoustic elements in hifi. For example, I am not certain if the issues of soundstage and of imaging are genuine/completley authentic.
It seems that in a live performance one is very rarely (if ever) as acoustically aware of space between musicians or their three dimensionality. My suspicion is that hifi compensates for the visual stimuli that is provided in a live performance with the over emphasis of these audible features. Small ensemble acoustic or vocal performances might be the occasional exceptions to this.
Just food for thought and a reflection on the hifi norms to which I refered in my above appraisal.
Thoughts welcomed" |
It seems that in a live performance one is very rarely (if ever) as acoustically aware of space between musicians or their three dimensionality. My suspicion is that hifi compensates for the visual stimuli that is provided in a live performance with the over emphasis of these audible features. Small ensemble acoustic or vocal performances might be the occasional exceptions to this. Its been my impression that there are several things that can contribute to this- how a recording is made (many are un-natural) and how well its details are reproduced. For this subject though, let's throw out the un-natural recordings, at least for now. What I have have found is that as a system looses the ability to reproduce low level detail (and consequently ambient information) the result is that the musicians in the ensemble tend to have a quality if a cardboard facsimile rather than the real person. So spaces between the instruments are larger, making the individual instruments seem to be in greater relief. Now as the system attains greater ability to reproduce ambient information, that information tends to flesh out the performers and fill the spaces in between. This causes the soundstage to *seem* less distinct, until one realizes how much more reflection information is being reproduced! Of course in a real music situation, the ambient information is seamless with the instruments themselves, but I think a lot has to do with the space in which the music occurs. Having done a lot of recording and listening in such spaces locally, I don't think I can agree with the comments in quotes, at least with the recordings I have heard- I hear the imaging information quite easily in those rooms and halls, whether live or recorded! |
Atmasphere,
Thanks for your thoughts on the matter and - I think - I agree. My early morning comments were confused at best. Acoustic space/venue; the method of delivery (location and quality of microphones, amps and/or speakers); proximity to performers and the quality of the relevant recording are the most important things concerning imaging and staging. My distraction was with psychoacoustics and what we listen for when playing hifi.
Ironically, I suspect it was the question of un-natural recordings that initiated my outpourings here: I have recently been treated to a diet of some overly produced (what I am reliably informed is) popular music with my children - Madonna most memorably. I think we can put aside 'system limitations concerning low level and ambient detail' here: not withstanding your interesting experiences and views.
More awake and a little less short
Thanks |
Dear Dgob: What we hear at home through our each one audio system is what microphones " heard " and that are way near the " stage/venues " that our seat position in the music hall.
In the other side the " micros " are not only sensitive but with wider frequency range that ours ears. As a fact there are many reasons why we heard what we heard at home against in live concerts and its differences.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Ralph, I believe there is one more factor in the perception of three-dimensionality or spaciousness -- how close one sits for a live performance. One season as an experiment I chose different seating locations for each of a half-dozen concerts by our local symphony. The variations in sonic effect were sobering. Unless I was front-center, I din't hear the live spatiality I hear in some recordings.
I think a major influence in the awareness/desirability of soundstage and spaciousness was Harry Pearson at TAS. Those descriptions could be counted upon with every review he wrote. Then I learned that his preferred seat at Carnegie Hall (and I must suppose other venues) was row 2 or 3, dead center. Well, that explained a lot.
Now, how ironic that most older recordings were made with 1-3 primary mics which were better able to capture the natural sonic space of the program, even when home audio equipment did not product it so well. But currently with (some) improvements in the equipment which better allow spatiality to be reproduced, everything is multi-multi mic'ed and channel mixed so that artificial reverb must be added to provide any sense of three-dimensionality. |
Raul,
I totally agree and, I suppose, have tried to suggest some of that in my comments. I suppose I did not really note the importance of differences between the individual listening room and concert hall on scale/volume and acoustic behaviour and how this alone impacts on attempts to exactly reproduce the live experience of a large number of recordings. I have tried to reflect on this on other threads but not so well in my above outburst, which was fueled largely by tiredness and irritability I think.
Nevertheless, my views that there are clear distinctions and that there are inevitable psychacoustic factors when reproducing performances through hifi are getting form and clarification through some of the interesting responses that it is raising and yours is a well considered and much appreciated one.
Many thanks again |
