Hmmm Mike, perhaps your Fisher, like the Lenco and the idler-wheels it represents, represents a Threat to the High End ;-)!! I have to say I just had one of the most intense musical experiences of my life, AGAIN, thanks to both the Garrard and the Lenco. I've gone back to the KEF Reference 103.2's, these speakers produce impossible SPLs for their small size, unbelievable detail and astounding dynamics micro and macro! They deserve every bit of the quasi-religious underground awe they generate. Of course, it helps to have Giant Idler-Wheel Drives which mercilessly crush high-end belt-drive after increasingly high-end belt-drives. AND DDs.
Hi Turboglo, this just goes to show why the idler and the Lenco were overlooked for so long: assuming all the judgments/character assassination were done and warranted, no one even bothered to take these old machines/technology seriously and test them in a good system. This goes as well for various vintage/"passé" speakers (AR2ax's, etc.), amps (vintage Sony, recently having matched and in some ways bested a Classé Audio DR-8) and so on. No one ever mounted a serious tonearm on a Lenco (except a very few who reported and were shouted down as I reported in the early days of Da Thread) to see if it rated (as they were doing the Garrards), and definitely no one was mounting a serious cartridge on record changers such as the Duals and Garrards and Elacs to see just how good those were!! Sorry to hear about your cartridge mishap, try Sound-smith in the 'States, they have a good reputation. Anyway, part of the Secret of the Idlers is to pay attention to all bearings, once you restore/clean those and relube the Dual, and clean the ilder-wheel, it will jump some more in quality!! Have fun, good as these are, they do not match either the Lencos or the big Garrards, the increase in speed stability and everything is palpable and obvious. My own Elac was so good it had me worried and running to do a serious comparison, but once the comparison was done it was clearly audible. But STILL, a record-changer can be a very serious machine, and as you found out even these can still be superior in many ways to high-end belt-drives!! It's the drive system of course.
And speaking of Threats, while Lencos I have sent out Crush belt-drives (and DDs) of higher and higher pedigree, so does the Garrard. The Garrard continues to mercilessly pummel the poor little Platine AND, according to reports, the latest State of the Art DDs. More on this as things develop.
As I've written many times, DD motors, which are their platter spindles, revolve very slowly, either 45 RPM or 33 1/3 RPM, since it is indeed Direct Drive. This means any motor/revolution/speed imperfections (and ALL physical systems are imperfect) are VASTLY amplified as compared with even belt-drives (150-300 RPM typically) and of course, idler-wheel drives (1500-1800 RPMs). Now, DD manufacturers always make much of the impressive and advanced devices they use to control the platter speed, using either a quartz reference, or some sort of servo-control/computerized system (better as it is not as audible), such as that used by Grand Prix, which checks the speed 5000 times a second! Thing is, DDs NEED this type of control, it is a WEAKNESS, not a strength to be Trumpeted to overawe. Don't get fooled by technology: a good idler-wheel drive CRUSHES digital media (VERY high-tech), for instance, when properly set-up, as will become more and more recognized with time, never fear. The Idler is Coming to Get You too, DD, not just the poor, put-upon Belt-Drive ;-). Why? Because the idler uses a pure analogue mechanical system to achieve smooth and unstoppable speed stability, pure momentum, pure inertia, pure torque and power; not computer sampling and rectification, which again is necessary due to WEAKNESS (i.e. slow revolution of imperfect motor), not a plus because it is a strength.
Once again, with FEELING: "Due to the high rotational speed of these motors, great relative mass and so high torque, no expensive solutions need be made to address the weak motors now used in high-end decks. The platters weigh about 8-10 pounds, with much of the mass concentrated on the periphery: the old boys understood flywheel effect to ensure stable speed. The platter is machined and hand-balanced in a lab. Even the motor is hand-balanced in a lab, and weighs something like 3-4 pounds, and runs silently on its lubricated bearings. Think of it: a high-torque motor spinning at well over 1500 RPMs (compared to a belt-drive motor's average 150-300) which pretty well wipes out speed variations by itself. The idler wheel contacts the motor spindle directly, while contacting the platter directly on its other side, thus transmitting most/all of that torque without any belt stretching. Many high-end decks offer thread belts which don't stretch, thus giving an improvement in sound. But the platter is also a flywheel, and so evens out whatever speed variations there may be in the motor. It's a closed system (motor-platter, platter-motor) and speed variations brought on by groove modulations don't stand a chance in this rig, and it is clearly audible."
So, despite current DDs generating the most impressive speed stability figures ever achieved, idler-wheel drives still have better de facto speed stability in action, when actually playing a record. This increased speed stability (even over a measured/claimed 0.002%) translates into: better and more impactful transients, more SLAM and HEFT, better dynamics micro and macro, more PRaT, better bass, better gestalt, etc. Not only does it translate into these things, these things are the proof the speed stability is better in practice!!
Now something I was not aware of when I sent out the Giant Garrard, was the fellow already had a Garrard set up, in Cain & Cain plinth. He did not find it impressive next to his Platine Verdier (which truly is a work of engineering art), and really did not expect much from my particular high-mass approach, (though he was excited and interested evidently or he would not have proceeded). Of course, if you extrapolate, you know what happened: the high-mass birch-ply/MDF plinth massacred the hardwood low-mass two-tier Cain & Cain, in spite of the separate tonearm-board, of the hardwood and all the clever and more complex design features. Again, it is results which matter, not complexity for the sake of complexity!! The massive birch-ply/MDF plinth is simple, it is CLD, it is neutral, it is HEAVY, it absorbs noise, it is economically-feasible, it is EFFECTIVE. As with the Lenco all on its own, trust your senses, suspect your poisoned brain of prejudices (which includes a love of complexity).
The Lencos and Garrards are out there conquering, and this will continue. I have nothing against the two other systems (I've experimented with BDs, and am still experimenting with DDs), to me this is simply a discussion (which I won't let die out, a least for now or until I get bored), backed by experiments and evidence (which I continue to both collect AND generate), of which of the three systems is superior. The idler IS - I believe - the best of the three systems, and so far the evidence AND logic support me. And now for the Garrard/Lenco/Idler Marching Song, aimed at BDs and DDs, sing along now: DOOM doom doom doom; DOOM doom doom doom....:-). Vive la Lenco, Vive la Garrard, Vive la Idler-Wheel!!!
