2. analog
  3. 1366040022

Everything about this is wrong...

I just finished a refurb/rebuild of a turntable, and I'm still puzzled.
The 'table is a Transcriptors Transcriber - yes this is the one where the "arm" is integral with the lid, and the platter itself moves tangentially. This unit just about breaks every rule of turntable design. The top and sides are glass; the record is suspended on a number of rubber nipples; and of course as the tangential movement is incremental one could make the argument that the stylus is never in the right position - the platter is always 'catching up'

So, it's a nightmare of sensible design - on paper. It may be beautiful to look at, but it makes no sense in terms of conventional thinking. And, if it had been such a good idea, unconventional or not, the idea would have caught on.

I compared the sound to two other turntables: one was a well-modified Thorens 150 AB (zero issues with this unit, and perfectly set up) and the other was a DD Kenwood 7010 from Japan, again perfectly set up. Arguably, neither of these tables is the absolute top-drawer, but they're both very good; maybe with slightly different signatures, but having compared them with today's offerings I've never felt the need to do much about upgrading them.

I have a number of excellent Shure V15 III cartridges, and this being a traditional choice, one was attached and adjusted. The records varied, but a re-issue of Stevie Wonder's Talking Book was the most profound shock!

Nothing prepared me for the simply holographic imaging that the Transcriber produced. The music had the sounds I am used to, but the soundstage was something I`ve never experienced to such a degree. To reiterate, there was nothing in the basic sonic signature that was very different from what I`m used to; but the imaging itself was simply extraordinary. I've tried some pretty exotic front ends in the past, but never felt like radically upgrading: yes, there were certainly differences when using a $10K turntable and arm/cartridge, but never did I think these were anything but subtle and probably not worthwhile.

Bottom line: what do you think is going on? I rebuilt the Transcriber for fun only. I didn't think the sound would be anything out of the ordinary - in fact I though quite the opposite. But, initially, I am stunned, and prepared to think that my assumptions were all just that - groundless assumptions.
As the title suggests, everything about this turntable is wrong, and it shouldn't have produced the extraordinarily involving music that I heard last night. But it seems to have done just that. Now I'm wondering what else I'm going to hear from my record collection....

The system is a Quad: ESL 57 speakers, Quad amp and pre-amp, and the cabling is sound throughout. Capable of sublime music, and one I do not think I will ever `improve`.
I try to keep in touch with what's going on in the industry, regularly visiting the high-end audio stores and always come away relieved that my money is safe!

But....this odd turntable, this masterpiece of contrary thinking is doing things I have rarely even come close to experiencing. Why?
57s4me
dover
2,243 posts
 
The worst case scenario would be eccentric records - I cant see that the feedback loop would be quick enough to prevent the cantilever from being continually loaded up adversely.

The other question is what condition would your records be in after a few years of being played by a stylus that is being loaded up out of time with the record playback requirements. I suspect you could get long term record damage in the high frequencies.
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,138 posts
 
I suspect that back in the day, they never thought about 180 gm or 200 gm records.
57s4me OP
30 posts
 
Yes, these questions occur to me as well.

Watching the arm negotiate a warp is a non-event; given the lack of mass, allied to ultra-high compliance there is simply no drama.
Bear in mind that this arm was reputed to track perfectly at 1/10 gram (!) and the warp point seems not to be relevant. I wouldn't dream of challenging my vinyl with a tenth of a gram, and instead use a more conventional tracking force - with superlative results.

Regarding the 1/10 degree mis-alignment with the groove: with a pivoting arm the alignment will I think always be worse. Yes, it may well be perfect at one or even two points, but geometry is just that, and the rest of the record will suffer becoause of it. To what degree might be an interesting debate...

And, unless we are uber-anal, I would think that most of us vinylites will use a tracking height that fits the majority of the records out there. I have read of people that will re-calibrate the tonearm height to account for the thickness of the record; I'm a dedicated listener, and I love my vinyl, but this would be too much for the likes of me. So, another either non-issue, or just one that I conveniently ignore :-)

Thanks to Swampwalker - you beat me to it!
57s4me OP
30 posts
 
Actusreus. To answer your question, the 'arm' is unipivoted on a jewel bearing. Up-and-down is perfectly handled.
gib48189
1 posts
 
I just happened to come across this thread. I have a Transcriber, have had it for more than 30 years. I purchased it new, had it stored for many years, unpacked it last year and have been using it again. I have not read this entire thread, but I have been, and always be amazed at how well it plays. I have it running through a Carver 6250 receiver and the pair of DCM TimeWindows that I also have owned for more than 30 years. Simply put, a sound stage and presence that are just amazing. I can post some detailed pictures if there is interest.
More to discover