Dear Dougdeacon,
*I know a Clearaudio Master Ref owner who dumped his three stock motors in favor of one retrofitted Teres motor/controller unit, with improved results*
Could you confirm that you are indeed referring to the Clearaudio Master Reference (and not the Maximum Solution)-in which case I would appreciate more info on the results of the motor swapping.
Many thanks in advance,
Kostas |
hi all
i personally feel that the better you know someone the better the chances of a better service
many audiophiles evaluate components by living with them
the biggest problem [at least here in the uk] is the limited stock of the audio outlet
the system i am using at the moment COULD NOT be supplied to me by any uk dealer
so for me at least getting it right has been a case of trial and error
probably not the most cost effective method but you do get to hear a lot of good audio products in the process |
.
Pauly,
.
The original question for this thread that was asked was Has anyone tried the new motor on their existing/old Teres, and does it seem like the upgrade is worth it ?
.
Lets see if we can at least initially agree that you have made an effort to divert this thread to an assault (please use another adjective if you believe assault to be inaccurate or over stated) on the Teres / Galibier business model.
.
The premise from your earlier postings was that you are a banker and want to see a return on your investment and that you are losing money by having it tied up for 6-12 months. The waiting periods are generally far less than 6 12 months.
.
The failing in your logic and comments is that you have neglected to account for the fact that the vendor for your table of preference that distributes through the normal reatail distribution chain is charing more or less twice the price that he would charge if he were using the Teres business model.
.
So, at this point you would have to begin your financial comparisons by doubling the cost of your table (assuming that the tables are equal in sonic value). You would need to check with Chris / Thom to see what arrangements are possible for auditions before you comment that there is no system provided for auditions.
.
You are more than welcome to bring your current table down to Miami for a comparison to see if the Teres does in fact stand up from a sonic perspective and provides twice the value.
.
Unless you are in a position to earn well over 100 % per annum on your cash in hand to cover savings created by the price differential emanating from buying through the normal retail distribution chain versus vs. buying direct from either Chris or Thom, your logic is quite flawed. If you are able to earn over 100 % per annum without risk, please clue me in to your methodology of investing so that I can shift my investment strategies and allow me to not have to go to the office on Monday or any day there after
.
Your point: Second, my manufacturer of choice allows me to evaluate the product of my choice in my own system, in my own sound room, in a matter weeks, two to be exact. Again, you or anyone working through the normal retail chain can buy something out of inventory and that would facilitate an audition with little lead time , but the Teres and Galibier tables are built to order and there is no inventory and are selling at more or less have the price. I am sure that Chris and Thom would be delighted to keep an inventory of all their models on hand if you and or their customers would allow them to charge twice the selling price..
.
If you are put off by Dans reaction to your snippy and condescending comments, you might want to try putting yourself in his place having had your postings directed at you by someone else. You can go through Dans postings on previous threads and with the exception of him rising against aggressive posts like yours, his time has been spent offering positive and helpful comments. He just seems not to suffer fools well and I more than forgive him for that (actually, I smile and cheer him on).
.
I am sorry and quite sure that you will not accept my appraisal that your postings have been delivered with an arrogant and pompous tone, but as a bystander, that is my initial reaction.
As a final comment, I would say that many and most that have heard a recent production Teres Turntable in their own systems would agree that the Teres TTs best most of what is out there. That being said, Teres tables are certainly in the upper echelon of tables that are available from a sonics, value to price, and reliability point of view.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
Kostas 1,
I may have gotten the model name wrong, but it was the one with three motors. If that's the Maximum Solution, I apologize for the confusion.
I haven't heard this rig myself, the owner doesn't live near me. But he sent photos and we traded emails. His report was similar to what I've heard when comparing elastic drive belts to the non-elastic drive tape used on most Teres-type tables: less slewing of leading edge transients, better pitch accuracy on sustained notes, slightly more dynamic.
I'd expect his improvement was not as large on the big CA table as on mine. After all, he did have three motors and three belts vs. my one, but it was an audible uprgade and he's sticking with it (unless he decides to try the Verus of course).
Not much, but I hope that helps,
Doug |
I was going to mention the hole in Pauly's economics, but Jtimothya and Cello beat me to it.
Saving 1-2% via improved cash flow by paying 80-100% more to subsidize dealer and distributor inventories is no savings, and believing so is naive.
Our banker friend didn't get a "free" trial, nothing in business is free. He paid for the convenience he demands and delivery on demand in higher prices. His dealer may not itemize inventory carrying costs and GSA expenses on their invoices, but they certainly built them into their markup before quoting Pauly a selling price. If they didn't do so, they'd go out of business.
Dealers charge margins to cover their costs and a profit. If there's a distributor in the chain between Oracle and the dealer then there are two margins. If Pauly were comfortable with a manufacturer-direct product he could have kept those margins for himself, at the cost of 1-2% cash flow and a waiting period. That's my idea of a good ROI.
This conversation is a diversion from the OP's question about comparative drive technologies and the Verus as a specific implementation. If it were entertaining it might be worthwhile, but it's just naive economics with an attitude.
Doug
|
Hi Tim
I dont think a brick and mortar established dealer network is the way to go either. As you correctly point out, it takes significant investment. I doubt it will produce a significant enough increase in sales to cover the costs and even when finances is available and cost could be covered, cutting cost is always a good idea.
I was thinking more down the lines of an informal reference based system. The model I normally use to explain is that of a small builder. (I used to deal with small business loans some time ago and spent countless hours advising the business owners) Rather than having to build a spec house, pool, roof, deck etc., a builder can refer prospective clients to jobs he has done. I recently had my driveway paved and had a look at couple of jobs in the neighborhood before choosing the builder. A simple but very effective what to demonstrate your products and services.
There is a tremendous amount of goodwill in the audio community, so I am sure there will not be a shortage of folks who would participate. Their benefit would be a closer relationship with the manufacturer, and the prospective buyer has the benefit of talking to a real owner rather than a pushy salesman. I have been invited into homes to look at both DIY speakers and amps, so I have no doubts this model would for a TT manufacturer also.
In short, there is more than one way to skin a cat. I am somewhat surprised at some of the responses I saw on the thread. It seems taking a risk is worn as a badge of honor.
As for trade-offs and the costs. Distribution channels and the convenience thereof has cost associated to them, that is true. So has machine tools and R&D. So to minimize cost, I chose a product where the sunk cost of R&D and machine tools were already written off, and not factored in the price.
I agree Teres is a successful enterprise and I wish them all the best. Hopefully one day I will have the opportunity to audition some of their products in the Philly/DC area.
Regards
Paul |
+++ I was going to mention the hole in Pauly's economics +++
Yep, not having a dealer network does save money. 100% correct. But who do you think pays for R&D? Who pays for the machine tools? Yep, you guessed it
you do.
Sunk costs such as R&D and tooling costs are factored in the price, and low retail prices can be achieved only through economies of scale. The more units that can be moved, the lower the cost assigned to each unit. This is economics, pure and simple.
Besides, you think Oracle still has outstanding liabilities on the Delphi tooling machines? On R&D? I would think zero, no? The overheads on a Delphi is potentially much lower than that on a Teres.
If that sounds far fetched to you, consider a DL103. Dirt cheap with amazing performance. Denon can sell them at this low price via a dealer network because ALL
sunk cost pertaining to machine tools and R&D have been written off many years ago.
+++ His dealer may not itemize inventory carrying costs and GSA expenses on their invoices, but they certainly built them into their markup before quoting Pauly a selling price +++
My dealer doesnt carry stock.
+++ If they didn't do so, they'd go out of business +++
This will come as a big surprise to him.
+++ Saving 1-2% via improved cash flow by paying 80-100% more to subsidize dealer and distributor inventories is no savings, and believing so is naïve +++
I cannot comment on your numbers other than to say that if they are indeed accurate no audio dealer on the planet should make use of a dealer network. Since the majority do, and I assume they have sound business plans, I can only surmise your numbers are either totally fictitious and/or you have left some minor facts out to prove your point.
Thats really not nice Doug.
+++ If there's a distributor in the chain between Oracle and the dealer then there are two margins. +++
Actually, there are many more margins than only two. Unless Oracle mine the metals and manufacture all the components themselves, I paid multiple margins. I do believe Teres also has suppliers, so you paid multiple margins also.
And if you used a credit card or cash card, you possibly help finance my Oracle. Thanks Doug.
+++ That's my idea of a good ROI. +++
Indeed. Since ROI is Net income/Investment, ROI is 0% if you keep the product, < 0% if you return it. To me, <0% ROI is not a good thing.
+++ naïve economics +++
LOL. Yep, it sure is.
Regards
Paul |
I'd like to get back to the original topic. Since there are no "Primate Reports" to read I guess I'll play along.
I'm sorry. I can't any of this "investment" argument seriously at all! C'mon, we're talking about depreciable consumer goods here! There's no investment. You'd better be spending play money on this stuff or you're going to be in the soup lines later in life. I can just see me taking this idea to my investment dudes. "Hey, guys! I've got this great idea! Audio equipment!" I'm sure I could still go on with my great idea even after they all tell me to take my business elsewhere.
It's o.k., Banker Boy. I'm sure your Oracle is a fine 'table.
Oh! And since we're waggling packages at each other, every time you use the internet, pick up a phone, turn on your t.v., your helping fund my toys. Thanks, Banker Boy! |
Pauly,
Kudos to the 3 Ds and Cello,
"Taking a chance," might be considered to be a badge of honor, unless you have the hours, years, and dollars, AND WILL, to make a mistake by trying something that might make a difference. If proven performance is what you're looking for , check out the Audiogon listings for " The best of everything," on the market yesterday, you can't beat the price.-----The price is BANKABLE.
I spoke with Chris at Teres, thanks Larry, regarding TT isolation and the conversation was beneficial. True gentleman in the audio industry will impart their knowledge without a ulterior motive-- financial.
I've been reading the Icons of Audiogon for a few years and finally decided to couple their TT knowledge and experience with my DIY gene. I've spent enough building a TT, that should be up and running in a month or two, that would have enabled me to purchase a Walker, or the Continuum, the cheap model!!. When it's done, I'll love the way it sounds, after all , half of enjoying music is the mood you're in when the stylus drops. When you couple technology with musical passion, you win, regardless of the price you've paid for the gear.
Being a small business owner in Virginia, with only one competitor 40 times my size, on the California - Mexico border, I realize that value and service is what it takes to survive.
If you rely on, and buy, the tried and true engineering of yesterday, Just buy USED.
Ken |
This discussion of business/marketing/sales has been truly, um, fascinating, but still no replies to what the 'Verus' option will do the finish of the Teres wood platter. I won't fully repeat my post, but any thoughts and or concerns? Will new owners be applying 'friction' tape to the platter to protect it? Can no one hear my cries of pain and anguish? |
Johnbrown,
Sorry your very interesting question got lost in the (fascinating) noise floor of that other discussion.
Cocobolo is pretty durable of course. I imagine the O-ring will wear about 100 X faster. I'm certainly not worried about any short term wear or damage during listening tests.
Still, it's a valid question. Even if the wood doesn't wear, any material worn off the O-ring could get deposited in the grain and leave a permanent ring.
How about a strip of metal? A flat black finish would virtually disappear against the cocobolo background. Might even look nice...
|
Thanks Doug-
As I said in the first post, knowing the Teres quest for quality, I assume a platter designed for an outboard drive would have a ring of alumininum/pvc/or etc because, at the very least, the drive will take the finish off of the wood. And, eventually, work into the wood itself
I realize this has nothing to do with sonics, but the Teres models are sold not only on their musical merits, but also on their gorgeous looks, so I'm wondering if owners looking to upgrade have any reservations.
Believe me, not trying to rain on a parade-just curious, because if (when) I own a Teres, I want it to look 'as new' for as long as possible. |
Johnbrown, contact from the o-ring will cause some wear on the platter, but so do belts and strings. It seems that the amount of wear would be proportional to the size of the contact area. So the amount of wear would probably be about the same as with a narrow belt or a string. But the forces involved here are very small so this is not a big issue.
I have no concerns about the o-ring damaging wood platters. Cocobolo is very hard and is considerably more durable than PVC and would have about the same durability as aluminum. Cocobolo is quite unlike common north American hardwoods. It is one of the few woods that sinks in water and has rigidity and hardness that approaches brass and aluminum. So there is no need to add a contact surface.
Chris |
An interesting question. Maybe Teres will offer up some info.
I think that Teres uses a mix of oil and poly as the finish. I don't think the o-ring would wear it off, but it may cause a track to become visible after a while. There is not much pressure on the platter from the mylar belts so I wouldn't expect there to be much from this drive. Although it would be concentrated at on spot and not distributed around the edge as with the belts. The cocobolo is really hard, it machines nicely and can be threaded.
I wonder what a little wax around the edge would do? |
Just curious. How much force does the o-ring apply laterally against the platter? 1/10 gram? 1 gram? Other?
What keeps the o-ring from moving away from the platter over time? The weight of the motor? Other?
As the o-ring wears due to friction, would the user need to move it closer or otherwise adjust its distance to the platter? Or does it matter so long as the o-ring is in contact with the platter?
Thanks for considering the question. Jeff |
Jeff, I don't know what the force is on the o-ring but it's more than a gram.
We use a very simple but effective method to keep even pressure on the o-ring. The motor pod simply leans against the platter. There are two small rubber feet under the motor pod that are offset from the center that causes that pod to tilt. The pod stands straight up and rests on three points, the two feet and the o-ring. really easy to setup. No springs, pivots or hinges, just gravity.
Chris |
"No springs, pivots or hinges, just gravity."
Sometimes the old ways are still best.
Thanks for the info Chris. |
Gee, the opening statement in the advertisement for this new take on the idler wheel/rim-drive could have been torn out of my earliest - and current - writings on the subject...except for the inclusion of idler-wheel drive as a victim of speed instabilities. Ironic, in a way, since it is the controversy I started a few years back about the speed instabilities of belt-drives - which Teres built their name on - which started the whole debate about which system was superior, sorry if this is boring you, Viridian, I realize that belt-drivers are feeling severely put-upon these days.
Long ago and still now, the bedrock of my insistence the idler-wheel system was superior to the other two systems (DD and BD) was based in simple and actual verification, simple (the lesson in science I kept/keep talking about): comparison in the system of your choice. A theory stands or falls by the experiment, which either proves or disproves it. If experiment/comparison/verification proves a theory wrong (i.e. that belt-drives are not adequate to combating the VERY important and nefarious Stylus Force Drag, which idlers were actually and specifically designed to combat), then it is time to abandon theory. Apparently, by the release of this variant on the rim-drive, Teres now admits I was right, implicitly.
But is this new system superior to the venerable idler-wheel system in terms of speed stability, as advertised, which I have insisted from day one was THE Prime consideration in designing turntables (and only idler-wheel drives designed to provide adequately)? Only verification/experiment/comparison will tell. As with the growing list of megabuck belt-drives falling before the Lenco and other fine and properly set up idler-wheel drives in front of witnesses, this new Teres system will have to face the music, and eventually be compared to a properly set-up idler-wheel drive.
The Teres system is designed in such a way that the motor CANNOT provide the torque of idler-wheel drives, which with their massive 1800 rpm motors can actually lift an 80-pound plinth when engaged at high speed (i.e. 78 rpm), since such a powerful motor directly applied would guarantee rumble (which is non-existent in a properly rebuilt idler-wheel drive, due to its separate and spring-loaded wheel). Not only is it about SPEED STABILITY, it is also about TORQUE.
That said, it is music to my eyes/ears to see the speed stability of belt-drives questioned in a advertisement of a spin-off of the rim-drive technology (sorry again if this is boring you Viridian ;-), and to Teres I say Bravo. I also wish you luck in the coming comparison :-). |
Well, John- who would have thought that that humility would be your most endearing character trait? ;~) I'm not a mechanical engineer or a physicist, but wouldn't torque mostly be an issue in terms of coming to speed from a stop? Once turning at relatively constant 33 or 45 or 78 rpms, wouldn't there be very little torque necessary to overcome stylus drag. I ask this as a serious question, based on my perception of torque as an attribute of a motor that contributes to its ability to accelerate from a stop or at least from low rpms, as in a drag racer from a starting line, where torque at low rpms is just as important as total horsepower at high rpms. |
Swampwalker, I don't want to wade into an argument about belt drive vs idler drive vs etc, but "torque" is defined as angular force. So, torque is the product of mass multiplied by acceleration, like any other force. Then, if stylus drag could be thought of as the equivalent of a force that delivers "negative acceleration" to the platter, a high torque motor might be of benefit in overcoming it. The question you raise is however a good one which I have not seen addressed; just what in fact is the magnitude of the force we describe as "stylus drag"? I dunno myself. I think it's key that stylus drag is constantly varying during different musical passages. That's where idlers may have a real advantage, by offering relative immunity to minute changes in platter speed that might other wise result from stylus drag. |
Jean,
I think I understand your comparison of idler drive to belt drive, but I'm lost in your comparison of idler to Verus rim drive.
I would think the comparison of rim drive to idler drive boils down to the relative compliance of the interface between motor and platter. With rim drive there will be speed instability if the rubber ring around the transmission wheel has excessive compliance. Is idler drive really much better in this regard?
There is also the matter of transmission of motor rumble. But as with your replinthed Lenco, noise problem can sometimes be engineered.
The torque necessary to meet the changing force of stylus drag is far less than what is necessary to lift an 80 lb. plinth. But it is nice to know that a Lenco motor could be used to drive an electric bicycle. |
Don't forget there is also the benefit of high platter mass to counteract the negative acceleration. It is the weight of that spinning flywheel that stores energy and helps get the car off the line. Too heavy, the car is slower to build rpms. Too light, and the car doesn't leave as quickly. The whole system should be analyzed, not just the individual parts. Relative to those light-weight cast or stamped metal tables of the earlier idler/rim drive 'tables the Teres platters are 3 or four times the weight. As Swampwalker said, the high torque may be great for getting the platter spinning from stop but once the platter is at speed, how much torque is needed to maintain constant speed? Which is a state of near zero acceleration. The energy stored in a 30 to 40 lbs platter is helping a lot. The connection of the LP to the platter must also be considered. It does no good if the platter is marching along but the LP is slipping on the surface.
"by offering relative immunity to minute changes in platter speed that might other wise result from stylus drag"
I would agree with that. IMO, this is also why the mylar belts are superior to all other belts I've heard. They don't stretch at all. However, they can slip ever so slightly and that is where the door is open for the possibility of rim drive. Obviously, the next step up should be direct drive, and it goes without saying that every drive systems needs to be well implemented. |
Stylus drag real or myth?
Some time ago I did an experiment to determine just what effect stylus drag would have on an LP. I used a DL103 set to 2.5 gram tracking weight and used a regular 120 gram LP on a cheap mat felt mat (I believe off one of my old Regas). I made a small notch in the edge of the record and aligned it to a piece of tape on the platter. Looking up the edge of the tape (akin to looking down the sights of rifle) I could line up the notch in the LP very precisely.
The one side of the record was played (approx 20 min). The record was unclamped.
Now if the average groove speed is about 14.1 inch per second (20 inch per second on the outer grooves, 8.3 on the inner most groove), that means I am looking at about 1410 feet (16920 inches) of groove length.
After playing, the record shifted at the very most, not more than 1/64 of an inch. That means that over a period of 20 minutes and distance of 16920 inches, stylus drag amounted to only 1/64 of an inch of record slippage; or stated differently 9.235e-5 % slippage.
I did not bother to measure/calculate and compare the amount of drag needed to slide the unclamped LP on the felt mat vs. the drag need to overcome the rotational inertia of a 12 pound platter (never mind the 30 plus lbs Teres platters). I simply cannot buy into the idea that the force of the rotational mass of a platter would be less than the force required to make a 120gram LP slip.
I have not heard a Teres as yet, but I did own an idler wheel (TD124). The idler wheel had no more speed stability than any of my AC motored belt drive turntables.
Regards
Paul |
Dan_ed,
Somewhere in this thread it's reported that in testing, Verus rim drive produced the greatest improvement in combination with the lightest Teres platter. It would seem that with rim drive (as with idler drive), high platter mass might actually impede speed stability (probably at the point where the motor has insufficient torque to meet the higher rotational force associated a high-mass platter.) But I suppose that high-mass platters are also better at resonance control. So there is likely a trade-off with how light one would want to go without resorting to fancy TT mats and other approaches to resonance control.
Since with rim drive as with idler-drive, speed stability is entirely determined by the motor, it would be interesting to know whether the 1800 RPM motor of the Lenco offers an inherent advantage. I assume that with the Verus, the drive pulley is pressed onto the spindle of a low speed motor. Perhaps the best rim-drive design would be a high-speed motor with multiple wheels and a step-down transmission. This might also improve isolation of motor noise.
Finally, issues of force and compliance surrounding stylus drag can't be too much different than issues regarding VTF. This is handled easily in a TT arm by counterweights & gravity.
|
Dgarretson,
That is along the lines of the point I was attempting to make. A given motor speed and torque in the rim drive system may have a range of platter weight that works best with that given motor. Then again, it could be testament to how well these heavier platters with mylar belts actually work. ;)
I think the extra gears of a reduction system are going to introduce more noise. IME, gears don't mesh silently and there will still be slop between the teeth. That is why the Lenco rubber-tired idler wheel can work well when everything is in good shape.
"Finally, issues of force and compliance surrounding stylus drag can't be too much different than issues regarding VTF. This is handled easily in a TT arm by counterweights & gravity."
I would agree with you on how easily this is handled except that so many tables/arms don't. Perhaps that attributes to the rising price structure of many 'table/arm lines? |
"A given motor speed and torque in the rim drive system may have a range of platter weight that works best with that given motor. Then again, it could be testament to how well these heavier platters with mylar belts actually work."
I'd like to hear an opinion from Teres on whether the Verus with a light Teres platter surpasses their heaviest platter with mylar tape drive. |
Me, too. :) But I'd also like to hear that from others as well. |
I hope this is ok to post here. I just found this posting by Mark Kelly over on AA related to this topic.
"The idler drive mechanism has only a few percent of the speed variability inherent in belt drive (due to the lossy transmission eg belt creep).
Most idlers make up for this by using motors which can't hold constant speed against variations in platter drag (like the stylus traversing the record). Anyone who says their stock Garrard holds constant speed simply isn't measuring it properly.
As against this, the short term speed stability of an idler is excellent due to the almost lossless transmission from a motor with a high amount of flywheel effect. Most people assume this is due to the motor having lots of torque but that's not the case.
The other problem is noise - an idler definitely transmits more noise than a belt and they can create extra noise all of their own if the bearings aren't perfect.
Altogether its a toss-up.
Mark Kelly" |
Dgarretson - As Doug points out: "According to emails from Chris, the performance jump vs. belt drive is inversely proportional to the weight of the platter. Lighter platters have less rotational inertia, so they benefit most." Presuming this holds true, in terms of yielding improvement, the lighter platter would to a higher degree - so this may be the more bang for the buck solution. However, in terms of overall sonics there is enough difference between say a 255 and a 320, apart from the drive system, that the latter easily bests the former by a pretty wide margin - at least to my ears. The inertia of the larger platter coupled with superior isolation provided by Stillpoint dampers make significant contributions to speed stability and lower noise. When I upgraded from a 255 to a 320 I definitely expected improvements, but the 320 significantly exceeded my expectations. I would be quite surprised if a 255 with Verus could exceed a 320 with the Reference motor. Over time, I've found my skepticism about Teres improvements consistently disappointed, and Chris' assessments to be quite accurate. Of course I'll wait to hear the Verus and judge for myself, but I have no reason to doubt that it will be an improvement commensurate with the upgrade price. We'll see - I hope the Verus starts shipping soon. Tim |
I got mine today. Initial comments here:
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/67/675079.html
Bill |
Pauly, Your stylus drag experiment is interesting...
Physics dictate that the uneven forces from stylus drag will modulate the platters speed. What can be debated is if the effect is large enough to be audible. Our ears are remarkably sensitive to errors in the time domain. Far more so than would seem logical and far more than most would expect.
Contrary to popular thinking platter mass only changes how stylus drag affects speed but cannot eliminate it. A massive platter will reduce the magnitude of the variation but extends it over a longer period of time. A light platter will conversely allow a larger speed variation but it recovers more rapidly. Most, but not all, prefer the shallower variations from a heavy platter but it is a compromise, not a fix.
The Verus motor does show greater improvement (compared to our belt drive) when coupled with a light platter. But there is no evidence that using a heavy platter with a Verus motor is detrimental. We have used the Verus motor with platters up to 70 pounds and as with our belt drive motors have consistently preferred the heavier platters. What we have found is that with the Verus motor platter mass seems to be less important. For example we recently did some comparisons between a 14 pound solid acrylic platter and a 27 pound lead/acrylic platter. With the Verus motor the difference between the platters was about half of the difference heard with a belt drive Signature motor.
So does the Verus motor with a light platter surpass our heaviest platter with a belt? I have not done that comparison but suspect that the answer would be no. But there is much more to the story than mass. The materials used in our 360 platter (brass and cocobolo) sound a lot better than acrylic.
Chris |
Very interesting discussion. I look forward to receiving mine in a month or so :-)! |
It's generally accepted that a constant, steady platter speed will produce the most accurate reproduction. Above, Chris stated that a high mass platter will produce speed variances of low magnitude and long duration, and that light platters will produce speed variances of high magnitude and short duration.
A main goal of TT design is steady platter rotation, but could TT designers be barking up the wrong tree? Shouldn't we consider the speed variances of the cutting lathe and try to produce a TT whose platter mass, motor power, and stylus drag combine to approximate the speed variances of the cutting lathe? If the cutting lathe's platter slows down and recovers due to a heavy modulation, it might not sound right when replayed in your living room if your TT's platter also doesn't slow down and recover at the same rate. Is it possible that rock solid speed stability in TTs is actually a bad thing? |
Ketchup - Your post is most intriguing, and brings up an interesting point.
Are most lathes direct drive? |
Ketchup, One would need to know a lot more about how a cutting lathe works. Perhaps someone among us can enlighten the rest. But if your idea has any validity, then in effect "stylus drag" is a good thing. There seems to be a body of empirical evidence that this is not the case. I would guess that cutting lathes use powerful high torque motors that are securely connected to the lathe, so that heavily modulated passages are treated no differently from those that are less so. But I'm just guessing. |
Lewm, empirical research (i.e. observation) for something as subjective as audio presents a very weak argument. I think Ketchup brought up a very valid point.
If we are to assume that physics tells us a platter will decelerate due to stylus drag, we would be mistaken if we were ignore the fact that the same force acting on the cutting lathe will have the very same effect.
From my own experience I have a few LPs that when listening to I have always thought that the transients were a little bit too quick and sharp to be real. (I am sure everybody on the BB has a few LPs that). I always put that down to the sound engineering tweaking the recording a little, but Ketchups postulation does go some ways to explain the phenomenon. Simply put, it is not inconceivable that the cutting lathes used to create those LPs slowed down more on transients than what my current TT slows down.
Sadly, we do not have any numbers or hard data pertaining to the amount of stylus drag and the effect said stylus drag has on a platter.
Regards
Paul |
Just curious. Isn't the common warp in albums causing more variation in pitch than the differences between direct drive and belt drive?
I have a Cardas sweep record with what appears to be an average warp and the pitch variations are very clear as the stylus travels faster over the warp.
Am I wrong that flattening the record should come before worrying about belt versus direct drive in terms of pitch control and prat? |
I think it's important, Jj, but we do already have vacuum platters, reflex clamps, ring clamps, and concave platters to help with warps. |
Paul, I think you misunderstood my intent. My main point was that we need someone who is or was in the record-making business to tell us whether Ketchup's point has any validity. And I am only saying that my guess is that it does not, but I admit I don't know. Now you have cited your empirical and subjective experience to contradict me, while also saying that this type of evidence is not acceptable. Your opinion is certainly as valid as mine, but one would need to know more about cutting lathes to settle the matter. |
Lewm,
First, you say that stylus drag might be a good thing. It might, but there is much more to it than stylus drag. My instincts tell me that a cutting head cutting a lacquer puts much more drag on the lathe's platter than a modern stylus does playing vinyl. The trick might be to use a lighter platter than that of the cutting lathe and, along with a stylus, hope that the speed variances are about equal in magnitude and duration.
Second, I would love to hear what some people in the record making industry have to say about speed variances in cutting lathes, but I fear whar I might hear. I think a lot of people into "pro audio" seem to think that we're nuts and that we shouldn't hear any difference between A or B, whatever they might be, or that we couldn't possibly hear something so subtle, whatever it is. How often have you heard that?
Whether my point has any validity or not will take A LOT of very careful experimentation that I bet will NEVER be done, but let's for a second assume that it has no validity what-so-ever and that cutting lathes are rock solid with respect to speed stability. If we assume this, then all the rim drive (Teres), mylar or tape drive (Galibier/Teres) belt drives with massive platter (Maplenoll/Walker) turntable designers are just wasting their time trying to reinvent something that has rock solid speed stability and has been around for years. |
Hi Ketchup. Agreed. I think it is folly to believe cutting lathes have perfect speed stability. I came across this site where the sell cutting lathes. http://www.vinylrecorder.com/index-e.html. One of the tweaks they offer is a 3.8 kg platter to reduce wow and flutter.
I guess like everything else in life, not all cutting lathes are equal. Some would undoubtedly have less stability that others.
Lewn, my bad I do not mean to be combative. I understand your point BUT nobody can really prove that stylus drag decelerates a platter to soften transients. We accept that as it is based on sound physics and what some folks have heard seem to tie in with that. A cutter slowing down the cutting lathe is based on the same physics. You cannot simply accept the physics for the one and reject the same physics for the other.
Also, I am not saying what I hear is proof that this happens, rather the cutter drag on the cutting lathe goes a long way to explain something I have heard on some of my LP's. I may be totally wrong, but I think physics back this one up.
Regards
Paul |
Pauly,
The flywheel effect of the platter on that cutting lathe would be negligible compared to the 75kg/cm torque generated by the motor. From pictures on the net it's evident that a really decent cutting lathe like the Neumann has a much stronger drivetrain. A lathe strong enough to handle the fundamental drag on the cutting tool should be impervious to small modulations in drag. Still, somehow tools never quite seem to be as good as they should be. I have a metal lathe with a 10" chuck & a 2hp motor & I still manage to find jobs that are too big for it.
I did find a reference to pitch problems introduced by stylus drag on lathes used to cut 78rpm records in the 1920s. |
"....could have been torn out of my earliest - and current - writings on the subject....."
Occasionally, some of us forget that johnnantais single-handedly invented the idler table. Fortunately, we can rest assured that he'll always be here to remind us of his place high on top of the Mt. Olympus of Turntables.
|
Chris and all, what is the size and composition of the Verus' O-ring?
I'm already looking forward to lively debates about sonic merit and wear from various O-ring materials (urethane, flourosilicone, polyacylate, etc.).
Anybody wanna buy my tape splicer?
Tim
|
Tim, The o-ring Chris supplies is from McMaster Carr, part number 9557K228. How about a group power buy?! ;-) Doug |
Well, this is not the end of belt driven turntables, but this is certainly the end of the dogma that belt drive is (far) superior to direct drive. I think the proponents of belt driven turntables will disagree with this: they will miss the sight of the big external motor with the rotating belt (wonderful nostalgia, heheh). The Goldmund Reference I tt was a direct drive design. The same with the Rockport Sirius (if I'm right).
Chris |
Hi
The original Goldmund Ref and Rockport Sirius I & II were belt drive.
The Sirius III is DD along with Goldmunds Studio turtables. |
+++ I think the proponents of belt driven turntables will disagree with this: they will miss the sight of the big external motor with the rotating belt +++
The Verus is external and not direct drive ... |
We used to make the distinction between ideler or "rim-drive" and direct drive and belt drive. I believe that is still fair. Different solutions for the same problem. |
Well, it looks like Harry has jumped on the rim-drive wagon. He seems to be offering the option and down-playing it at the same time. :-O
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/67/677755.html |
