2. analog
  3. 1317949815

Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

I have just acquired a 32 year old JVC/Victor TT-101 DD turntable after having its lesser brother, the TT-81 for the last year.
TT-101
This is one of the great DD designs made at a time when the giant Japanese electronics companies like Technics, Denon, JVC/Victor and Pioneer could pour millions of dollars into 'flagship' models to 'enhance' their lower range models which often sold in the millions.
Because of their complexity however.......if they malfunction.....parts are 'unobtanium'....and they often cannot be repaired.
128x128halcro
plinko
256 posts
 
Fleib, how would you know I have a better test record?  Maybe mine is worse?  Many components to sound and I didn't comment on this.  In retrospect, it's still very hard in some cases to determine from graphs what are better results and I cannot assume better results than the Victor but the other table results posted, likely.
fleib
1,124 posts
 

Plinko,

How do I know?  Your mean frequency is exactly 3150Hz.  The VPI is 3154.5.  I forget what the Victor is, but I remember it's not 3150. 

Have you seen the Victor with the Timeline? It spins at exactly 33 1/3 RPM with any load. How do we explain the deviation?

Not to belittle your table, it did remarkably well, but look at the green line which is supposed to be net performance, and compare to Victor. 

I wouldn't take it too seriously though. This app is really for amusement purposes only. No self-respecting lab would touch it. Kind of feel sorry for Mikey Fremer. He tries, but fights an uphill battle with Stereophile.

Regards,

lewm
13,324 posts
 
Sorry, Dover. I was cranky that day.
lewm
13,324 posts
 
For me, there's no perfect way to measure the phenomenon we are trying to understand, so I prefer listening tests.  Listening tests are inevitably subjective in nature.  However, lately I have been doing a lot of listening to my SP10 Mk3 as the Krebs mods "break in".  Richard originally suggested it would take some time, and I was skeptical.  However, now I must report that the Mk3 is "smoother", more "continuous" in sound by a noticeable amount, compared to pre-Krebsian era.  Furthermore, these virtues are attended by a new open-ness of the sound; the sound is freer of the turntable than before.  I would liken that difference to what I heard when I changed from a belt-drive with a conventional plinth to one with a plinth that resides only under the platter, a la Galibier or my old Notts Hyperspace or the plinths favored by Halcro.  Adding these new virtues to the rock solid timekeeping of the Mk3, and I cannot imagine anything much better. (Of course, the "timekeeping" should be better than OEM due to the effect of the Krebs mods to reduce the number of servo error corrections needed per unit of time.)
dover
2,264 posts
 
Lewm - there is no proof that the Krebs mods reduces the number of error corrections. Krebs provides no evidence that his "mods" reduce the number of error corrections. Krebs cannot provide any testing data to support the claim.
Although you say you cannot imagine anything better, it is worth noting that David Karmeli classes the SP10mk3 that he owns as a toy compared to his reference tables that include the Techdas, EMT 927, Goldmund Reference, American Sound & Thorens Reference. None of these are direct drives.
I share a similar view to DDK as I have heard both the Krebs SP10mk2 and mk3 and they simply do not have the resolution that my Final Audio VTT1 provides.  

 

More to discover