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
lewm
13,043 posts
 
2.7 kg!!!!!!  That is nearly doubling the weight of the entire platter of an SP10 Mk2.  I would never do that to any DD turntable.  You could probably get away with it on a Mk3, because the base platter weighs 22 lbs to start with.  The servo is tuned to the rotational mass of the platter. You may well have enough torque to get that much extra mass moving, but you are probably losing something in terms of performance.  Perhaps Peter and JP can chime in on this subject.  Lots of modern day users of vintage DD's do these things. Keep in mind that M-S made the mat for their belt-drive turntables. In any case, I won't be looking for a CU-500 for my Victor.

The SP20 sounds like an economy version of SP10 Mk2.  You sacrifice 78 rpm, probably some electronic sophistication, and the cost of an outboard chassis, to save some cost.  I'm sure it's excellent.
lewm
13,043 posts
 
Forgot to say that my TT101 is running but not "up and running". Time got away from me this weekend, and I have yet to mount a cartridge. I did install the chassis into the QL10 plinth, which I have modified extensively with metal arm board and metal re-enforcements underneath the MDF stock plinth, to add mass and structural rigidity, and constrained layer dampening.

Has anyone unearthed any data on the Victor UA7045 tonearm, particularly its effective mass?  I have an FR64S mounted on the Victor plinth, but I might want to go back to the UA7045, if it would be a better match for a higher compliance cartridge than is the FR64S.
pryso
1,928 posts
 
Lew, re: metal mats

Some time ago I believe it was Raul who recommended the Audio Technica AT666.  That is a metal mat with vacuum hold down.  His preference was simply as an added mat, ignoring the vacuum.  I looked that up and it weighs 1.4 kg, still pretty heavy but within the range listed in the SP-10 MK 2 manual.

jpjones3318's avatar
jpjones3318
149 posts
 
lewm
03-14-2016 5:54pm
2.7 kg!!!!!! (...) Perhaps Peter and JP can chime in on this subject.


If you go to a show where Pass Labs have their source setup, you'll likely see a MKII with an ~8kg stainless steel platter.  My understanding is their 'tables have been setup this way for years without issue.  Stainless platters for the MKII show up on Yahoo every once in a while.

I had one (a platter) here for a bit on one of my MKII.  Takes a little longer to start and stop, but I didn't notice any ill effects.  I didn't measure any circuit parameters while running it - having a MK3, it was doubtful I'd even keep a MKII around.  W&F was about the same as the stock platter.

You'll see stainless platters show up on Yahoo every once in a while.  

I'd monitor the thrust pad a bit more often.  


pbnaudio's avatar
pbnaudio
1,613 posts
 
I have run a micro seiki CU mat on my MK2 for months - to me it sounds much better that way.  I would state that the bearing in the MK2 can easily handle this load, its a thrust plate and a ball bearing.

Below is a seller on eBay that sells replica of it weighing in at 3KG!!!!!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MICRO-SEIKI-COPPER-MAT-CU-500-REPLICA-WORLD-BEST-LOOKS-FANTASTIC-BRAND-NEW-/...

And a thinner one weighing in at "only"1.86kg

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MICRO-SEIKI-COPPER-MAT-CU-180-REPLICA-WORLD-BEST-LOOKS-FANTASTIC-BRAND-NEW-S...


Good Listening


Peter


More to discover