Upper Level Vintage DD Strenghts and Weaknesses


All of these tables have been discussed in some form or another here over the years. I have read quite a few threads on them, but its a bit difficult to nail this point down.

Basically I am looking for a non-suspended table to install a Dynavector DV505 arm on, and these tables can fit the bill.

The most widely available is a Denon DP 75 or DP 80 in a Denon plinth, and they are perhaps the most affordable also. Are there any of their plinths that are desirable, or are they just a veneered stack of MDF or plywood?

While more expensive I can find a Sony TTS8000 in a Resinamic plinth although shipping from HK is expensive. There is one thread I came across here where a member who restores tables says two of the three TTS8000 he has done had play in the spindle assembly which looked to be wear in the brass bushings of the motor. That does make me pause in concern.

The JVC TT101 is not only difficult to find, its apparently a bit of a bear to get serviced, so its not high on the list.

The Technics SP 10 MK II I have owned, and its a nice table but to be honest I had a Denon DP75 that I felt actually sounded better. Also the models that are out there are either abused or have a premium price tag attached to them. Also I don’t need instant torque, and I think the bi-servo designs might offer better speed control.

As I write this the Denon and Sony seem to be at the top of the list, unless there is another I should be looking at.
neonknight
I would not spend big bucks on feet for speakers, but I would have any speaker, particularly if it is expected to reproduce deep bass, well and stably mounted on the floor.  I recognize that sometimes there is a risk of acoustic coupling that can be undesireable, when the drivers get too close to the floor.  In that case, I would raise the speaker but still have it on a rigid stand of some sort.  But none of this requires ebony or Combak products.  For example, one of my systems uses Sound Labs 845PX, with a heavily modified crossover.  I added 80 lbs of weight on top of the back plate at the rear of the active panel, for each speaker, which sits on the OEM very ordinary feet that SL provides.  The added mass very audibly deepened and cleaned up the bass response.  I even considered bracing the whole 8-foot tall panel by running a piece of steel from the top of the speaker to anchor on the floor behind the back plate, but I never went that far.
I watched interview with Dynaudio engineer and this guy explained very well than speaker cabinet should NOT move with the woofers. I think suspended stands are horrible for lightweight speakers. 
@neonknight 
 Are you any closer to making a decision on your Brand / Model of a 
Vintage DD TT and are there any furthering of your plans for it ?                      
@pindac, using the word ’cornerstone’ like this in relation to turntable footers is tricky. For stability you’ll need 4.......

Anyway, while upper vintage turntables (DD or otherwise) are still competitive, in most cases their designers didn’t spend too much thought on plinths and footers. There are exceptions like Pioneer P3, where the wood veneer plinth is more like a skirt over some very elaborate suspension. But in most cases the footers just have some type of resilient material to absorb external vibrations, including the earth’s plate movement as some seem to believe.

My appartment has wooden floors and in such a case these resilient footers are totally inadequate to absorb foot falls and other floor borne vibrations. Wall mounting is the only way to go. When you have eliminated the floor as a source of vibrations you don’t need resilient footers and you can change to mass loading the table.

Consequently, my tables are all wall mounted and have their original footers replaced with non resilient ones. In every case the sonic improvement (in terms of tighter bass response, cleaner highs, dynamics, etc.) was as obvious as can be. I use Finite Elemente Cerabase Compact footers, but I’m sure there are plenty of alternatives that will give the same result.

A friend who has been a Mentor for a proportion of my Journey in HiFi in relation to Turntables, has their own TT Mounted on a Wall Mounted Steel Framed Shelf.
A Sub Plinth is also used and Two Types of Footer used between The Plinth, Sub Plinth and Wall Shelf. 
When I am in my friends environment I can not imagine a better method to mount the TT.

In my own environment I have tried a Steel Framed Wall Shelf as a Basic Support and also with various Sub Plinth Construction Methods.
I have also used Rack Mounting on the Racks Top Shelf. 

The Best I have achieved is the Consruction I have in use to sit the Rack On and the Construction I use on Top of the Rack.

The Sound Quality that is being produced in my listening environment, is the most satisfying I have achieved over many years of working with the permutations of materials used in the constructions used as a Support.

The Next Stop really has to be Trialing with Plinth Materials.

I am at present using a Compressed Plywood that is approx' 800Kg a Cubic Metre
(1764 lb per 1.3 Cubic Yard) 

The Next Trial is going to be with a Compressed Plywood that is approx'
1400Kg a Cubic Metre ( 3087 lb per 1.3 Cubic Yard )   

There is quite a lot of information availble where the merits of coupling a Japanese Vintage DD TT, to a Densified Wood Plinth are made known.