The Miller Carbon Story


Had a real nice conversation this morning with Origin Live’s Mark Baker. Mark makes some of the very best turntables on the planet and I was interested to learn more. This was our first conversation and so he was interested in me as well. This reminded me of others who have asked.   

The following story is only superficially about the Miller Carbon. The larger and I would say more important subtext is you can do it too! Please dear reader note the number of times something was tried not knowing whether or not it would work. Like all things in life: The more things you try and the more effort you put into it the better you get at it.


The Miller Carbon Story

My first turntable was a Technics SL-1700 with Stanton 681-EEE. It was 1976. Still have that turntable, anyone can see it, right there on my system page.  https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367. Rack on the right. Bottom shelf.  

Next, after college, came the Listening Room and with it a new turntable. This was way before the internet. All we had was Stereophile On Dead Tree. After reading all the reviews it came down to a VPI package or Basis/Graham. What to do? Cast your mind back, way back, to the primitive past. I faxed my question to Stereophile.  

Michael Fremer called me back!   

The Basis/Graham was my own decision. Fremer didn’t talk me into anything. Quite the opposite. He was a source of much useful information that helped me make up my own mind. So it was that I learned early on from Michael Fremer what it is that a reviewer really is supposed to do: provide the reader with the information they need to make their own informed decision.  

My first high end mod was to remove the cheap rubber power cord from the Basis motor and replace it with an inexpensive power cord. Cheap, but proven to be better than all the freebie PCs and I wanted to find out if it made any difference on a turntable motor.  

It did! Same exact improvements heard on the other components it had been tried on before. How or why, who knows, but I heard it. Other mods followed. Different belt materials were used. Silk, cotton, floss. Each had its own influence on the sound. Fascinating!  

This was all part of the process of investigating turntable performance in order to upgrade. Easy to read about different materials, mass, motors, bearings- but what does it all mean in the real world? This was my way of figuring it out for myself.  

Teres Audio seemed to be the value leader. A complete turntable was too expensive, but the motor could be added to the Basis with only a slight modification for the speed sensor. When this worked out extremely well it gave me the confidence to go for the platter and bearing.  

But what about the plinth? Around this time I was working with DJ Casser and his Black Diamond Racing Shelf. His Shelf material was so much more effective than acrylic, it had to make a better plinth too. After a good deal more planning a BDR Source Shelf was cut into a unique sort of egg shape. Another piece was cut 4” diameter, drilled and tapped to be used as the nut to hold the bearing. Two more pieces about 3 inches in diameter were cut and stacked to make the tone arm mount. Three Round Things with Cones were screwed into the bottom of the plinth. The Miller Carbon was born. http://www.teresaudio.com/fame/40.html



128x128millercarbon
Diminishing returns is more a phantom than a thing. More often than not all it means is doing the wrong thing. Because over the years it always has turned out doing the right thing is never a lot for a little, in fact it is usually quite the opposite.

So for example the motor was upgraded from the original pod to battery power and then a big $2500 jump to the Verus motor and controller. This was a diminishing return in the sense it was about what the platter, bearing and plinth cost, so nearly double the cost, but not double the performance. But on the other hand looking around, what other turntable was there that could be bought that would be better? 

So a good worthwhile improvement, but yes a diminishing return. However this was not the case when going from the Graham 2.2 to the Origin Live Conqueror Mk3. That improvement was huge! So there was no diminishing return. 

We could even go off-topic onto speakers, where Tekton Moab are far better speakers than the Talon Khorus they replaced, yet the incremental cost after selling the Khorus was so small no way it could be called diminishing. 

Same sort of thing again with the Raven Blackhawk (review to come) that cost more than the Melody integrated but is so much better no way it could be called diminishing return.

Sure everyone can find all kinds of overpriced stuff where the return is not only diminishing it is outright negative. All that does is prove my point. If the return is diminishing it is more likely due to some fault in system evaluation or component selection than some iron law of audio.
Microfiber dust off the platter beginning every session. Damp cloth tone arm every month or so. Every once in a while wipe off the shelf and granite. 

The next one will probably get a proper acrylic cover. Floating, hinged off the wall, no part of it touching any part of the rack or table open or closed. 
Dear @njkrebs  : ""   if you need to read through previous posts of what people wrote...""

Some times could be good  to know or " figure " out something of what is posted by a gentleman trying to understand his post reason to posted.

I did it with your " rethorical " post. 

Btw, normally always exist " opportunities " to make up-grades in an audio room/system with out spend money but only our time, some examples: changing the cartridge alignment ( overhang/offset angle. ), time to time check/fine tune the VTF/VTA due that cartridge suspension over playing hours has a kind of low degradation that could affects those cartridge set up parameters, small speaker position changes or even our seat position and many other tweaks we have on hand. The ones that could help the more are the system transducers links changes/fine tune.

As you I'm satisfied with my system.

R.