Hi Mario, haven't yet tripped over any Metzners, but am definitely on the lookout for one, if only for their bizarreness. I still have to get off my ass and get started on the Rek-o-kut Rondine I have, which, as I wrote a while back, sounded utterly superb in mono, where there is no rumble (rumble is not picked up in true mono), in fact, SO superb in mono that it reminded me of nothing less than the fully restored and set-up EMT 930 I heard back on Cyprus this past summer. For those who have an inherent fear of rumble with these old machines, get yourselves a true mono cartridge and set-up and find some true mono recordings to listen to: they sound astonishingly good, even the 78s, when played through a real system. I heard mine via tubed elctronics and a single Quad ESL57. As high end as I've ever heard, made me wonder - once again ;-) - about the Marketing Myth of Progress. In fact, I should get into the workshop and get started right away, and work on setting up a true mono system!
But, busy up here with yet further Lenco experiments, including the steel Reinderspeter top-plate I am now about to start on. Not that "ordinary" Giant Direct Coupled Lencos leave anyone wanting. The fellow who received both a rebuilt Lenco and a rebuilt Garrard 401 from me, the former with a Dynavector 507 MKII/Dynavector 17D MKIII and the latter with a SME V/Dynavector XX-1 re-tipped by VdH, reports he hasn't returned to the Garrard yet after setting up the Lenco, which he received after the Garrard. And lest we forget, the Giant Direct Coupling recipe works as well for any idler as it does for the Lenco, forget about Mystical Synergies, it's just about maximizing and proper set-up.
Just as a reminder, here's what one fellow sent me when he received a Giant Direct Coupled Garrard 301 from me: "Well, got the stock i/c on the Dyna, and not all tweaked yet, and nothing sitting on stand, without isolation, and it betters the Verdier/Koetu Urishi on a special Isolation stand...I am candidly surprised. I did not expect this. I had the the Cain and Cain plinth and it did not sound good. This is way above. The 301 is incredible in your plinth. It has only the inexpensive Denon 103 R and that is not redone yet...and only a stock cable and it is better by a long ways than the Verdier on a special isolation table. Next I will try the Koetsu in the arm....and in my best phono stage and see. Damn...don’t let this get out, or it will ruin the high end."
There's still resistance to the idea of Lenco as a true high-end 'table (more from Garrard-ers than anyone else, sadly), not to mention resistance to the idea of idlers as true high-end 'tables, despite the HUGE increase in interest and sales of these machines, HUGE increase in reporting on these machines in the hi-fi press, and their re-appearance on the market!! Prejudice is a tough one to beat. I STILL read that old politically-correct canard (not as in duck ;-)) that all drive systems are equal, it's only implementation that counts. Rubbish. Engineering is about engineering to a price, and if it takes a $50K belt-drive to match a $5K idler-wheel drive (and I mean in every audiophile area, not just SLAM and bass and rhythm and transients), assuming a $50K belt-drive can even match a properly set-up idler-wheel drive, then the issue is settled and the idler-wheel drive is quite simply superior. For a belt-drive to match the torque of an idler with an 8-pound platter, let's say it takes a 75-pound platter, to make the equivalent torque with momentum, which requires all sorts of expensive precision manufacturing and materials. Then it takes a very expensive and solid bearing to bear the weight and friction, assuming a bearing can be made which will not seriously wear out in just a few years. Then it takes a structure capable of supporting this massive weight, and so on. The belt-drive is not a practical system (not that it doesn't sound good at budget prices, like the great Thorenses and ARs, etc.), which is why they have hit $100K and beyond, with still improvements reported at each price point!! Or, simply buy a 'table with a high torque system with no slippage or stretching (why, an idler of course), a powerful motor which does not lose speed when faced with Stylus Force Drag, and sufficient weight on the flywheel-platter (Lenco springs to mind) to create a closed system - motor drives platter, platter smooths out motor - which utterly ignores stylus force drag, does not require vast amounts of material or unnecessary expense, and achieves the same thing, more reliably, at a much lower price-point, than an equaivalent belt-drive, assuming a belt-drive exists which can outperform a properly set-up idler-wheel drive.
Direct Drive is also undergoing a resurgence of interest due to the idler-driven topic of speed stability, and also because DD motors are still available on the market. But, due to the extreme slowness of the rotation (literally 33 1/3 RPM for 33 1/3 LPs, and 45 RPM for 45s, as opposed to roughly 300 RPM for belt-drives and 1800 RPM for idler motors which iron out speed imperfections), they require expensive controlling systems and engineering to counteract the magnification of speed imperfections, all physical systems being to some extent imperfect (but the faster the motor spins, the more these imperfections are ironed out). People make the mistake that the consequent high technology in DDs is a big plus (computational power as a selling feature), when in fact this high technology is required by the Great DD Liability, which is magnified speed imperfections caused by the extremely slow rotation. Not that DDs cannot be made to be extremely good, in fact better than belt-drives according to these ears (especially servo-controlled DDs so far), but, as with belt-drives, it is perhaps true that DDs can only be made to match idler-wheel drives by increased expense, which means that according to the principle of engineering to a price point, idler is still the superior system.
Those with experience know that noise/rumble is not an issue with idler-wheel drives when properly set-up, a lingering bit of misinformation from the Bad Old Days of the Hegemony of the Belt, those same belt-drivers now saying that all systems are equal and it comes down just to proper implementation....yeah, and the combustion engine is not superior to the steam engine, it just comes down to proper implerementation, as in a 100-ton machine (locomotive) to match a half-ton machine....but the steam locomotive will not stop on a dime, or accelerate in a matter of seconds.
Anyway, DD experiments will continue in my workshop, the Lenco will be taken to The Max via the Reinderspeter top-plate and reported on, and I hope to delve into the mysteries of the fabulous Rek-o-Kuts!! Have fun all!!!
But, busy up here with yet further Lenco experiments, including the steel Reinderspeter top-plate I am now about to start on. Not that "ordinary" Giant Direct Coupled Lencos leave anyone wanting. The fellow who received both a rebuilt Lenco and a rebuilt Garrard 401 from me, the former with a Dynavector 507 MKII/Dynavector 17D MKIII and the latter with a SME V/Dynavector XX-1 re-tipped by VdH, reports he hasn't returned to the Garrard yet after setting up the Lenco, which he received after the Garrard. And lest we forget, the Giant Direct Coupling recipe works as well for any idler as it does for the Lenco, forget about Mystical Synergies, it's just about maximizing and proper set-up.
Just as a reminder, here's what one fellow sent me when he received a Giant Direct Coupled Garrard 301 from me: "Well, got the stock i/c on the Dyna, and not all tweaked yet, and nothing sitting on stand, without isolation, and it betters the Verdier/Koetu Urishi on a special Isolation stand...I am candidly surprised. I did not expect this. I had the the Cain and Cain plinth and it did not sound good. This is way above. The 301 is incredible in your plinth. It has only the inexpensive Denon 103 R and that is not redone yet...and only a stock cable and it is better by a long ways than the Verdier on a special isolation table. Next I will try the Koetsu in the arm....and in my best phono stage and see. Damn...don’t let this get out, or it will ruin the high end."
There's still resistance to the idea of Lenco as a true high-end 'table (more from Garrard-ers than anyone else, sadly), not to mention resistance to the idea of idlers as true high-end 'tables, despite the HUGE increase in interest and sales of these machines, HUGE increase in reporting on these machines in the hi-fi press, and their re-appearance on the market!! Prejudice is a tough one to beat. I STILL read that old politically-correct canard (not as in duck ;-)) that all drive systems are equal, it's only implementation that counts. Rubbish. Engineering is about engineering to a price, and if it takes a $50K belt-drive to match a $5K idler-wheel drive (and I mean in every audiophile area, not just SLAM and bass and rhythm and transients), assuming a $50K belt-drive can even match a properly set-up idler-wheel drive, then the issue is settled and the idler-wheel drive is quite simply superior. For a belt-drive to match the torque of an idler with an 8-pound platter, let's say it takes a 75-pound platter, to make the equivalent torque with momentum, which requires all sorts of expensive precision manufacturing and materials. Then it takes a very expensive and solid bearing to bear the weight and friction, assuming a bearing can be made which will not seriously wear out in just a few years. Then it takes a structure capable of supporting this massive weight, and so on. The belt-drive is not a practical system (not that it doesn't sound good at budget prices, like the great Thorenses and ARs, etc.), which is why they have hit $100K and beyond, with still improvements reported at each price point!! Or, simply buy a 'table with a high torque system with no slippage or stretching (why, an idler of course), a powerful motor which does not lose speed when faced with Stylus Force Drag, and sufficient weight on the flywheel-platter (Lenco springs to mind) to create a closed system - motor drives platter, platter smooths out motor - which utterly ignores stylus force drag, does not require vast amounts of material or unnecessary expense, and achieves the same thing, more reliably, at a much lower price-point, than an equaivalent belt-drive, assuming a belt-drive exists which can outperform a properly set-up idler-wheel drive.
Direct Drive is also undergoing a resurgence of interest due to the idler-driven topic of speed stability, and also because DD motors are still available on the market. But, due to the extreme slowness of the rotation (literally 33 1/3 RPM for 33 1/3 LPs, and 45 RPM for 45s, as opposed to roughly 300 RPM for belt-drives and 1800 RPM for idler motors which iron out speed imperfections), they require expensive controlling systems and engineering to counteract the magnification of speed imperfections, all physical systems being to some extent imperfect (but the faster the motor spins, the more these imperfections are ironed out). People make the mistake that the consequent high technology in DDs is a big plus (computational power as a selling feature), when in fact this high technology is required by the Great DD Liability, which is magnified speed imperfections caused by the extremely slow rotation. Not that DDs cannot be made to be extremely good, in fact better than belt-drives according to these ears (especially servo-controlled DDs so far), but, as with belt-drives, it is perhaps true that DDs can only be made to match idler-wheel drives by increased expense, which means that according to the principle of engineering to a price point, idler is still the superior system.
Those with experience know that noise/rumble is not an issue with idler-wheel drives when properly set-up, a lingering bit of misinformation from the Bad Old Days of the Hegemony of the Belt, those same belt-drivers now saying that all systems are equal and it comes down just to proper implementation....yeah, and the combustion engine is not superior to the steam engine, it just comes down to proper implerementation, as in a 100-ton machine (locomotive) to match a half-ton machine....but the steam locomotive will not stop on a dime, or accelerate in a matter of seconds.
Anyway, DD experiments will continue in my workshop, the Lenco will be taken to The Max via the Reinderspeter top-plate and reported on, and I hope to delve into the mysteries of the fabulous Rek-o-Kuts!! Have fun all!!!