Tables That Feature Bearing Friction

Dear Jloveys, teh Verdier Magnum has some very interesting points. The oil pressure bearing is an extremely good solution for a bearing which is both - able to handle very high platter weight AND provides a very low friction and extremely high damping. Very good. The platter features super high inertia (the large diameter...) but would even be better with an internal damping or a compound (3-5 cm metacrylat or vinyl on top of the platter and at the underside too. thus the platter would be dead quiet and teh vinyl record would see a contact surface with identical density - which is optimal). I see some room for mprovement in the suspension and in a possible counterspindle to make the bearing vector/force free. But it sure is a serious machine with several very strong points and going in the right direction - super high inertia, super high mass in motion .......

Dear Dgarretson, if you want more grip you may need a slightly thicker thread. If you want less grip make it thin. The knot itself - there is no secrect. Just make sure to make a knot which is on one side only. Yes - that way the knot will wander to the outside. This will take some revolutions, but after a while the knot is constantly on the outside of the thread and does not longer bounce against the spindle or platter. You may use any aramid or dyneema on the market. They are cheap and are available in different colors for low $.

Of course there are motors capable to drive 100 lbs platters by direct drive or idler. But not with excellent results - at least not compared to what is possible.

Credible arguments for a light and responsive platter.....??
Very interesting - give me one (aside from being cheap and easy to handle for the motor).

Dear Dertonarm: What do you have in hand? do you already ask you?

You have always a critic against almost any audio item out there ( mainly analog items ) but what you own and design.

You can't prove anything at all with technical or not technical " words "- bla-bla-bla where " even " your TT design is faulty because you detect its compromises years latter.

So where do you think are " seated "?, I know where you are but the mportant issue is if you know it.

You say that in the Verdier design it is a room to improve, well in your whole system design there is too room to improve, but telling this means almost nothing because you can't test/prove it.

There is a " saying ": " of tongue I eat 10kgs. ", facts is the name of the game.
The physics have to applied taking in count its environment, materials, parts, available technology, options, etc, etc where things will happen.

Your position that you already are at the end TT learning curve design goes against your own faulty TT design.

What prevent that when you already make it ( this year ) again " next day " you take in count ( again ) that there are new compromises? that maybe could happen.

You say that the non-technical discussion is futile and maybe some us don't agree with.
I take in count that the common sense and non/technical " debate " is something where you don't have strong arguments, example: like the build materials on a TT design where by physics laws I assume you can predict its precise neutral whole/overall behavior, how? you don't give an explanation yet: is there a precise technical explanation on that subject? or you choose " silence " because you don't have a technical answers?

So, you want to convice that the BD TT " road " is the best and only way to go, better than that: that your design is the best and only way.
There are no valid options even if you don't know it: DD? no, Idler drive? no, other BD designs? no, other options? no: only the one you have in mind and that today you even test it.

IMHO your position leaves all TT designers eating ( with all respect to everyone of them ) in your " hands ".

Well I have a " little " more respect not only for a designer but for the human been they are, just like you.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

just like you are.