A new TT from Steve Dobbins,"The Beat." ???

From what I read, I believe what Mike is trying to say is that the stator in the motor is decoupled from the bearing which is physically possible. And I was just thinking about such thing couple weeks ago while having the mental experiment of decoupling the DD motor from the platter and bearing but Dobbins beat me to it, pun intended.

After all a DD motor is nothing but a series of coils lay out in a circle that we call a stator and right above is a circular magnet that we call a rotor that's attached to the bearing shaft. In a conventional DD motors, typically, the stator is mounted to the same surface that houses the bearing. It is totally possible that the stator can be mounted separately or decoupled from the bearing. This can address the problem the common complaint about DD table that back torque force vibrating the bearing and plinth and therefore tonearm. So yes, I believe to be quieter than the Mk3 can be achieved. Just happy to see people are putting new ideas into the direct-drive genre. I applaud that!

I agree with Lewm that the Clearaudio Statement is a rather inelegant design.

.

another related issue when looking at the Mk3 is that the platter is part of the motor assembly. so there is no choice if a better platter is desired. the Mk3 does not have a 'problematic platter'; but just like the bearing issue there is room for improvement.

i can sure hear what Steve's new platter has done for the Garrard, and there is related design in the platter of The Beat.

No doubt the platter and mat have a huge effect on the sound of any tt. This is a universal issue, not just restricted to dd tts. Problem for me is that I don't know what is "the best". In general, high mass seems like a good thing, but after that there is a lot of room for speculation. I believe that high mass is less critical for dd tts than for belt-drive types. I guess if one had the cojones to try it, one could unbolt the magnet from the Mk3 platter and attach it to a platter of one's own design and thereby fit the new platter to the Mk3. A company like TT Weights could make such a platter (and of course Steve Dobbins can make a fab one).

Hi Lewm,

I thank you for your reply and those that, not only spoke to the original thread, but digressed. To strictly stay on the line of the original thread would mean the thread would die out with a dozen or so answers.

My reason for the thread was not only to see how many others resorted to, for any reason, to move the TT to an adjoining space. Topics such as; cable length, walking to another room to drop the stylus, proper stands that abate vibration are all viable reasons to keep the table in the listening room. Last but not least was the design of the TT itself.

I viewed the systems of those of you that responded, no slouches here! The views echoed your replies.

If I may, I'd like to ask a few questions that will pertain to the original thread, but will also expand the answers from the Audiogon "Brain Trust," if I may call it that.

If it's heavy enough it won't vibrate, but different frequencies will excite the mass in different ways as everything has a resonant point or two or?

Some resonances are floor borne and need to be dealt with in a different way than those that are airborne.

Assuming that all floor borne vibrations are nulled out, it leaves only airborne vibrations and the drive motor and bearing to contribute noise.

Lets assume all drive systems contribute some, but very little, noise to the stylus: some are better than others. The platter then needs to address airborne vibrations. If you have a big system and love bass or a smaller system or a room not properly suited to your musical tastes, the platter design may be the deciding factor.

High mass, via Walker with a center clamp , constrained layer damping via VPI with a peripheral ring, TTWeights with a peripheral ring and copper matt and others, vacuum via SOTA and others, and the list goes on-- all attempt to address the problem.

If you choose to repost to this thread I know it will probably be because you have more personal knowledge of the vibrational problems you've dealt with rather than opinions only and that a three thumbs up!!! Yes three.

I for one, after reading Mike's posting, realize that I'm lucky in the fact that the table on my Denon 308 is not a part of the rotor. Is bolted to a tapered shaft and collar. I guess it means that I'd have options to modify the platter. Yippee!!. Nothing is worth having without options for a tweak.

Happy Easter, Ken

Kftool, Since the platter of your tt is probably bolted to the top of the motor to which the magnet is fastened, in a sense you are free to change the platter, as is true of most dd turntables. The Mk3 is the exception rather than the rule. Most dd turntables are like yours. But the restriction is related to platter mass. The drive system was designed for the mass of the platter, and if you change the platter mass dramatically, then the servo mechanism will not work correctly. Problem is that the permissible range of variation in platter mass for any particular dd setup is unknown to most of us. It's safe to say, I think, that with a massive motor, like the one you have in your DP308, you can probably increase mass by at least 20% without any worries. Probably that is a conservative estimate. The only way to find the upper limit is to do the experiment. As to your other point, I do not know to what degree a heavy platter would work to resist airborne vibrations. Only way to do that is to move the tt to a sonically dead part of your listening room or to outside the listening room, IMO.

PS. You're a lucky guy to have a DP308 and the space in which to place it.