Nude Turntable Project

Dear Lew, First of all glad to see that you are well and
even more so to see your contributions again. There are
two competing theories of truth. One is the 'referential'
the other based on 'meaning'. Say 'bachelor' means the same
as 'unmarried man' or 'plinth' means the same as 'base'. This one is also called 'analityc'. The problem however is that we need the reference to the reality: there is no truth inside the language. Both are combined in Tarski's theory of truth which is based on quantification and conditions. Say: 'some man are young and bold'. 'Some' is an quantifier while 'young' and 'bold' are conditions which some persons need to satisfy in order to make such statements true. Even persons who have never heard about whatever theory of truth are obviously able to say: 'I know 3 of such persons'. This means that they understand what 'young' and 'bold' means but also that there are such persons in reality which they are able to recognise. In your 'meanings theory' no Japanese will be able to recognise any 'plinth' while we in the West would have no idea what 'base' is refering to. As a scientist you are supposed to believe in the 'universal truth'. The 'synonym'
approach will not do as you can check by Quine or may conclude from my explanation.

Regards,

Lew, I agree that in theory if tonearm and platter are subject to the exact same vibrations then the stylus should not pick them up. In practice I don't see how it is possible. Vibration has to take a different path and go through different materials to reach different locations on a turntable. I would think that even if everything is rigidly coupled the vibration will be changed and possibly delayed in time depending on what it is traveling through. Is it even possible to design a turntable that would vibrate the same at the cartridge and at the platter at the same amplitude and phase from an outside stimulus?

I would think that even if everything is rigidly coupled the vibration will be changed and possibly delayed in time depending on what it is traveling through.

The designer of the Onedorf turntable (which uses a separate armpod) said the same thing when I rehearsed for him this (Lewm's) argument in favor of rigid coupling. Basically, as you say, the wildly differing shapes and materials of the tt motor and tonearm will prevent 'vibrating in harmony'.

My turntable (JVC TT101) came with a plinth as a QL-10. Now it has no plinth so however you want to parse the language a large support was removed and now the TT sits on its tin-can of a base on cones. So I believe it is plinthless - nude or not.

I am surprised Henry's phono pre blew rather than the preamp circuits - to me it would take a huge amount of signal from the cartridge to blow the phono side and with Henry's recollection of having it on MM there should have been enough headroom to hold this - otherwise dropping the needle onto a record will make a big enough boom to damage the phono circuit.

IMO, the Onedof turntable was designed around a novel idea for a bearing. The designer seems to know very little else about turntable design. Thus I think he is entitled to his opinion but that it is not much more relevant than that of any other moderately knowledgeable person. Sorry.

There are ways to couple the bearing and tonearm effectively. I do agree that the goal is a tricky one. In the process, you probably don't want to introduce tt motor vibrations.

Nicola, I know you are having a good time with your philosophical meanderings, but really, base = plinth, in English. It's that simple.