Nude Turntable Project

Yes Banquo....it does indeed look my idea and I'm pleased someone did it.
I need to get around to doing something myself....but my friendly metal-shop man has retired and I'm a bit loathe to 'tender' out the fabrication to some unknown operators?

By the looks of things.....there appears to be a growing 'band' of 'nuded' Victor TT owners out there?
It must sound good for this scale of 'adoption' :-)

When you have time.....I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the differences between the TT-101 and the Technics SP10/II?
Of course.....if the music is great.....you may not want to waste your time writing instead of listening?
Enjoy.

Dear Banquo363/Halcro: That's exactly what I did several years ago with my Denon's, I posted here and in the past in other threads.

Difference was that I used natural marble and natural onyx stones ( beautiful look for say the least. ) all that supported for the AT 616 pneumatic footers. I still have those stone bases but are so big that I have no space to use it again with my Victor 71/Denon 80/75. Yes, it works fine.

When I have some time I will test it again against the nude one in real time.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dear Aigenga, Your listening is the final arbiter of whether any change is a good one, but I would only observe that by using a "spongy" washer where once was a solid washer, you have to some degree decoupled the motor from the rest of the chassis elements. This obviously can be a good thing. But it can also be a bad thing, because now the motor/bearing/platter as a unit are more free to move when the motor is called upon to increase torque in response to drag on the platter. Remember Newton's Laws of Motion: every action has an equal and opposite reaction. When the motor urges the platter in the clockwise direction, the motor itself has a tendency to move counter-clockwise. Plus, the Victor engineers had the option to anchor the motor assembly in any feasible way, and they chose what they chose. Just a thought.
Irrelevant if you are pleased with your modification.

Banquo, to handle the tt I remove the platter and turn it upside down on a large flat bowl that is covered with a dish towel. The washers are about 5/8" in diameter and 3/32" thick. They will raise your platter a tad by raising the entire motor. That gives you more leeway as to how tight that bearing thrust plate screw must be. Not tightening it too much is rather critical for clearance as well as proper alignment of the motor components.

Lewm, the 1/16" neoprene bonded to 1/32" steel do not make for a spongy mount especially if they are torqued down. Your point is quite valid but my ears tell me this is better. Psychoacoustics no doubt but c'est la vie. Anyway the washers that JVC used, being two metals and thin are a pain in the ass. As Banquo found out (and I did too) they tend to get lost in the machine.

Gary

Naked.....not 'nude'!
5 months after mentioning my idea to Banquo.....about designing a 'cradle' out of stainless steel flats to 'drop' the TT-101 into......I finally got off my bum and did it.
Designing is one thing......but drawing it and then finding people to quote and then waiting for the thing to be built....is quite another :-(
The cradle is made from 4mm engineering Grade 316 stainless steel all laser cut and welded.
I had thought to simply drop the whole TT in together with its flimsy black steel bottom perforated cover......but then I thought......why not go fully naked and avoid any possible resonances related to the cover panel?
The result will not be to everyone's taste.....but to me it's more in line with my thoughts on the Copernican view of turntables whereby the tonearm pods are now correctly visually dominant surrounding the skeletal structure of the turntable.
I suspect that someone like Lewm will find some way to interpret this 'cradle' as some kind of 'plinth'.......but what can I do? :-)

How does it sound?
A bit too early to file a report......but it is audibly changed.
For the better of worse?.........stay tuned.....