Nude Turntable Project

09-18-13: Ct0517
I am however surprised at Dovers comment.

I dont think it is ideal to have electromagnetic fields floating around the cartridge, irrespective of what type of TT is used.

I mean considering he uses a Dynavector tonearm and preferred ET2 Magnetic damping. :^)

Ct0517 - your comments are incorrect.
Though I own a Dynavector arm I have not used it for a long time. It is handily outclassed by my Fidelity FR64S, Naim Aro and Eminent Technology ET2 arms.
Please refer to my post in your ET2 thread...

05-16-13: Dover
By the way I still own a Dynavector 501 which has a very high horizontal effective mass, and whilst the bass is quite punchy, the musical timing, soundstaging, and resolution is well down on both my Naim Aro and Fidelity Research FR64S ( yes I own 2 of these as well ).

Another correction:
Very minimal magnetic damping is used on my ET2, none on the Denon 103 set up, and it is well away from the cartridge and cable. This too was explained in your ET2 thread.

03-03-13: Dover
The configuration I use is:
Decoupled counterweight in the horizontal mode ( spring bypassed )
Lightened tonearm
Minimal magnetic dampening

09-19-13: Ct0517
But Boy, would I really like for someone like you to get yours hands on a thread drive design TT - NOT - a belt drive design that has been converted to thread.
I would love to read your impressions ...

I agree, it is folly to convert a belt drive to thread drive, unless all the engineering principles on motor selection, pulley design and platter/bearing design have been revisited and are clearly understood. For example, the optimum pulley for a thread drive will have quite a different profile than that of a belt, as well as the motor design, power delivery and platter mass. An example of this is the Verdier, where the motor is not strong, and addressing this should be a prerequisite before converting to thread drive.
It is quite an ask to go from tinkering around with DD turntables to designing a thread drive. A thorough understanding of engineering principles would be a prerequisite. I would recommend you search on Dertonams posts on thread drive in this forum for authoritative and informed analysis of thread drive principles. Dertonam has had a wealth of experience with the Micro Seiki thread drive TT’s that were designed specifically for thread drive from the outset, as is the Final Audio Parthenon thread drive TT.

Dover, Funny you say that about "converting" the Verdier to thread drive. Nearly all, if not actually all, the Verdiers I have ever seen have been using thread drive. I actually thought it was "stock". One well known emporium near me that sells Verdier places the motor about 3 feet away from the platter and uses a thread drive. I've often wondered how the heck they can keep the thread from slipping down the smooth sides of the platter.

Richard, You voiced my own thoughts on the pitfall of a coreless motor; the orientation of the magnet and coils is at 90 degrees to that of a conventional motor, and this would result in max field strength in the vertical direction. Plus, the coreless motor is very close to the underside of the platter, much closer to the platter than a conventional motor in a Technics or other similar DD. I've noted that the L07D motor is a completely discrete unit, sealed in a casing shaped like a movie version of a flying saucer. Do you think the casing is made of mu metal or something with similar shielding properties? If so, why do we perceive that adding another shield under the platter mat makes a further improvement?

By the way, the same might be said of the TT101 motor. It too is completely encased, top and bottom, maybe for the same reason???

Dover - imo each of us needs and has a reference point, a ground zero for this hobby and other things in life.
Without this anchor we become lost.
This ground zero is a little different for everyone.
For this reproduced in my room as far as source goes - my Studer deck playing 15 ips tapes is it for me.

here's why.

Before my Studer tech gave me back my tape machine he put on a tape that had different frequency notes on it.
He played each of them for one minute. It was rock solid in pitch. Never wavering. I wont get into its sonics here.

imo - a TT setup can come close, but will never be this good because other than all the many electro/mechanical "items" that need to be set up with the table, tonearm and cartridge - the record itself is so so flawed. oh you can try to setup things as best as possible for one record. But the next one will be different. I have hundreds in rows next to my listening chair that I randomly select from. What are you going to do.

So the record for the vinyl hobby imo is the Elephant in the Room.

Everyone loves to talk about their shiny TTs, tonearms and cartridges - the equipment. No one wants to talk about the source. Sorry for ranting on your thread Henry.

Dover
An example of this is the Verdier, where the motor is not strong, and addressing this should be a prerequisite before converting to thread drive.

imo - if you truly understood how this table worked you would not have made this comment. I guess JC Verdier does not know what he is doing. If I recall you discussed a Verdier in the past on this forum and it required the use of a setup bearing to run properly as it oscillated. Could it have been one of the many counterfeit ones around ? Its a very imitated and duplicated table. You need to be very careful. fwiw - I remember reading Syntax timeline testing the vintage Verdier - it was on the pass list. Cant remember the thread.

My Verdier and my other hobby tables are compared against my Studer in my own room real time - switching between the two.

So thats my Ground Zero Dover. Whats yours ?