A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Dear Chris /all: The " naked TT project " is similar as what happen with the MM/MI alternative: many people are trying/testing with no posts in the threads.

Both alternatives are so un-expensive and so easy to achieve that IMHO it is an audio " waste/lose " not to try it, at least just to " cover up a hole in our audio culture ".

Btw, Banquo363: from the AT operation manual the AT616 works between 10-60kgs. It works for me and for Dgob too.

Now, each 616 footer is a set of three internal and independent insulators design where the third one works when the item weight is over 30kg.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

We're baaack.....

I re-assured the moderators that I really didn't take my pet snake for a regular walk..........it's just a special treat.

Halcro, points are a sort of mechanical one-way diode. That is they are fairly efficient at transmitting vibration in only one direction. So if your points are pointed *down* under your tone arm: welcome to your plinth, the anti-vibration platform.

Any good anti-vibration platform will have both 'acoustically dead' and 'absolutely rigid' as a mantra.

I agree that a bad plinth is likely worse than none. I've been down this path before- my turntable has been in development since the early 1990s. So the comments I've been making are based out of experience, not conjecture.

If you want to separate something, and if the 'table is not a direct-drive, then the motor might be a better candidate. However IME the vibration of the motor will be of no significance if the plinth works right.

Greetings Ralph,

my turntable has been in development since the early 1990s.

That sound exciting? I was wondering why no turntable designers were contributing to this thread?
Any clues as to which 'drive' model you're pursuing?

I think this is an example of separates on the same plinth?
GULP