A Copernican View of the Turntable System


Once again this site rejects my long posting so I need to post it via this link to my 'Systems' page
HERE
128x128halcro
Raul,
If you look at the original marketing materials for the Kenwood L-07D from almost 30 years ago, you will find a clear 'explanation' against having the arm base be dis-connected from the bearing mount of the turntable. A similar explanation is in some of the original marketing materials in Japanese for the Exclusive P3. In fact, the P3's construction is not terribly different than some of the 'armpod' implementations. What some of the philosophical 'naysayers' bring up as an objection is not necessarily the lack of bulk-cladding (plinth) around the motor OR a heavy armpod. The philosophical issue some of us have is that of putting an isolation layer between the motor bearing and the arm bearing.

In the design of your arm, I imagine you are not going to put an isolation buffer between the armwand and the bearing - that would strike you as less than optimal, and not even worth testing. Some of us feel, perhaps to our detriment, that an isolation layer between motor bearing and arm bearing is not much different.
I meant to say in the previous comment that the P3's construction is not terribly different than some of the 'armpod' implementations of some of the people who have presented on this thread. The difference would be in how the armpod is connected to the surface beneath it.
Dear T_bone,
Go on........try it. You know you want to :^)
You have the TTs ( a plethora)...I provided a recipe for a cheap armpod.....you have the arms.....and you really want to prove it doesn't work. You're the perfect candidate.......well, you AND Lewm....to be converted?
Imagine the mental exercise to be enjoyed IF.........your ears tell you something your brain cannot yet compute? :^)
Halcro,
I'll get there. I think the concrete idea is really kind of cool. One could even do a low cost DIY "TT pod" out of concrete. :^)
There is no question in my mind that our hobby has some religious aspects ( aka it is about what one believes). But we are used to use 'scientific' arguments in our discussion. Who would expect that, say, the Catholic churh will ever reach any agreement with, say, Greek ortodox church despite the fact that both were once 'the same' church? To admit that the 'other' may be right is like loosing a game. So Lew refers to Newton and T_bon to some 'original marketing material' to prove their case. But we all can enjoy leterature while we know that this 'art' has nothing to do with the (real) truth. I myself always enjoy the post of , for example, Lew and Herr Professor in this sense. I wish btw that I could afford the 'big one' from Kuzma with 3 of those 'golden' arm pods. One should I think
refer to those as 'pedestals' because a 'pod' looks so miserable in literary sense.

Regards,