A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Halcro,

Whilst I do not like sprung turntables I agree with Dertonam you cant write them off. The key mistake most suspended tt's with belt drive have is that they have the motor drive on a different chassis from the suspended plinth on which they mount the platter/bearing/arm. If the motor is mounted on the floating plinth along with the arm/platter then it is possible to get speed stability - ie rigid coupling of the motor/platter/arm/cartridge loop is the key.
For isolation my non suspended high mass turntable is mounted on a wall hung shelf which lowered the noise floor and cleaned up the bottom end considerably over floor racks with various isolation devices. My floor is a sprung wooden floor, so you may not get that difference with a concrete floor.

Dear Halcro: +++++ " agree that the perfect turntable has not yet appeared.....or at least I have not heard it? " +++++

perfect TT?, it does not exist and never will. What could appear time to time are TTs that already shorten the " perfect long road " like the Onedof or the Wave Kinetics or the Continnum: you can choose.

Many of you speak about speed stability and speed accuracy along TT isolation as main factors to improve in TTs design but IMHO someway or the other ( even with after market solutions for the isolation subject. ) all those subject are already " done " and today normally are truly solved and IMHO none of these subjects preclude to have and hear top quality performance from the LPs, at least these subjects has almost no influence to bad performances.

Of course that always exist the possibilities to improve about but IMHO what the overall TT design needs are designs that can change " dramatic " the today top level quality performance: the needs not only to perform at the top with what is in the market but " something " that outperforms by a wide margin/dramatically the today TT performance status.

There are alternatives to do that because there are some TT design areas that needs a lot more effort.
Two of these areas to improve are: power supply and TT build materials that are on designers's hands to decide about.

Power supply design ccould " sounds " something plain and simple for any designer but it is not you need very specific skills to design the " perfect " power supply for your TT.
I can't remember if was with the Brickman or Raven TT designs where I read that changing the stock TT ac power suply design for a battery powered unit the TT performance " enhanced ": this could be if you have a " wrong " power suply design because when the ps design is right on target a battery powered one can't beat it.
This example is the same for electronics audio devices designs. We know this because during our Phonolinepreamp design the first prototypes were battery powered till our ac design beat it.

The other area about TT build material is no more simple and in some ways very complex due to many factors involve and its relationship when we talk about build materials. Till today there are " designs " but no one I know already addressed succesfuly the build material subject and for what I " see " around there is no single road or a trend with that subject.

I'm not on TT design ( yet ) but one thing is for sure I have the main solution to that TT build materials that could change " dramatically " the word TT and I found out almost by " accident " through our tonearm design project. As a fact we already tested and is way promising.

If I was a TT designer I will put my main " research " and tests mainly on these two TT design main " characteristics " ( ps and build materials. ) that if the designer has success will can to begin to write a " new " TT design history.
Till then IMHO what we will see in the near future are more new TT designs that could be better in this or that performance area but with out change in " dramatic " way that TT quality performance.

I hope I'm wrong and tomorrow appear the " perfect " one because this is what our beloved analog hobby needs for " wake up " of its long long lethargy.

I'm not diminish in any way any single TT designer, all of them deserve my respect.

Btw, Henry you need to listen the SME 30/2 that IMHO is a top performer and till today I never read of any customer with any single compliant about speed stability or isolation or almost any other kind of compliant. Here you can read a review of the original 30 model and you can read there how SME handle the Dover concern about this type of TT designs:

http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Model-302-The-Absolute-Sound-1457.shtml

and always can read from SME directly:

http://www.sme.ltd.uk/content/Model-302-1314.shtml

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.

Dover,
I agree wholeheartedly with you about wall hung shelves for mounting turntables.
They eliminate most of the structure-borne feedback problems which can damage the performance of even the best designed turntables.
I believe even Dertonarm agrees with us on this?
If you read the last page of the latest TAS in an interview with Peter Ledermann of Soundsmith.......he was asked for his most important tips for good audio.
A sturdy wall shelf.... was his answer.
And yes.......a concrete slab on the ground (not suspended).....is far better than a suspended wood floor in resisting structure-borne sound transmission.

Dear Raul,
Thank you for those Links......interesting.
OK.....in the face of some good arguments and experienced listeners I have opened my mind to the possibility of good turntables of the suspended variety?
I really need to hear the top line SME 30/2 sometime?

Dear Raul,

The SME 30/2 a top performer... aua. You are not joking I guess.
Hmm? Ok, I have heard it in a very good Kondo chain in it`s motherland with a mounted SME V. Okay if it is a top performer the Walker is the Giant. Both is not true in my very honest opinion.

Hope this is not the benchmark you draw your comparisons on TTs. But I am afraid you do. Hmmm...

best @ fun only