Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

Wonderful information, photos and Links from HiHo as usual.........
I really think from the descriptions of the TT-81 and TT-101 motors in their respective Service Manuals....that HiHo and Caligari are correct about the TT-81 NOT being a 'coreless' motor?
As for me taking apart my TT-81.......HaHa HiHo.....and you too Banquo....:-)

But for your collection of images HiHo......here are all the ones I have of my TT-81:-
TT-81
TT-81
TT-81
TT-81

If the TT-71 and TT-81 motors are the same......why have the two models?
The TT-71 motor is described as "12-pole, 24-slot, DC type FG servomotor with Starting Torque of more than 1Kg-Cm and Drift per hour of 0.0001%"....whilst the TT-81 motor is described as "DC Servomotor with Starting Torque of 1.3Kg-Cm and Drift per hour of 0.0004%".
These are different specifications with the added benefit of the TT-81 having quartz-locked positive and negative servo control as does the TT-101.
Perhaps the most defining clue to the differing motors is in their Power consumption...13 watts for the TT-81 and 15 watts for the TT-71.

HiHo,
Your interest in the Victor motors seem to have been ignited by your experiences with the TT-71.....is that correct?
Your research, photos and Links are certainly invaluable to this Data Base.
I haven't heard a TT-71...but I know the Professor (Timeltel) has one and is quite pleased......
I have more than five times the expense invested in my TT-101 over the TT-81....and would love to say that the performance difference is worth the cost....?
Unfortunately (or fortunately)...that is not the case and I can honestly say that I can hear no differences between them.
But is that really so strange?
Apart from the added complexity of the electronics and the coreless motor.....the rest of the architecture of the two TTs are identical.
Same platter....same materials...same dimensions and structure and same quality of electronic parts.
As you can see from the Timeline videos of the two TTs.....their speed accuracies and consistencies are identical....so why wouldn't they sound the same?

As they are the best sounding turntables I have heard in 40 years.....the TT-81 must be the bargain of the century? :-)

Hearing back from Antonis about his TT-81 plinth......I was wrong about the granite slabs I thought he used.......
Instead of granite slabs.....he has designed and constructed some exotic stressed skin panels utilising bauxite balls and epoxy sandwiched between two sheets of aluminium.
You can see it all here
Who needs (new) turntable manufacturers when we have inventive and knowledgeable audiophiles able to utilise the best DD turntables ever made?

Hello Halcro,

I own 2 of the TT-81's. One is in storage sitting on the shelf. It has been completely rebuilt (including all caps.)
Your comment about it "must be the bargain of the century" is something I have to agree with. I also own a VPI Aries Extended with all mods. I prefer the TT-81!
Regards'
Don

04-04-14: Halcro:
"If the TT-71 and TT-81 motors are the same......why have the two models?"

While I cannot confirm they are the same -- the motors have different model numbers but, I believe, have similar structure -- there's really nothing unusual about using the same motor in different models. JVC and others are giant corporations and they don't think like audiophiles. It was very common to use similar parts with different features. Sometimes with improved electronics they implemented into older models with added features to come up with a new model. That happens all the time in their integrated tables and I can think of at least 5 or 6 models share the same motor. The JVC QL-Y66F has the same motor and electronics as QL-A70, except one has automatic tonearm and the other with manual tonearm. Just look at Technics, the SL-1200Mk2 architecture had been used in 6 or 7 models with various features such as tonearm, plinth, suspension, automation, pitch control, etc....

The best view of the motor is actually from the top, remove the platter and motor cover and you can get a glimpse of the motor structure. Judging by the provided photos, the motor is canister type so it's very likely a variation of the TT71 motor which is a core motor. Please continue to provide us motor porn though. :-)

At the end of the day, what matters is that you like the sound of the TT81 regardless of motor type. But the TT71, while decent, makes me desire more so I moved on to their integrated tables, which are sleepers but usually audiophiles are annoyed by their automatic tonearms. If many of these quality integrated tables have an armless version, history would have been rewritten. (If Lenco had more armless L75 models, audiophiles would not ignore them for so long. I know they do have the G-88 but...) The TT81 has advanced electronics so that might have pushed the performance to another level, evidenced by your approval.

My own observation so far is that I tend to prefer tables with coreless motor, they pass the solo violin test, exceptions are ones with magnet-less motors as found in Denon induction motor a la DP-60 or Sony PS-8750 or older Sony drag-cup motors with a copper rotor. Aside from top of the line models, many DD tables with traditional core motors as found in models by Technics, Pioneer, Kenwood, etc... do not float my boat. Of course, the motor is just one part of the turntable but in a DD system it's a major contributor to the sound. One can easily argue that the weaker torque of a coreless motor has a less dynamic sound and less drive or "jump" factor in character. So at the end of the day, find what you like is what matters. Audio is like food for me, I'm all about flavors and colors. Lamb chop is great but on some days I just want a salad. That's why we have multiple turntables! I'm sure someone (Raul?) will jump at me about neutrality, faithful to the source, bla bla blah...

______