2. analog
  3. 1317949815

Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?

I have just acquired a 32 year old JVC/Victor TT-101 DD turntable after having its lesser brother, the TT-81 for the last year.
TT-101
This is one of the great DD designs made at a time when the giant Japanese electronics companies like Technics, Denon, JVC/Victor and Pioneer could pour millions of dollars into 'flagship' models to 'enhance' their lower range models which often sold in the millions.
Because of their complexity however.......if they malfunction.....parts are 'unobtanium'....and they often cannot be repaired.
halcro
fleib
1,124 posts
 
Lewm,
There's another side of this coin. A rigid coupling of the arm pivot and main bearing, has greater potential to degrade. DD motor vibrations will be more easily transmitted to the arm.

A strict relationship between arm and platter can be maintained with high mass pod and platter structure, mass coupled to, or rigidly fixed to the mounting surface. In this case pivot to main bearing distance is not compromised. With either approach success depends on implementation.
Regards,
fleib
1,124 posts
 
Dover,
Your "rules" apply to belt drive tables and seem inappropriate here. How is a DD motor mounted on a separate platform? Using a plinth or subchassis does not necessarily maintain mounting distance better than separate pods.
Regards,
fleib
1,124 posts
 
Thuchan,
I was thinking a cantilevered armboard would have greater potential to resonate, but maybe that too would depend on execution.

Free floating pods? I think the pods would have to be coupled in some way. If by free floating you mean mass coupled, that would be possible, but difficult to execute. If you eliminate the plinth/subchassis, then the mounting surface becomes the means of closing the loop. Pods could also be rigidly coupled.
Regards,
thuchan
1,009 posts
 
Dear Lewm,
that seems to be a brilliant idea: why not building a massive slate plinth, let the 101 sink in the middle and Henry`s pods at three other holes having rigid contact with the slate plinth. will draw a draft.
thuchan
1,009 posts
 
Dear Fleib,
okay - that makes sense! I could build up a round aluminum (or using other material!?) corpus in which the 101 sinks in keeping rigid contact. Three floating but rigidly coupled armbases -eventually not neccessarily flying in the air- keep contact with the corpus via two massive tubes like at the Feickert Triple. The armpods will carry a flexible upper level segment which can be exchanged like at Henry`s pods.
This upper level plate will also carry a flexible & fast changing system as it is implemented at the Firebird thus enabling using 12, 10 and 9 inch arms.

This design could fulfill the rigid contact requirements of arms, motor and platter. The main issue will be that the 101 keeps contact with that "kind of plinth" as you suggest.
regards
More to discover