Technics SP-10 mkII speed adjustment question

All points well taken, altho thankfully all of the turntables you mention are more attractive than the metaphor you chose to describe them.

In my view any serious attempt to replinth theSP10mk3 would include throwing away the exoskeleton and motor covers and bolt the motor, bearing & tonearm mounting base rigidly to a common sub chassis to maximise rigidity and minimise any potential movement within the platter/turntable/arm/cartridge loop.

I'm sure dropping the SP10mk3 into a slate or Panzerholz "plinth" makes a difference but it is only a half pie solution in my view.

You have obviously not studied what was done with my version of the MK3 plinth, Panzerholz plus metal interior plate attached to the MK3 using stainless steel bolts.

Underneath there is a large steel plate with stainless bolts through the chassis and metal plate, into the MK3 carriage. A large non magnetic threaded brass rod attaches to the bearing and undercarriage capturing the Technics from any vertical movement and provided a sync for vibration.

The arm boards are attached with stainless steel plate, attached with stainless steel screws and fixed to the same plate as the chassis of the MK3.

This is 90 pounds (+) of "cure' for what was originally supplied by Technics. The sorry "glass" plinth by Technics was a joke and none of the tables you list has a plinth with even a fraction the effort and material that was put into ours.

Last, the top plate of the MK3 does not matter one whit once the other issues are resolved. In my opinion this is simply an easy way to purchase beater SP10 MK3 and not have to repair or restore the damages chassis parts to make it presentable.

Hi Albert -
I refer to panzerholz or slate plinths in general - not yours.
I have no idea what your plinth or the Artisan Fidelity does. That you have addressed many of the structural issues within the Technics as opposed to just "cutting a hole" underpins the thrust of my post to highlight that to replinth is not a straightforward task - one has to understand the pros and cons of their TT design from top to bottom, inside and out, before they start planning a major upgrade such as replinthing.
The purpose of the post was to get people to look deeper and think more deeply about their TT in order to improve it. Much of the work required is documented on the net.
In Lewms' case he has to make a long term decision whether to keep his NOS SP10 relatively stock, or gut it, but if you are going to gut it, why go half way.

Understood and I agree. There are many plinths for sale that are nothing more than a cookie cutter hole in a piece of material. Hardly a proper plinth.

As for Artisan Fidelity, their plinth is a copy of mine and I resent that. However there are others and probably will be more.

My Audiogon Lenco project is here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vbudg&1082337040&view

That was nine years ago, but I built dozens of plinths and worked with high end turntables thirty years before that post first appeared.

I agree most people don't address rigidity and that is perhaps the most important thing other than quality of materials.

The other people that put everything they know into making their plinth right is Steve Dobbins and Oswald Mills. All of us do it a bit different and each gets a bit different result but those are all originals and represent maximum effort.

"As for Artisan Fidelity, their plinth is a copy of mine and I resent that." Not so fast. Although Mr. Porter's tale makes for good story telling, anyone with a fastidious eye for detail and a keen memory should be able to spot immediately what classic Technics design was the near aesthetic duplicate of "yours". For those interested in investigating further, search Technics SH-10B3 Obsidian plinth on Google. Once a suitable image is located, note the familiar beveled edge angles (top and bottom) and armboard location and shape. Now, if one were to imagine this plinth's center slightly taller and a slightly longer armboard.....you get the idea. An original exterior design, yes, only by Technics circa 1980 or so. This base criteria also served as a personal design concept of mine on paper, long ago. Constrained layer damping in mechanical engineering is a practice which has been utilized in various industries, even audio for decades. Panzerholz, again, not invented or conceived by the poster above. Furthermore, the internals of these two respective Sp10 designs differ substantially. The method of cld layering, applied isolation, bonding, materials used, finishing techniques and implementation as a whole vary to a significant degree. The principal similarities of the plinths in question are almost solely aesthetic in nature. While we are sharing openly, inquisitive readers might also be interested in researching Artisan Fidelity's once unique practice of thick outer plank wrapping over a constrained layer core. This practice has been embraced by AF from the start and only later copied by certain others. If anyone is curious as to why another might suddenly switch their approach from thin to thick panel wrap, just ask, the whole story is an enlightening one, that much I can assure you. And the sudden offerings of Sp10Mk3's with aluminum chassis refinishes? A "copy" perhaps of our long standing practice or merely coincidence? The list goes on, but why bother....

Where credit is due on Mr. Porter's behalf, in my humble opinion, lies in helping bring to light the vast potential of these particular direct drives of a bygone era, the Technics Sp10Mk2 and Mk3 which were once overlooked by many, primarily as a result of poor implementation. (ie. plinth design) In this capacity, this individual has served as an inspiration to both myself and others. This includes the fundamental approach of Panzerholz core based plinths in conjunction with the above stated models.

Artisan Fidelity's core substratum methods employed for Panzerholz based and conventional style plinths have been proprietary since day one for each individuals set design requirements and tailored uniquely for each make and model. For anyone following our work, never have our aesthetics for the Technics Sp10 remained static and based solely around the vintage factory SH-10B3 Obsidian plinth or "Porter" style in question. Moreover, our latest Sp10Mk2 and Mk3 next generation design efforts build upon knowledge learned through previous conventional design approaches and are a significant departure from either.

Never has Mr. Porter made an effort to approach me privately regarding his feelings on the Sp10 plinth style matter, instead he wishes to continually express his thoughts in a contriving manor on public forums. Perhaps had he contacted me early on, and made the choice to discuss things directly like a professional, as a like minded audio enthusiast, we could have avoided these unpleasant and unnecessary forum antics.

Time to put this to rest.