Dover.
To answer your questions.
The servo does not know if you are going to play Mahler or Beethoven before the fact, but it does know very quickly when you do. The feedback is very fast. In much the same way that we do not know where a tennis player is going to hit the ball, yet we can follow its path smoothly without over or undershoot. This is the essence of properly designed closed loop control.
The no measurable speed change comment due to stylus drag was for the SP10MK3 and was taken from their specs. The power supply current draw observation was for the Goldmund and was a clear indication that stylus drag is real and significant. It does not, I agree, quantify its magnitude but it must be big since its effect was present even at treble frequencies. It does however give us a realtime picture. ( exluding propegation delay of the servo electronics, if you want to be precise ) I have not said that there is no measurable speed change with the Goldmund.
Loop rigidity and plinth energy dissipation. Of course these things effect attack, deacy et el. So does room treatment.
You didnt use the time line for the tests. My mistake.
The Goldmund and the LO7D are two completely different machines in concept and execution. The LO7D being an all out assult on the art of DD, TT design. The Goldmund was built to a price point using a badge engineered motor. While this motor does what it was designed to do, these price constraints show. Wrapping feedback around a motor does not elevate it above its core performance.
Peace.
Halcro.
Thanks for the test results. I agree with Tonywinsc, your dedication is impressive.
To answer your questions.
The servo does not know if you are going to play Mahler or Beethoven before the fact, but it does know very quickly when you do. The feedback is very fast. In much the same way that we do not know where a tennis player is going to hit the ball, yet we can follow its path smoothly without over or undershoot. This is the essence of properly designed closed loop control.
The no measurable speed change comment due to stylus drag was for the SP10MK3 and was taken from their specs. The power supply current draw observation was for the Goldmund and was a clear indication that stylus drag is real and significant. It does not, I agree, quantify its magnitude but it must be big since its effect was present even at treble frequencies. It does however give us a realtime picture. ( exluding propegation delay of the servo electronics, if you want to be precise ) I have not said that there is no measurable speed change with the Goldmund.
Loop rigidity and plinth energy dissipation. Of course these things effect attack, deacy et el. So does room treatment.
You didnt use the time line for the tests. My mistake.
The Goldmund and the LO7D are two completely different machines in concept and execution. The LO7D being an all out assult on the art of DD, TT design. The Goldmund was built to a price point using a badge engineered motor. While this motor does what it was designed to do, these price constraints show. Wrapping feedback around a motor does not elevate it above its core performance.
Peace.
Halcro.
Thanks for the test results. I agree with Tonywinsc, your dedication is impressive.