Brinkmann vs TW Acustic

Suteetat
CT0517, I only have one motor. It takes around 13-15s for the platter to come to a complete stop when I timed mine (Raven AC-1 with BN battery supply)

Thanks for that info Suteetat.
Is anyone running two motors or three ? Does the 13 -15 seconds elapsed time of a single motor – (platter to a complete stop from 33 1/3) – change when an additional motor is added?

Can anyone supply this data? I will provide some comparisons that I think are interesting and relevant especially if using battery.

Thanks

If a 160 pds Vibraplane with another 100+ pds tt slides away putting additional 0.2 pds on it, you have a serious problem with your total setup. Maybe that's also the reason why 200g records sound different from 180grs ;)

This may end up competing with Raul's thread for longest on the website, but it also competes with the now defunct TV series, "Seinfeld", in that the subject is "nothing".

Thuchan, I have to disagree with you. At least in theory it should not be best to place the motor drive of a belt drive system on a completely separate support from that of the turntable itself. This is a cardinal sin of bad belt-drive turntable design. (The commercial product analog is to use a suspended chassis bearing the platter and tonearm whilst the motor drive is fixed to the inert plinth.) This results in some of the most obvious "wow" that I've ever heard in vinyl reproduction. The original AR turntable was guilty of that infraction, as were the early SOTA turntables. Especially, to put the turntable on a Vibraplane or similar device and the motor on an inert shelf system is asking for trouble.

Heradot, I doubt that any of the 260 lb Vibraplanes are sliding away with the addition of a record on the platter. My point is that because the Vibraplanes (and other air suspension systems) need a compressor to remain inflated in the long term means that at some interval, the air bladders need to be filled up again slightly. My compressor goes on for about 5 seconds every day or two. I can't hear it so it does not matter. It is supplying three Vibraplanes with 270 on each unit so there is a lot of pressure and air does escape slightly.

Because the unit needs air occasionally, it is changing very slightly in height or level or both. That is why it has automatic self-leveling. It follows that any part of the turntable system (motor, flywheel etc) should not be located on a different surface if absolute control of the dimensions within the system are to be maintained.

Perhaps this is only theoretical because it may not be heard, but then we are also talking about the accuracy of the Timeline vs the KAB and other devices. To remain consistent, if one argues for the Timeline, he should also argue for a fixed/closed motor pulley to platter distance, spindle to pivot distance etc, etc. How can it be otherwise?

As far as the thread is concerned, all of the Brinkman and TW Acustic BD tables I have heard and seen maintain this fixed motor to platter distance because they are placed on a common platform.

Peterayer,

Thank you for explaining in more detail. This thread isn't making too much sense. Too many contradictions.

I am surprised you needed isolation for your SME. I thought the O rings would do the trick. But when I think about it, it makes sense. Nothing is as god as a separate platform. The first time I "heard" my Raven was after isolating it. Even concrete floors make standing waves.

I just don't believe any turntable can be judged until isolated. I hunk the best solution is a singular isolation system for the entire analogu system, and maybe Independant platforms to absorb energy on top of the isolation platform separating the motor and turntable. Maybe even the Tonearms if you want to be obsessive. I am just happy so don't worry too much. I just need better vinyl or really the Audio Desk system so I can get more listening time.