Skeletal vs Plinth style turntables

Halcro.

Ok to answer your criticism's of my posts
Most DD TTs use a synchronous motor with some type of feedback or a non synchronous motor also with feedback.

In each case, if all is properly functioning the motor is COMPELLED to rotate at the correct AVERAGE speed. It depends upon the drive design how it reacts at smaller time increments.
I have witnessed this incremental speed change by proxy on a Goldmnud studio by scoping its power supply. There plain as day was a distorted view of the music that was currently being played. Clearly the PS was not stiff enough but that is not the main point here. There can be only one cause of this modulation of the power supply. The platter is momentarily slowing in sync with the music and the motor/ controller assembly is reacting to this by drawing more current to correct the speed drop. The timeline test is showing that your TT is working correctly but do you honestly believe that its servo has some sort of preview of the upcoming modulation and reacts predictively? Of course not, it REACTS to a slow down and corrects. These errors are happening in real time, but it's average speed is correct. The platters inertia alone is insufficient.
I did these tests 20 years ago and they proved to me, back then, that stylus drag exists.

Then their is the subjective test. A frequent comment from my customers who have had MK3's upgraded is that the speed stability is improved yet the MK3 passes the time line test. I do a lot of work on the speed sensing mechanism in the upgrade so this observation does not surprise me.
We should not need remanding that our hobby is subjective by nature.

I do not understand how the time line test proves that the pod is not moving? All it is measuring is the platter's speed.

Richardkrebs,

The timeline test is showing that your TT is working correctly but do you honestly believe that its servo has some sort of preview of the upcoming modulation and reacts predictively? Of course not, it REACTS to a slow down and corrects.

This is what I mean.....
You present not a shred of scientific evidence to prove what you say or disprove what the Timeline shows....
Yet you reach a positive conclusion stated with precise conviction....

I do not understand how the time line test proves that the pod is not moving? All it is measuring is the platter's speed.

If this is true....I fear that you do not understand the basic physics of the question you pose.....

Halcro
Humor me.
Explain how passing the timeline test proves that the arm pod is not moving.

Cheers

Richardkrebs,
The Timeline works by detecting stylus drag which is caused by friction.
To make an armpod move via the stylus/tonearm it must be solely by the friction (stylus drag) which is your hypothesis....
You need to understand and appreciate things like the mass, density and the inertia of the tonearm pod. Then you need to understand the disposition of the centre of gravity of such an item and the shear stresses which need to be transferred through the cartridge/tonearm to the fixing plate to then be converted to a bending-moment force sufficient to overturn such a mass about its centre of gravity.
Before any of that occurs....the frictional forces of the stylus in the record groove will have ground the record to a halt...and possibly into the dust...
But common sense will make this obvious to even lay folk....

Halcro
Yes I get the arm pod high mass and footprint thing.

Again
How does passing the time line test prove that the arm pod is NOT moving.

Cheers