A difficult LP reproduction question


I have a nice high end system and wish to add a second turntable (for fun!). The choices are likely Thorens TD124MK ll or Lenco L75. Both these are old technology and will spin 78 RPM and use idler drive.

Desire is to experiment with moving magnet cartridge, inexpensive phono stages and 78 RPM records to name but a few.

Here are but a few of the economy priced phono stages that I've been researching for the past three weeks. (Hope that explains my lack of posting lately).

Seduction
http://www.bottlehead.com/et/adobespc/Seduction/seduction.htm

EAR 834P Deluxe
http://www.ear-usa.com/earproducts.htm

Lehmann Audio Black Cube SE
http://www.amusicdirect.com/products/detail.asp?sku=ALEHBCPLUS

Antique Soundlab Mini
http://www.divertech.com/aslminiphono.htm

Musical Fidelity X-LPSv3
http://www.musicalfidelity.com/xponframeset.html

NAD PP2
http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_amplifiers/pp2_closerlook.htm

Any Audiogon member that have direct experience with any combination of these, I would appreciate your comments.
128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xalbertporter
Another deck, unfortunately more rare (particularly outside UK) that would be excellent for 78rpm replay is the Strathclyde Transcription Developments Ltd STD305D. This, sadly no longer available, deck is belt drive (using a DC motor) and has an electronic speed control unit complete with digital readout which can be varied electronically over quite a wide range. Check it out on my STD site:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/willbewill/

regards
willbewill
Johnnantais...A massive turntable will prevent high frequency speed variations. If you know the stylus drag force variation, and the angular inertia of the platter you can calculate speed variation, even neglecting any tendency of the motor to smooth things out.

I think that the stylus drag probably correlates with "Trackability", a parameter where Shure pickups excel. What do you use nowadays for stylus downforce for 78's? In the old days, when 78's were new, downforce of 5 to 10 grams was used, and this would certainly cause a lot more drag.
Eldartford, do you know I never actually tried to play 78s on my Lencos? I stumbled on them entirely by accident one day, and that particular model being defective, I simply threw out everything which was not directly connected to the drive system, thus accidentally modding it and being blown away by the sound. From there, hooked, I pursued the idler wheel grail. But from perusal of various 78 and mono stylii, I believe these can be tracked today from as low as 2 grams and up to 5. Others with hands-on experience will know more.

While it's true that high mass platters overcome belt reaction to a certain degree, what is actually happening, since physics cannnot simply be banished, is that this mass lowers the frequency of the reaction, as the belt reaction must overcome greater mass/inertia, thus reacting continually, but at a slower pace. This is why high-mass decks sound less lively than lower-mass decks (their bass rhythms messed up by low-frequency reaction), which major in PRaT, versus the information retrieval of high-mass decks which overcomes high-frequency belt reactions. I used to have one of the highest mass platters in the business on my Maplenoll, a 40-pound lead platter. Yes, there was greater retrieval of information, but it also sacrificed the famed Maplenoll liveliness. I eventually went back to the lower-mass Maplenoll Athena, which is far more musical. Thus is the high-mass/low-mass phenomenon exposed, as the human ear is still the best measuring instrument we have, with respect to music. Once I had a good idler wheel properly set-up, I was forced to seek the causes of the great increase in detail, attack, bass, imaging, and so on. So, having experience of both high-mass (Maplenoll Ariadne) and low-mass (Ariston, AR-XA modded, Maplenoll Athena) belt-drive 'tables, I came up with the above theory, which seems to fit the facts. A recent review of the Origin Live Aurora Gold turntable in Stereo Times had the following to say: "The heart of music is time and timing: music unfolds in its own created universe of time, divided into smaller sections placed within that fluid time scheme, divided further down to the individual note. Each individual note begins with silence, rises to its intended volume and then decays. Identifying that note, the instrument playing it and the physical location of it are all based on an exact sequence in time. It wouldn’t be too false a metaphor to understand music as an emotional language based on intervals of tone and time."

And what has better speed stability than an idler-wheel drive with perfect wheel, incredible cogless 4-pole 1800-rpm motor, and massive balanced flywheel platter which creates a closed system (groove modulations and stylus drag? what's that?) in which the platter smooths out the motor's revolutions while the motor carries the platter relentlessly? And yes, you're right, this extemely high-torque design is an accident of being designed for high stylus pressures - 5 to 10 grams - in the old days. But properly designed and implemented (a heavy, non-resonant plinth), the extreme speed stability regardless of groove modulations and stylus pressure is entirely audible at 33 1/3 rpm, even compared to the best of belt-drives. Again from the same review: "Since accurate tracking of the timing of a note - it’s loudness, attack, flowering and decay is also the perceptual mechanism behind reproducing a coherent stereo image, it’s no surprise that the I/AG is as adept at reproducing the stereo illusion as it is with the music unfolding within that illusion." And here speed stability must be the reason my Lenco with Rega arm clearly out-images and out-soundstages my parallel-tracking Maplenoll (the precursor of the E-T tonearms, the Maplenoll having been designed in part by Bruce Thigpen). To conlude, it's not for nothing that I flipped over the Lencos. A series of accidents beginning with a 'table which was designed to combat extreme stylus drag in the days of 78s, and ending with a lad who already owned a Maplenoll Ariadne and Audiomeca turntable, but in a foreign land needing a table cheap and picking an idler-wheel 'table he had never heard of at a flea market.
Where did the information above come from about "mass lowers the frequency of reaction"? I am very curious, and would like to read more.

Richard
Richard, the information came from nowhere but simple physics, my own experiments and experience with my own large collection of record decks, and the almost universally-noticed phenomenon that high-mass record decks simply don't have the "boogie factor" that low-mass decks like the Linn LP12 (and other similar decks) have. Rubber belts react, being rubber bands or springs, if you will. As the belt stretches on one side due to the braking action of groove modulations (the greater the modulations the greater the braking action) and the continuing pull of the motor, it must eventually contract. The lighter the platter, the more quickly it will contract. The heavier the platter, the greater the energy required to drag it (mass/inertia), and the slower the reaction, which affects the bass frequencies and thus the rhythm.

As I wrote up above, this is my theory to account for what I and others have heard and continue to hear. Take for instance this discussion on this forum of the strengths of various designs in "VPI Scout or Michell Technodec?": "But I would say that I'm now a believer in the 'theory' that high mass decks rob music of the life/prat/essence of music on vinyl. I don't see that teres does anything to handle resonance other than throwing lots of mass at it and this results in a dull presentation that I personally find boring and takes away one of the important reasons I love vinyl." Add to this the HiFi World review of the Garrard: "I also strongly suspect, after listening to the very clean transient starts and stops supported by this turntable, that its high torque drive system suffers less from dynamic slowing than belt drives." Simply a theory drawn from a series of sources and personal experience.

Once again I resort to the most recent consideration of this phenomenon (which I have followed avidly ever since discovering idler-wheel drives) from a Stereo Times review of the Origin Live turntable: "I must admit to severe disappointment with the musical delivery of most of the High End turntables and tonearms beloved of US audiophiles. This was as true in 1973 as it is today. Consequently I ran Duals and AR’s instead of the Thorens and Japanese direct-drives that were the rage in the mid-70’s; a Connoisseur when everyone lusted for a Technics SP 10, Kenwood KD 500 or Denon direct drive. Similarly, I owned Regas and Linns when Goldmunds, Well-Tempereds, SOTA’s and VPI’s were the High End darlings. The overall pre-occupation with stereoscopy and with sonic special effects of most High End record players pays too little attention to the core values of musical communication. (One prominent designer even admits that he was no idea of how to design a turntable with that sine qua non of the UK design school: articulating rhythm, phrasing, tempo and drive.) Consequently I find these tables turgid, dissecting, prosaic and unable to dance: you hear everything about the sonic event except what the music means."

While this phenomenon has been noted for as long as I have been paying attention (mid-'80s), the only theory so far to account for it is that mass absorbs energy and releases it over time, the greater the mass, the slower and more drawn-out the release. I submit that it is not this (heavy idler-wheel 'tables for instance and heavy direct drives do not suffer this problem with PRaT...all dance clubs use direct drives), but simple belt reaction, the heavier the platter, the slower the reaction. Of course, anyone can react to this theory in a number of ways: 1) deny that high-mass belt-drive 'tables have any problem with PRaT; 2) PRaT is an illusion; 3) high-mass aborbs energy and releases it over time; 4) disagree with all of the above and wait for a better theory; 5) agree with the theory. There are probably other reactions, and I'm sure at some point I will discover them. I read all record player reviews I can uncover (it is a sickness with me), as I find the whole "design's impact on the music" thing fascinating. I experiment extensively at home, and listen to various decks when I can in other systems. It's that "magic" factor that I find supremely important in music, and I believe this comes down to timing, or PRaT, as does the above reviewer and Art Dudley, among many others. The pursuit of high mass in record player design is a runaway train with no musical (PRaT) foundation.