Turnable database with TimeLine

01-16-14: Richardkrebs
The goldmund feedback is very fast as observed on the scope current draw plot. Much faster than 0.3 sec . As I posted earlier, it was responding note by note. A startling observation.

I'm very keen to try this test on my Final Audio. Could you please explain, if I use Mahler's 2nd for the test, which instrument should I listen to for the "note by note" ? Tympani ? Violin ? 1st or 2nd ?...
Could you explain what scope you used and how you calculated your reported result of less than 0.3sec for the servo response.

Since you keep referring to the Goldmund Studio, could you explain the reasons you went about modifying the power supply - what were the deficiencies that you could hear that prompted you to modify the power supply. Goldmund claim in their brochures that they used a new motor with built in regulator and Quartz controlled speed with response times fast enough to be immune from power line variations and to use an unregulated power supply.

Could you also explain what differences you could hear when you sold the Goldmund to purchase your SP10mk3. I recall that you told me at the time that the SP10mk3 was the only Direct Drive TT that you could not hear cogging or servo correction derived artifices. You told me at the time that the SP10mk2 and Goldmund did not have enough torque and thats why we could hear timing problems.

Dover,
Less than 0.3 seconds servo response came from observing current draw modulation in the kHz range, in sync with the music being played. The test was done with the system muted and live to check if it was some sort of acoustical feedback phenomenon.
There is only one possible cause of this.....
The platters speed was being modulated note by note. The controller / motor assembly was responding to this and " attempting" to stabilise the speed. This shows a controller frequency response in the kHz range. A speed that is not unusual in the industrial field.

Suggest a better test piece for you would be " Final Fantasy" by Nobuo Uematsu.

Lew,

To write somerhing useful for readers, the Kuzma "Reference" runs also with wrong Speed (too fast)....the search goes on :-)

I wouldn't worry what Syntax writes......
For years...he has maligned the TW Acustic Raven turntables on every audio Forum he could find....
With overtones of arrogant superiority.....his subjective diatribes may have left many owners of these fine turntables feeling insecure....especially in the face of his proclaimed superiority for the Micro Seiki RX-5000?
With the advent of the Timeline....we finally have an OBJECTIVE scientific measure of the speed accuracy and consistency of any turntable.
And still over the last two years.......Syntax has proclaimed that not one...out of a dozen Raven AC turntables he had tested....could pass the Timeline Test...whilst his RX-5000 was "burning holes in the wall" with its Timeline accuracy?
The first time we see visual proof of the Timeline with my Raven AC-2 and his Micro Seiki RX-5000....you can see the Raven keeping absolutely consistent timing under load albeit at 33.31rpm (an error of .06% which is better than any turntable's printed specification)....and keeping dead-on 33.33rpm spinning freely.
Yet the laser mark with the RX-5000 can be seen to drift forwards of the letter K in the word FRUHBECK...then backwards to the C and then even further back under the letter E before appearing suddenly under the letter K again.
This cycle keeps repeating throughout the video (which is shorter than all the other videos posted).....and there is no filming with the cartridge 'up' so that comparisons can be made about the effects of stylus drag as is done on all my videos?
This objective evidence demonstrates a very poor performance from the Micro Seiki RX-5000 IMHO....and I would recommend to all those with Raven turntables who ever again see malicious subjective comments posted against these fine turntables....to simply post the two comparative videos shown on this Thread.

And those who may own Kuzma Reference turntables......notice that no visual evidence has been filed in support of these 'cheap' words from Syntax?
He prefers that you simply 'believe him'?

Hi Moonglum,
As the Raven motor controller has 'stepped' increments of speed control....the 'under-load' speed can only be adjusted to be +/- 0.06%....a superb specification incidentally.
It is a fluke that the 'exact' speed is achieved without load....
Other Raven owners with belts under tighter of looser tension....may fluke an 'exact' speed under load....but this will be slightly higher whilst spinning freely.

Peterayer,
As Ron Sutherland explained it to me......you are only using ONE laser flash hitting the wall every 1.8 seconds.
With the first few models sold.......locating that single flash on the wall where you want it.....was quite difficult and time consuming.
With a choice of one of six flashes.....that 'positioning' problem has been made easier.