Show us your Turntables!!!

[Warren M.]

3 minutes ago, Rockford said:

Why would it change? If the record is now 4mm higher, I raise the whole tonearm assembly 4mm it should be the same VTA? or I am missing something?

Actually raising it by 2mm may be trivial or may be really messy. Could be as simple as turning a dial. Or could involve several finicky screws with a pole that doesn't slide until it is way too loose to control. For VTA which is finicky like that, my trick is to use a deck of cards to hold the tonearm in place, and remove cards one at a time until the position is correct, then tighten all the necessary screws. Works like a charm. So yeah, use that method and use any thickness mat you like.

[Rockford]

Thanks for that, appreciate your patience :-)

[PKay]

40 minutes ago, Warren M. said:

Actually raising it by 2mm may be trivial or may be really messy. Could be as simple as turning a dial. Or could involve several finicky screws with a pole that doesn't slide until it is way too loose to control. For VTA which is finicky like that, my trick is to use a deck of cards to hold the tonearm in place, and remove cards one at a time until the position is correct, then tighten all the necessary screws. Works like a charm. So yeah, use that method and use any thickness mat you like.

Your card trick is an excellent idea. 

[Warren M.]

On 27/07/2019 at 8:12 PM, YNWaN said:

This is is my turntable. The pic is a bit out of date now in that I have redesigned the record clamp and it has a different arm (a Javelin) and armboard. 

 

Tell us about the sound qualities of the rig. Do you intend to commercialise it (or have you already)? What went into the decisions you made along the way?

Cheers
Warren 

[YNWaN]

Hi Warren   

 

Sound quality is always a very subjective view and the turntable sits in a highly customised system that couldn’t be put together at a dealers, for example. However, given all of that, here is my opinion. Two of the major sonic ‘fingerprints’ of the deck are how quiet the backgrounds are and how solid and stable the sound and stereo image are. I was listening to Aldous Harding’s first album recently and you can very clearly hear the background hum that is recorded onto this record when between tracks (great record though). A huge amount of detail is retrieved but it isn’t thrust at you in an obvious, or forced, sense. Instruments in a complex mix can be sought out and followed (recording permitting) and you can often hear the individual acoustic around them (that can seem a bit odd when different instruments in a mix have differing acoustic spaces around them. Dynamic contrast, moth micro and macro, can be quite startling!

 

The deck pictured is the third outright scratch built deck I’ve done (each developments of the previous) - but this last deck has been in development, on and off, for 20+ years now and there is a fourth generation version approaching completion. There have been approaches made with suggestions of commercial build but nobody has yet fronted sufficient funds to make that a reality. Despite the apparent visual simplicity this is actually quite a complex design and would be relatively expensive to produce .

 

Over the years I’ve done a huge amount of theorising, experimenting, re-theorising etc. What was once sketches in notebooks is now CAD drawings in Solidworks.

 

In essence, the primary intent is to keep everything as modular as possible and also try to give each element one, rather than two or more, jobs to do - this is actually quite rare in turntables where many components have contrasting, and sometimes contradictory, roles to play. Throughout my designs I have used contrasting masses in that the chassis to which the arm is mounted has been of low mass but high stiffness and critically damped. However, the main suspended mass is high and this gives the suspension a low resonant frequency and a relative immunity to high amplitude shock. For example, my deck is on a suspended wooden floor (top floor room in a Victorian town house) and, whilst a record is playing, you can stamp next to it with no ill effect. The biggest difference with my most recent design is that the motor pod sits within the main suspended mass rather than outside of it (which has been the case with my earlier design. This has been made possible due to better motor control (electronic) that reduces motor vibration, a quieter motor in the first place and a complex motor mount that has its own suspension element designed into it. Low noise, absolute speed stability, fast transmission of vibration with critical damping - these are the tenants by which I design. 

 

Sorry all for the lengthy and pompous diatribe   

Edited August 1, 2019 by YNWaN

[Tasebass]

On 01/08/2019 at 10:58 PM, YNWaN said:

 

 

Over the years I’ve done a huge amount of theorising, experimenting, re-theorising etc.

with the release of the Khan top plate for the LP12 that Roger introduced several years ago now could I fabricate idea's I had been toying with for decades regarding the LP12  Mark..

Even when fabricated I still experimented with products including your Tranquillity MagLev .... The Mober bearing from Edmund Chan and some damping "tweaking" the said Khan top plate among others with the idea of creating a "quite room" for the sub chassis to operate at full potential which in my case is the Keel...

As you say and I have noticed that the more silent things are the better the overall performance of the TT and associated equipment...

I must say the Tranquillity/Mober bearing combo I find to be excellent... 

 

Tase.

[YNWaN]

Hey Tase, good to hear you are enjoying what the Tranquility does  . In my own deck the mag-lev. bearing works slightly differently as the platter is fully floated free from the thrust pad. However, it also has a very heavily viscously locked bearing and it was thought that this combo would be a step too far for the majority of LP12 owners. I also felt it would likely put too great a torsional moment on the suspension and custom electronics might also be needed. I’m also not sure it could be made to work with the D.C. motor Linn have started to use. Overall I felt it was better if we just removed the majority of the load on the main bearing rather than float the platter completely. 

[Guest gnnett]

2 hours ago, YNWaN said:

Overall I felt it was better if we just removed the majority of the load on the main bearing rather than float the platter completely

Well I would be keen to know if the effect of the magnet(s), as well as reducing, or in your case removing vertical load on the bearing, does it also reduce load on the lateral bearings? Or does the arrangement actually also provide increased stability laterally, I think commonly referred to as "teeter-totter"?

 

Cheers

 

Grant

 

[YNWaN]

Neither arrangement makes any difference to the side load the bearing experiences; this is largely governed by the tension of the drive belt and the balance of the platter. However, as you suspect, both arrangements do add an element of lateral stability. 

[andyr]

10 hours ago, gnnett said:

Well I would be keen to know if the effect of the magnet(s), as well as reducing, or in your case removing vertical load on the bearing, does it also reduce load on the lateral bearings? Or does the arrangement actually also provide increased stability laterally, I think commonly referred to as "teeter-totter"?

 

Cheers

 

Grant

 

 

7 hours ago, YNWaN said:

Neither arrangement makes any difference to the side load the bearing experiences; this is largely governed by the tension of the drive belt and the balance of the platter. However, as you suspect, both arrangements do add an element of lateral stability. 

 

In terms of lateral stability ("less teeter totter"), Mark, do you think that 2 belts, 180 deg opposite each other, will improve matters ... or not?

 

My gut feel was that it could only improve stability - and reduce side-wear - as the chassis is no longer being pulled to one side ... but maybe this lack of sideways force makes the bearing less stable?

 

Andy

 

Edited August 3, 2019 by andyr

[Tasebass]

13 hours ago, YNWaN said:

However, it also has a very heavily viscously locked bearing and it was thought that this combo would be a step too far for the majority of LP12 owners

Wow!!

Well I would have been very keen had you and Roger pursued the ideas...

 

Cheers Tase.

 

[YNWaN]

Hey Tase, as it happens Roger and I have discussed a more ‘hard core’ MkII version of the Tranquility, so we shall have to see (I wouldn’t hold your breath though and it’s certainly not imminent). The primary problem is that the Linn/LP12 owning community is, for the most part, a pretty conservative bunch. 

[Guest gnnett]

Well I can assure you that the Lenco community is far from conservative.  

[YNWaN]

19 hours ago, andyr said:

 

 

In terms of lateral stability ("less teeter totter"), Mark, do you think that 2 belts, 180 deg opposite each other, will improve matters ... or not?

 

My gut feel was that it could only improve stability - and reduce side-wear - as the chassis is no longer being pulled to one side ... but maybe this lack of sideways force makes the bearing less stable?

 

Andy

 

 

Hi Andy, this concept of ‘teeter totter’ is theoretically a problem but, in realty, of small scale importance (relatively). If one looks at used LP12 bearings (both shaft tip and thrust pad) the wear shows pretty consistent pressure marks and no evidence the bearing has been processing. I’ve been able to inspect quite a lot of LP12 bearings over the years, both Cirkus and earlier, and pressure wear marks are evident, though side wear is very low and wear marks are concentric and even. Side wear of the bearing is not really of concern as surface velocity of the rotating components is very low and no real wear is evident even in very old examples. 

 

Lack of side  force could theoretically make the bearing less stable and the Well Tempered decks specifically make use of the one sided belt tension to centre the bearing, for example. However, I believe that the majority of these issues can be addressed successfully by using a sufficiently viscous lubricant. In a ‘normal’ LP12 the linn ‘black oil’ is a good choice. Not because it has any magic properties but It is sufficiently viscous as to lock the lateral load of the bearing and yet not so thick that it significantly increases load on the motor. However, as the LP12 bearing uses an upper and lower bush arrangement it is extremely important that the bearing shaft is fully immersed in oil - much easier to achieve with the Cirkus bearing with its added oil well at the top. 

 

What two opposing belts does clearly offer is a more balanced pull (or potentially so) on the suspension. As the motors exist outside of the suspension loop this suggests potential speed stability benefits by minimising lateral suspension displacement. However, the positioning of the motors is very important as the asymmetric layout of the suspension points creates a clear axis of lateral rotation in the suspension. 

 

Sorry to ‘go on’ - have I answered clearly?

Edited August 4, 2019 by YNWaN

[YNWaN]

2 hours ago, gnnett said:

Well I can assure you that the Lenco community is far from conservative.  

In Australia perhaps but I’m afraid I didn’t find the UK Lenco forum very receptive, or friendly for that matter  . In fact, after a short while I requested that my account be deleted and I haven’t returned since. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by YNWaN

[Guest gnnett]

Sorry to hear that, although I do have a foot in both camps and have often thought of getting the Tranquillity for my LP12 and figuring out how to adapt another to the G99.

 

Your comments above confirm that my thoughts of adding platter mass, still needs to consider platter balance.

 

Cheers

 

Grantn 

Edited August 4, 2019 by gnnett

[YNWaN]

I’m not sure it would be worth trying to modify a Tranquility to work with a Lenco as it is very specifically sized to fit the LP12 and also made to match the mass of the platter. 

 

You don’t say as much but I guess that when you talk about adding platter mass you are referring to the common technique of stacking a second platter to a Lenco? There are two problems with this; firstly platter balance but also, and closely linked, second, the centre of gravity is raised quite significantly and the moment of leverage* on the bearing shaft is also raised - at which point side loads can become an issue. 

 

* magnetic bearings like the Tranquility and my own do effectively lower the centre of gravity of the platter as the bearing sees it. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by YNWaN

[Frank Prowse Hi-Fi]

This classic brought in for a service yesterday - the one and only Elac Miracord 50H

 

 

[Demondes]

Wow 50H, is the original version with the papst motor?

[dwbasement]

My RD11s has been at my mate's place for almost half a year I think, finally back home.

[andyr]

On 04/08/2019 at 5:55 PM, YNWaN said:

Hey Tase, as it happens Roger and I have discussed a more ‘hard core’ MkII version of the Tranquility, so we shall have to see (I wouldn’t hold your breath though and it’s certainly not imminent). The primary problem is that the Linn/LP12 owning community is, for the most part, a pretty conservative bunch. 

 

Would be very interested, Mark!    (Given my TT, now, is basically a 'LINO' - "Linn In Name Only".  )

 

(Especially since my mate Steve has just come up with some mag-lev 'springs' to replace Linn springs!)

 

Andy

 

 

[needlerunner]

The MuFi Ultradeck. Very understated.

[KRSDarwin]

Simple Project Carbon Debut with Ortofon OM-10 made beautiful with hand crafted tube MM phono stage and Bewitch tube integrated amp playing through Paradigm Premier 100B speakers

[Frank Prowse Hi-Fi]

Client's beautiful LP12 with newly installed Cadenza Mono MC cart:-

 

 

[Tasebass]

6 hours ago, Frank Prowse Hi-Fi said:

Client's beautiful LP12 with newly installed Cadenza Mono MC cart:-

 

 

Oooo a polished platter......not to sure about the arm board gaps though...

 

Tase