"panzerholz was chosen for its cost effectiveness"
My understanding of that material is quite limited, but by cost effectiveness I do not mean inexpensive but more in regards to overall value compared to using other materials with similar unique physical properties (whatever those may be). |
Halcro, you raise in interesting question. Those old M-S direct-drives are not rated in the top tier, but a modern equivalent is the Grand Prix Monaco, which could be said to be plinth-less, even though it appears that the carbon fiber bits are there to provide some resonance control. The GPM certainly IS top tier, as is the Teres Certus. The latter basically has no plinth either, but once again, there is a lot of wood in the Certus, and it's not entirely there for looks. It would be nice to hear from those designers.
By the way, in view of the original post, I don't think this is off topic, but if it is, I do apologize. |
I have really serious doubts that panzerholz was chosen for its cost effectiveness! |
|
My assumption is the materials are chosen for their combo of high mass and rigidity, dampening ability and aesthetics. |
Raul is there anyway of seeing pictures of your nude sp10?
Looking at this whole project of vintage DDs from a first time perspective further research I gather Steve Dobbins and Albert Porter chose their plinth material for very specific reasons that go beyond a knuckle wrap test.
Soft slate for Mr.Dobbins design and panzerholz plywood for Mr.Porter. My question did you guys use any sciencetific tests choosing this material? |
Thank you, Albert. I'm hoping that this thread will get back on track, where we can discuss what you do, which types of wood/finishes are available, and if you have tried various woods, what were the sonic characteristics of each?
Thank you. |
08-22-10: Brianw
Which turntable makes/models are covered? Technics SP10 MK2, Technics SP10 MK3 and Garrard 301 |
Which turntable makes/models are covered? |
Dear Lewm: My experiences are very similar and that's why I'm asking. That very high torque looks that is no linear to DD quality performance at all.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Raul, I guess what I was speculating about earlier is as follows: Many/most of us equate the good qualities of the Garrard/Lenco/SP10s/etc to the "high torque" of their respective motors. Turns out in real analysis done by Mark Kelly that the Garrard and Lenco motors are in fact not particularly high in torque; they are just large in size and relatively inefficient in converting AC input to power output. Yet without a doubt both are wonderful sounding turntables (even better when installed in proper plinths, I would insist). With the SP10s and some other DD tables, they really do have high torque motors and do also sound good. I just don't know whether the two facts (torque and sound quality) are linearly related. It seems to me that what we are liking about these idler- and direct-drive turntables is inherently related to the drive mechanisms but not necessarily to motor torque. I had promised myself not to make any more sweeping generalizations for which my listening experience is totally inadequate, but here I've done it again. I can also say, to support my thesis in part, that the Kenwood L07D motor has only "adequate" torque, yet the L07D just is a fantastic turntable. For another thing, my tricked out Denon DP80 has much less torque than my SP10 Mk2 and sounds as good, in similar slate plinths. |
Is not the Micro Seiki DQX-500 basically a 'nude' direct drive from 30 years ago?
Has anyone had direct experience with this model to see whether they agree with Raul's 'nude' preferences (no pun here Raul)?
|
Thank you, T-Bone.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul,
The DP100 was very specifically designed for audiophiles. Denon sold their DN-307s and 308s for radio station and other pro use. The people at Denon's affiliated repair place are adamant about that. The Denon DN-308F is also a high-torque beast.
From everything I have been able to find out the SP-10MkII and Mk3 as are seen and used by audiophiles were specifically designed for audiophiles. The broadcast-use tables had different features.
I can't speak for the EMTs. The EMT lookalike Sony PS-X9 was sold to radio stations and audiophiles alike burI can't find any evidence they were ever used in Japan in radio stations though I have seen a couple of absolute 'beaters' in my time, which indicates to me it is possible. I know of two people, one in Germany and one in the UK who have ex-radio station PS-X9s. Most of them in Japan were audiophile-bought/owned.
The Exclusive P3 and P3a, the Onkyo PX-100M and the Lo-D TU-1000 were also very expensive audiophile-oriented high-torque tables without a broadcast market. |
Dear Lewm: On other topic: TT torque. I would like what do you think on the whole torque subject?
In a home system IMHO we really don't need that fast start/stop that the SP-10 or DP100 or EMT has and that was asked in Radio broadcasting job or for Djs. These TTs were not designed for audiophile specific needs.
I never had on hand the today DD Monaco design and I can't speak if comes with that kind of very high torque.
We really need it? or a DD design for home systems really does not need it and maybe could work/perform better with lower torque? what do you think?
Maybe Teres too could put some light on this important TT characteristic? or Monaco TT owners and of course any one that could share his experiences about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike and friends: You posted: +++++ " although i have not listened that way myself, i would be skeptical it would be optimal. " +++++
I think this statement, that I respect, said all about nude version discusion:
+++ although i have not listened.... +++++
My subject is not if I have reason or not. I already heard several DD TT with different new plinths and the nude version. At least what I'm saying is because I heard it.
All the ones that are " skeptical " on the subject never had the opportunity to heard a nude version and the ones that in direct or indirect way are already in the commercial plinth market have no interest about.
Enough and useless to go on from my part.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Mike/Albert: I'm not asking and don't need that you support nothing I posted.I know exactly what Mr. Doobins made because I seen at his place.
In my personal nude version I can't go with out the top " case " only the bottom one because I need it ( the top one ) to put on place the AT footers.
The subject is that many " things that surround the original SP are resonance/vibrations focus so is good to work with out it.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
++++ " Even seems to me that my SP-10s and Denon's could perform even better with out its metal bottom cover. I don't try it yet but maybe is time to make this test and see what happen. " +++++
Regards and enjoy the music,
raul. Mike is not suggesting running the Technics MK 3 nude. His comment does not support what you've been pressing since the beginning of this thread. One Technics MK3 renovation by Dobbins removes the MK3 top cover with speed switches (which is often damaged) and puts the rest of the table into his heavy plinth. Speed change is still accomplished at the motor controller. I leave the cover and switches and support the entire works with a heavy brass rod attached to an iron block fastened to the chassis with stainless steel. This mechanism locks down any vertical movement and flex while absorbing motor vibration. I have no doubt Steve has addressed this problem in another way and gets excellent results. With either method, both of us and most others such as the famous original constrained layer MK3 plinth by Akito Knita rely on multi laminations, mass and constrained layers to bring out the best performance of these powerful tables. |
Raul,
ok, i get it about what you were referring to.
OTOH it's clear we are not referring to the same thing at all.
you are mentioning about the stock SP-10 and removing the bottom-plate of the stock case-work in hopes of improving performance.
i am referring to completely removing the case-work and installing the motor and platter inside a custom plinth...and even that point is only related to the Mk3 due to it's considerable torque.
so my comment about a 'nude' SP-10 does not support your comments. they are related in a round about way but i don't share your viewpoint although it would not greatly surprise me if removing the bottom of the stock casework might be better. although i think it more likely that removing only the bottom plate would cause the remaining casework to resonate more.
i don't mean to be argurmentative; i'm simply trying to make sure that my intended meaning is clear. |
Dear Mike: No, I'm refering almost on what you posted about nude. This is what I posted in my firsat post in the thread:
++++ " Even seems to me that my SP-10s and Denon's could perform even better with out its metal bottom cover. I don't try it yet but maybe is time to make this test and see what happen. " +++++
Regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
Raul, to be clear; my comment on the nude (original case-work removed) SP-10 Mk3 referred only in the context of installing the nude SP-10 Mk3 inside a custom plinth. possibly that was inferred by your comment; Nice to hear that I'm not totally wrong about my thoughts on a nude ( non casework. ) SP-10 as a improvement. but that was unclear. you could be referring to a nude SP-10 with no plinth. in that case, although i have not listened that way myself, i would be skeptical it would be optimal. |
Dear Mikelavigne: We have to remember too that in the case of SP-10's or EMT these TT's were designed for Radio Stations/broadcasting more than to home audio systems.
Nice to hear that I'm not totally wrong about my thoughts on a nude ( non casework. ) SP-10 as a improvement.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
i own 2 vintage tt's with Dobbin's plinths; a Garrard idler drive 301, and an Technics SP-10 Mk3 DD. i did also have a Dobbins plinth'd SP-10 Mk2.
so why do these plinths improve performance over the basic stock tt or OEM plinths?
my opinion, already touched on by others here, is that 60's, 70's and 80's 'even SOTA' tt's had their strengths and their 'areas of potential improvement'. obviously the strengths were that much more R&D could be directed to building motors since these companies were much more able to spend that money than the typical tt builder of today. OTOH their weaknesses were that the case work was an afterthought in comparison. system performace (cartridges, arms, phono stgaes) did not necessarily reveal limitations of the build quality back then.
it's not simply adding mass, or adding isolation. it's more a matter of engineering the precise plinth construction that will optimize the drive system. what is the best combination of materials put together in a particular way to allow the tt to have maximum livelyness, low noise, and drive which sounds the best.
i know that Steve Dobbins built many dozens of plinths before he sold his first plinth for the SP-10 Mk2. he did the same for the Garrard 301, and then again for the SP-10 Mk3. i know he experimented with many materials and ended up with a constrained layer design. eventually on the Mk3 he discovered that (in his opinion) mounting the Mk3 with the casework still in place compromised the performance due to the high torque of the Mk3 motor. the original casework allowed 'flex' and a slight smearing of the sound. eliminating the case and mounting the Mk3 'nude' inside the plinth performed better.
not every plinth designer necessarily agreed with Dobbins on that issue.
in any case; it should not be surprising that 30+ year old casework could be improved upon. |
Also my understanding of the panzerholz material used in Albert's plinths is that it is very rigid but lower mass than comparable standard wood materials, so I'm not sure that adds up either. The Panzerholz used in Albert's plinth is very dense. It is made up of European red beech plies compressed under high pressure into a sheet about 1 1/4" thick. It's density is on the order of 85 lbs./cubic ft., which makes it heavier than than all but the densest exotic hardwoods. John |
Mapman, You are quite right that not all that torque is used during play. We like to think that some torque now and then is needed to maintain speed stability in the face of stylus drag, which can vary in degree related to the tortuosity of the record groove. Torque is also in play when the platter goes off speed for any other reason, like due to cogging, etc. I never saw anyone put any numbers on these forces, so I don't know how great or small they may be. If we ever had any real facts to go on, we would not need to have these rambling discussions. |
I'm still not getting it.
I believe a table spinning at a constant speed has 0 acceleration. Acceleration occurs as the table gets up to speed and prior to playing. So I'm not sure I understand how the higher mass plinth can enter into this. If teh plinth does not move or rotate during playing at target speed, then it should be fine I would think.
Also my understanding of the panzerholz material used in aLBERTS plinths is that it is very rigid but lower mass than comparable standard wood materials, so I'm not sure that adds up either.
I could see the value of the plinth using that material in theory again if the intent is to isolate from vibrations from the motor or perhaps even otherwise. No doubt any kind of motor used to drive a table produces vibrations, so perhaps the tonic is in teh specific cases where this is an issue otherwise, though I am skeptical it is an issue common to all tables in particular those already designed out of the can to deal with the issue.
I will also add that I cannot imagine a case where applying a more massive plinth properly can hurt, and they are very nice looking for sure! |
Dear Mapman: Speed accuracy and speed stability is IMHO a critical main target in any TT design but seems to me that in the best TT set ups ( either drive mechanism. ) that is not any more an issue, I can be wrong but that's what I think.
What I don't know for sure because I never measure it is that if my vintage BD and DD TTs are right on original specs as my today TT designs ( that I assume are on target in this regard. ).
All in all I don't heard/precieve any trouble with my units regarding speed accuracy or stability.
Regarding DJ the main problem is that DJ's needs heavy torque ( at any " moment " ) with the TT and very fast start/stop TT characteristics and I don't know yet any BD that can meet DJ needs job.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
I made no comparison between direct- and belt-drive turntables on any level, especially to say one is noisier than the other. I was just addressing what I perceived to be an inference by Mapman that direct-drive turntables are inherently noisy, because of the positioning of the motor. Nor does it follow that because a DD turntable might (or might not, according to Raul) sound best in a massive plinth, this is an indication that DD tables have special issues with noise. To me the rationale for the massive plinth is the high torque of DD motors in the more expensive tables. This torque is applied at the center of mass of the platter and so is best counter-acted by a massive plinth. Earlier I made mention of Newton's third law of motion. The acceleration of the platter by the motor is exactly counter-acted by a force to twist the motor/chassis. If we firmly fix the motor/chassis in a massive plinth, then the angular acceleration on the motor/chassis goes down in proportion (In a linear system, F = ma; where m = mass and a = acceleration. If m goes up, a goes down.) Thus vibrational forces induced by the very torque of the motor (not by noise per se) is diminished. This is the way I think of it. |
One more thing I can note from my experience with DD and belt tables years ago is that overall DD tables did indicate better speed control overall than belts. Belt drives tended to have greater variability in speed accuracy from unit to unit as indicated by strobes, however, the better belt drives measured similar to DD tables in this regard. Often belts would have dirt or otehr deposits on them which caused slippage and measurable speed variations, even with new out of the box japanese tables of the day. Usually, cleaning of the belt in otherwise good condition with light solvent would remedy the problem. I was most diligent about checking this aspect of a belt drive table before turning over to a customer. Also most belts do wear over time and that results in similar slippage and speed variations as indicated by strobe and the remedy here is to replace the belt.
I have no data on longevity of DD tables in regards to speed accuracy in comparison to belts so I cannot comment on whether one or the other offers greater stability over the long term. I suspect good DDs may have an advantage here however if there is a problem the remedy to fix would be more costly than a belt replacement.
Also, DD tables are clearly more robust and suited for DJ use in that these tables are transported frequently and belt drive tables are not well suited to be transported continuously without additional preparation I suspect.
|
Dear Lewm: Maybe I'm wrong but I can't read where Mapman posted that DD TT are noisy per se.
Anyway I thinmk that the noise TT subject it is not a cue for real differences in TT drive mechanism performance.
If we take the best DD we can have noise figures like -96db in the SP-10MK3 ( it will be interesting to make a measure today in one sample of this TT. ) or around -100db like Rockport but there are good examples in the BD side with TT in the -90db values. I can't speak on this specific noise subject about idler drive TTs.
What for me is or could be interesting is not to know those " fantastic " values/specs but to know which is the TT noise threshold where there is no or where don't have any more influence in what the cartridge " takes ", where is that threshold TT noise figure/value where there is no more influence in the quality performance we are percieving.
Because: how can we sure that those -90db or -100 db or whatever are good enough?
This is something IMHO that belong to the TT designers as many other TT subjects/questions that today there are no clear and precise answers.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
I used to sell many belt, idler and direct drive tables back in their heyday and heard many. I could never attribute a clear sonic difference to drive type. Tonearms, carts, and other things but never drives. Nobody told me any type was superior. Strobe light speed indicators indicated that either drive done well could be equally accurate. I steered most customers to the belts in that DD tables cost more for no real benefit I could discern. I never sold any really good idlers, so I was not a fan of those at all.
These were my collective observations having been there and done many different tables. Granted, these were stock units and not the beefed up versions available today.
Either DD motor noise is an issue and the plinth the solution or not. I do not know for certain which but I don't think you can have both both be true. The plinth might still be helpful for external vibes, but as I alluded to above, there are other more effective ways to establish a solid foundation to isolate table from external vibes.
YEs, I am familiar with the fact that DD motors rotate more slowly and that in itself is an advantage (one of many any design can sport). |
Mapman, You have fallen prey to a common fallacy regarding direct-drive turntables, one that was first foisted on the audiophile public when we were led to believe that belt-drive is inherently superior. That is the idea that a direct-drive turntable would naturally be "noisy", because after all the motor is right there at the spindle/platter interface. But if you will take note of the actual manner in which all of the better direct-drive turntables are built, you will see this is a fallacy. Generally the magnet structure or stator of the motor is part of the platter itself or is firmly affixed to the platter when the platter is in place. Then the rotor part of the motor is a fixed non-mobile structure around the circumference of the magnet/stator. Thus when the platter is in motion there are zero moving parts separate from the platter; it is driven directly by the electromagnetic interaction of the stator and rotor. Only the bearing itself can contribute any noise into the system, just as it can also do in a BD or idler-drive. Moreover, the DD motor only has to rotate at 33.33 rpm, in contrast to the motor of a belt- or idler-drive turntable which has to rotate at many times the speed of the platter. Slower motors tend to be quieter than faster motors. As further evidence of this, all you have to do is look at the fantastic S/N ratios thus achieved by the best DD turntables. So, you are free to prefer whatever you prefer, but don't say that DD turntables are noisy per se. |
Albert, the Mayan calendar ends in 2012 so be careful about accepting too many deposits now. My advice would be to go under the table and look at the pyramids. |
Aren't the two tables best optimized with different tonearm, and cartridge plus also set up and calibrated differently? Any combo of these could account for a difference. Not to mention dirt accumulated on the stylus, etc. It's not as though we weren't aware of any of those variables. Everything was checked and rechecked with the same result. What I am describing was a the result of the platter being unable to maintain angular velocity which would have been well known to a turntable designer or other expert but not to us at the time. Live and learn. II have a training that permit to know in " hours " what you could take " many months ". I already explained this to you in other thread even you " live " how fast I can detect " errors " or virtues due to that specific training. Well, if I had only known this beforehand. I am now bowing from the knees. John |
I have responded to very few threads in the time I have been reading this forum, mainly because I lack alot of listening experience, but I can't help responding to this thread. Based on Arthur Salvatore's review of the re-plinthed Lenco, I recently changed from an Aries 3 with super platter and jmw 10.5i tonearm to a Lenco drive (motor and idler) in my own diy plinth, a Graham 2.2 tonearm, and the super platter. I used the same cartridge (XV-1s). I was stunned by the difference. The vpi was a fine table, but the improvement in transient response, clarity and bass was so blatantly obvious even to my relatively inexperienced ears. Some might argue it could be the tonearm difference but I believe it was primarily the idler drive vs the belt drive. The original poster asked if re-arming and re-plinthing these older tables advanced analog playback - my answer is a definitive yes. Note that I can't speak directly to the technics DD table, only the Lenco but I suspect results would be similar. I can't see myself ever going back to a belt drive table. |
Everyone thank you for your comments and for some of you here for sharing your hard work and effort into this hobby on this site
Though at times some of the threads read like a Republican Democrate debate of sorts though there is something for everyone on this site to follow or criticise this is ok
My experience of using direct drive table is coming up soon,first one is the Kenwood 990 in the nude with a swinging arm board off the x frame and a kick ass arm, FR 64s Up next when all checked over will be a Technics SP10MKII tried nude and with heavy vibration obsorbing plinth
Sounds like fun to me. |
So far in one year I have managed to get only about four delivered.
At that rate and from my list of waiting customers you should get your sample about 2014. |
"So a heretofore unknown fault inherent to a belt drive turntable became apparent. "
How can you know the drive mechanism is the reason?
Aren't the two tables best optimized with different tonearm, and cartridge plus also set up and calibrated differently? Any combo of these could account for a difference. Not to mention dirt accumulated on the stylus, etc.
I would not expect any properly set up high end rig to sound inherently muddy and garbled, but I am sure you heard what you heard. |
Dear Albert: No, I did not. Could you send me a sample just for fun?
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
I think the person asking the question about plinths should do his own test about nude plinth and disregard what both you and I say. If you read back on my post of 8-18-10 Anyone who wants to try their Technics or other high torque direct drive table with slender footers and no mass are welcome to do so and report back their findings. I think that sums everything up precisely, except I could take a cue from Raul and say: "Raul, do you already tested the sp-10 Panzerholz version? becasue IMHO is what the thread owner would like to know." |
Dear Albert: +++++ " This test occurred over many, many months with dozens of participants. Raul was here for only a few hours..... " +++++
I have a training that permit to know in " hours " what you could take " many months ". I already explained this to you in other thread even you " live " how fast I can detect " errors " or virtues due to that specific training.
Any one can do it if has the training/discipline process need it for.
I respect the members of the " group " I knew at your place ( including a reviewer. ) where I knew their listening aptitud too.
I think that you don't need to justify your choice because my posts.
As you I know what I heard.
Albert, my opinion is only that: just an opinion. What it matters is what you think and your opinion because is you who has to live with that system and who has to be happy with: not me. If you are happy then I'm too because of that.
The subject IMHO goes beyond personal " affair ". Maybe Mr. Walker can comes here and could give us his thoughts on the whole subject, things could be that I'm wrong.
In the other side: do you already tested the sp-10 nude version?, because IMHO this is what the thread " owner " would like to know.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
As an example, we played a Bill Evans Lp that always sounded fabulous with the Walker. But when played on the Technics, a particularly complex and dynamic passage from the piano was suddenly controlled and articulate rather than muddy and garbled. So a heretofore unknown fault inherent to a belt drive turntable became apparent. This was no small, subtle difference. In fact, it was in a way embarrassing that we would think that up until that point everything was fine and wonderful when instead it was flawed. How were we to know that Evans was playing it one way and not the other?
Certainly the overall sound of a system is a product of personal preference, but in this case (among others) the better performing turntable was obvious.
John |
I still do not get the whole fascination with DD turntables in general, but I can see how a heavy plinth could benefit by providing better isolation from motor noise which I suspect would be more inherent to start with in general with DD tables.
To me once a table reaches a certain level of performance, such as teh ones discussed here surely do, the differences are often most subtle and personal preferences become a predominant factor. I doubt one could be conclusively determined to trounce the other.
Also, I am not so sure it is possible to keep any group of respectful listeners from influencing the opinions of the individuals no matter how professional or sophisticated the bunch in cases where performance is by design uniformly at an extremely high level. |
I owned the Walker Proscenium with Black Diamond arm, the upgrade air suspension (yes Walker were available without), Prologue platform, latest version silver tonearm wire, two tonearm termination blocks both (RCA and XLR), the latest pump and of course, the Walker Ultimate motor controller.
The Walker was plugged into a dedicated 20 amp circuit separate from my digital. Porter Port plug (of course :^) and a very expensive top line power cable.
This rig was (and still is) one of the finest turntables ever made, I owned it for many, many years and the last upgrades were done here at my home by Lloyd Walker himself with help from Fred. It just does not get any better than that.
At the time of the test my electronics were Aestheitx Io and Callisto with every possible upgrade (including some that were not yet released to the public). World class equipment regardless of what Raul or anyone thinks of it.
The Walker was tested with three phono cables, two were RCA termination and one was XLR.
This test occurred over many, many months with dozens of participants. Raul was here for only a few hours so he has no idea what all went on. All together there were 15 or 20 from my own group, two reviewers, three audio manufacturers and various visitors invited from Audiogon.
The Walker was played as a system since the arm cannot be removed and we tried three phono cartridges and multiple tonearm cables in an attempt to hear every possible variable.
There was no agenda other than continual search to learn and work to improve my reference system. It's always been that way and will continue. |
Jlsemrad, Interesting idea. Perhaps the reason that Raul likes the outboard tonearm pod with his plinth-minimal SP10 is related to isolating the tonearm from undamped resonances created by the motor. Still, I think the tonearm and bearing need optimally to reside in a closed system with each other. |
Dear Slipknot1: Pathetic was for Jlsemrad that bring to the thread an audio item that has nothing " to see " with the TT subject, I wonder what he want it to explain ( I don't care at all any more. ).
+++++ " Rule number one " +++++
btw, maybe those rules were " writed " by the AHEE and I don't always follow its rules. Even I don't always follow what I learned into the AHEE, remember?: " thinking out of the basket " .
If I need it or ask for I always like to share my experiences with out hide anything even if goes against me or against my audio item designs.
I can't be in other way or change that attitude.
Example, if you ask me something: what do you prefer? that I give a nice answer only for you be " happy " or you want to hear what I have to say about?
Do you know something?: time ago my audio friends call me to meet me at their homes along other persons to heard his system and give my opinion along the other people opinion. Through the time these same audio guys now call me for the similar " job " but along no one: just me ( private. ). You know why?, exactly that's why.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear John: Attacks?, for me some one that is unaware of " something " it is an ignorant on that subject.
How do you name your ignorance, that kind of " unaware/ignorance?
Allnic?: just pathetic.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. Raul- Please understand that I respect and admire your deep understanding of LP playback. But - to label Allnic as "pathetic"? A generalization such as that one damages your credibility. We all understand your passion for the hobby, and we respect it, but you should be more gracious than that. Rule number one in business: Never bad mouth the competition. Tell me why your product is better. Don't tell me the competition is "pathetic". Remember that you are a manufacturer as well as a hobbyist. Disclaimer: Allnic dealer (and yes, I have heard Raul's phonolinestage in my system, and it sounded great) |
The Panzerholz plinths sold by Albert are designed strictly to damp vibration from the cogging action of the powerful DC mother which by necessity is in communion with the platter and the rest of the chassis. In no way is there a claim that it will isolate the cartridge from vibration external to the turntable. The designer has no control over external forces and the plinth is designed to give the user a compact and self contained (as well as aesthetically pleasing) solution to the problem of noise intrinsic to the motor itself without him having to resort to the aggravating hair-shirt method of placing the armboard in a physically detached position from the rest of the turntable.
John |
Perhaps trounced was too harsh a word, but in fact the Technics won out. The judgement and final conclusion were made after many weeks of care listening, discussion, and evaluation by a diverse group of individuals, not a weak one in the bunch who is prone to be swayed by group opinion. Many different kinds of records and music were auditioned, audiophile quality or not, from old blues recordings from the early fifties to the latest release of high quality recordings of Baroque and classical music. No opinions were formed on the basis of listening a single favorite track from the latest Janis Ian release. No one in our group "works the room" to extract an opinion from someone else that is in agreement with their own. Certainly Albert, above all, seeks comment and opinion from his friends to help clarify what exactly is happening with his system.
The original poster wanted to know what opinion people had of the Porter Panzerholz plinth and that is what he got from me.
John |
Dear mapman: Very good point of that " solid foundation rack/plattform ".
Now that you mentioned maybe I forgot to think on those low mass BD TTs like Linn or Oracle or Michel that have a different approach and that in a precise/right set up can " sing " too.
regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
