View Full Version : Mike New Platter for Technics SL-1210
What I received: a composite aluminium/brass (?) heavy platter with neoprene (?) o-ring around a groove in the outer rim. Mike forgot to include two 8mm bolts to hold the platter while installing it but I had no trouble in sourcing a couple from work. These will be included in future shipments.
Setting up is straightforward provided you read the instructions carefully and TAKE YOUR TIME. Removing the magnet ring from the Technics platter and installing it onto the MN platter - ensuring correct alignment - takes only a few minutes but you need to heed the warnings about the aluminium material and not over-tightening any of the bolts. This heavy platter is not something you want to be dangling over the exposed circuit or lovely plinth without taking care to keep your balance and looking through the hole while lowering it down gently.
Finish is not in the SME category but the quality of engineering looks very good and the fit, roundness and accuracy of the centre taper are as perfect as the eye can see. The combination of MN bearing and platter fit tightly (don't forget the Vaseline) and sit level within the plinth. Without the outer strobe, it gives the deck an esoteric air and makes it look a little different from anything else out there. The L-shaped cut on the outer edge makes it easier to grip LPs than the slope of the Technics platter.
The top surface of the MN platter ends up close in height to that of the Technics platter so only small VTA adjustments will be necessary. Unfortunately my Dynavector arm will not go low enough to achieve correct VTA with just the platter and Herbies mat so I still need to use my Copper mat between the two. However, since this is a constant in my system it means that any differences I hear are purely due to the new platter itself.
What I am hearing from the off are three areas of improvement: deeper tighter bass, greater sense of soundstage and the space of the recording venue, and very fine detail in the high midrange. Those who know my system will appreciate that bass extension and power are not in short supply and it's important that everything does not become overblown. The extension and authority of this new combo are impressive, moving air and punching my chest without any tendency to bloat or excess. If there's no bass, there's no bass, simple as that. Good dynamic recordings sound magnificent and are the equal of my Ayre SACD player for bass and slam, and that's a compliment. The sense of recording space and atmosphere are amazing, making recordings sound even more different from each other. It's easier to hear into the mix but also easier to spot engineered sound or tape repairs on older cuts. I am also hearing some extreme fine detail in the mix, some tinklings and instrumental contributions that I've not heard before.
I am struck by the clean, low distortion transcription of all the records I have played so far. There is a sense of structural solidity that gets the best out of the system's strengths. Timing is extraordinary, the best I have yet achieved. I dare say my system's sound is not for everyone, but in many ways the tonal quality of LP and CD replay are similar and, in my mind at least, make arguments about LP versus CD redundant. Both sound superb and there is no jarring when switching from one to the other.
All I can say is well done, Mike! I believe there are a few of his platters in use around the world now and many more of his bearings, and I hope he is successful in manufacturing them in production quantities. I hope to acquire a Timestep HE PSU when Dave has them ready to sell, which should suit the new platter even more.
Equipment used: Dynavector DV507-II arm with AT-33PTG cartridge running through a Bob's Devices CineMag step-up transformer into a Whest PS.30R balanced phono preamp. Other Technics mods: Mike New bearing (mandatory for the platter), Timestep PSU, motor dynamics mod, Isonoe feet, Bruil weight. I have adjusted the brake potentiometer on the main PCB to stop the platter pretty quickly. Start-up time remains excellent.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/Technics%20MN%20Platter.jpg
Hi Martin,
I've got Mark Grant round for a sesh, so don't have the time to comment too much at the moment, but your review is very interesting indeed.....
I'll pop a few thoughts on later. However, your deck now looks so gorgeously over the top in an industrial chic sense!! :respect:
Laters,
Marco.
The Grand Wazoo
27-07-2010, 22:32
It looks nice Martin
Just a quick question that you may not be able to answer! I don't understand why the lip on the outer edge of the platter needs to be so pronounced. OK so I see why you'd want the record rim to be easy enough to grip, so the top diameter needs to be that dimension & the bottom diameter is that size so as not to have a great big gap there where the original platter was angled out to.
But....if extra mass is a desirable thing here, why remove so much metal from the platter edge where it does the most work? Presumably when you buy the platter, your also paying for the metal that's removed just as much as the metal that's left in the final product. I'd just have thought a higher step would be preferable.
Any thoughts?
It suits the Dynavector a treat, by the way!
Good observation, Chris. However, the platter is seriously heavy and doesn't need any more inertia than it already has. There's also the o-ring, probably better seated as it is rather than jutting into an area that's normally vacant.
I think Marco got it right - industrial chic :)
Great job Martin lad it moved things forward
Mike_New
28-07-2010, 05:43
Hello Chris,
The reason I have designed the outer rim profile the way I have, is so that the Peripheral Damping Ring (which is indeed an “O” ring of special silicon) looks aesthetically pleasing at the point where it is required for effective damping. All Alluminium platters of this size will ring at a specific frequency, and my solution to this problem is, I believe, rather elegant technically. You are correct about the outer diameter being set to come out to the edge of the chassis/plinth. If you look carefully at Martin’s very well focused image, you can just about discern where the platter lower edge finishes.
The main diameter of the platter top surface is set at just under 300 to allow for the bulge at the edge of the record.
. The whole design philosophy was predicated on trying to get the “centre of gravity” as low down on the bearing as possible, consistent with not fowling the componentry on the main drive PCB.
This is not as easy as it looks!! Because there are some critical issues concerning the positional location of the motor and coil assemblies, if the excellent characteristics of the direct drive system are not to be spoiled. I do believe however that the effort I put into this has paid off.
I am now in the position of being able to accept some variations in design parameters on a per customer basis.
The major ones being: Do you require a center relief for the record label to be machined into the top surface?
What diameter do you want the top surface to be? 300 or 296mm
I have observed that these two options are the most contentious when talking about platters!!! So now, as the customer, you can decide!!
Most people will probably choose to use some kind of mat on top, so the options do become somewhat academic.
I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.
As an aside, I have come up with a devastatingly easy way to lift up the total bearing and motor assembly by 6mm. this provides for a much easier way for people to install the tone arm of their choice and to use heavier material for the armboard. It also greatly improves the bearing mounting rigidity.
I do not want to move off topic with this, so I will supply details later.
I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.
Please could you send mine on? ;)
As an aside, I have come up with a devastatingly easy way to lift up the total bearing and motor assembly by 6mm. this provides for a much easier way for people to install the tone arm of their choice and to use heavier material for the armboard. It also greatly improves the bearing mounting rigidity.
Very interested in this Mike, when you're ready.
I have played with my arm mounting a little more and have just created enough additional lowering to be able to remove the copper mat. So now I am using the MN platter with just the Herbies mat on top. I cannot detect any sound quality change from before so I conclude that the MN platter is doing a superb job when compared with the Technics original, regardless of mats used.
The Grand Wazoo
28-07-2010, 07:01
Mike,
Thanks for answering my question.
I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.
My comment was just a result of a little experience in the sawmilling trade years ago & I'm glad it wasn't taken as a criticism.
Cheers
chris@panteg
28-07-2010, 09:16
Thankyou Martin for a most excellent and informative review , looking great.
Chris made an interesting point about the rim of the platter ' its useful to point out ! that with DD you don't really need high mass at the rim as in belt drive's , the mass is concentrated more around the rotor magnet , that's my understanding of it anyway though its more complicated than that, of course.
Martin,
Great review. The platter and table look devastating!
I am ordering Mike's bearing with special option mentioned above, platter, and his SME armboard (to replace the timestep unit).
I'll post details when I receive the parts, and pics of the installation, as well as sonic impressions.
Fun times ahead!!
Cheers
Pete
Nice one Pete. The SME V is very special and, together with that Zyx, will benefit hugely from the bearing and platter. Doing those at once will blow you away with the improvements. Keep us posted!
I've just had Shuggie over tonight and he brought his Paul Hynes SR5 power supply with him, so we did a comparison with my Timestep. You may recall that in my system the SR3 made no difference that we could discern (in an older configuration of my Technics deck).
This time the differences were there. What I heard was an added tightness to the bass, which sounded firmer and even more pitch stable. The rest of the frequency range sounded initially smoother with what appeared to be more confident tracking. Further listening gave us both the impression that it just sounded 'right' with less harshness and a little more air around the soundstage.
Going back to the Timestep made it sound a little more shut in, obvious and perhaps 'edgy' - the best word I can think of to describe it.
So not night and day but a clearly discernible difference that I consider to be a worthwhile improvement, extracting even more from Mike's excellent platter.
To be fair to the Timestep, is it the HE version?
It would appear that the heavier platter will need a heavier duty power supply. Perhaps one day we'll be able to fully compare like with like to make it fair.
Maybe a power supply with more advanced regulation is providing the benefit.
I doubt that more power is required
Not, it's the standard Timestep and I am being fair in that the differences are really NOT night and day. I have asked Dave when the Timestep HE might be ready for shipment and am awaiting a reply. At the moment it looks to be between the Timestep HE and Paul Hynes SR5 for me.
Citation16
30-07-2010, 14:26
very interesting....
can someone provide info and or link to order the Paul Hynes SR5 power supply please.
Also, a photo of the SR5 would be nice...
Wonder if it also can be used for the Stanton 150 turntable ?
Ammonite Audio
30-07-2010, 16:15
There is a website www.paulhynesdesign.com but it's a bit long in the tooth and the SR5 is not shown. I posted a picture of the SR5 on this thread http://theartofsound.net/forum/showpost.php?p=132138&postcount=1
Paul does lurk here on AoS and may chip in, but if you want to know more about the SR5, give him a call as he's a helpful chap.
Wonder if it also can be used for the Stanton 150 turntable ?
If it needs a DC supply and draws less than 4A continuous, then the SR5 would probably suit; however the cheaper and smaller SR3 shown in my picture would probably do the trick too. 4A is theoretically overkill, but on my Kenwood KD-770D, it does make a remarkable difference over the smaller power supply.
Spectral Morn
30-07-2010, 18:41
Here's a question....
Would either the PH SR5 or the TS HE Psu make as big a difference with a normal Technics platter? or do you need the heavier platter to get the difference/benefit ?
Regards D S D L
Ammonite Audio
30-07-2010, 21:32
Would either the PH SR5 or the TS HE Psu make as big a difference with a normal Technics platter? or do you need the heavier platter to get the difference/benefit ?
Based on what the Paul Hynes SR5 does with my Kenwood deck, in comparison with the already rather good SR3, I would say that the bigger PSUs would make a worthwhile difference, irrespective of the platter used.
My SR5 can be easily adjusted to 21v to suit the Technics, so perhaps Marco would like to conduct the experiment when he next ventures down towards these parts?
Spectral Morn
30-07-2010, 22:36
Based on what the Paul Hynes SR5 does with my Kenwood deck, in comparison with the already rather good SR3, I would say that the bigger PSUs would make a worthwhile difference, irrespective of the platter used.
My SR5 can be easily adjusted to 21v to suit the Technics, so perhaps Marco would like to conduct the experiment when he next ventures down towards these parts?
That would be interesting to read.
Regards D S D L
Mike_New
30-07-2010, 23:37
What I would like to see in all the new breed of power supplies for the SL1200, is the same sort of low volt remote switching that the KAB employs, using the exisitng on/off switch on the TT. This elegant solution makes it so much nicer to use the TT. No scrabling for the on/of switch on the PS, or bending down on you Knees to switch off at the power socket which you have to do on the other unit.
I have been asked if I would look at building a PS myself and have investigated a basic design. However there are enough people able to supply the requirements of all of us I believe. All they have to do is to implement a small modification to the design and I am sure Paul with all his expertise in electronics could do this at a small increase in price
The benefit of convenient on/off control would be worth it.
And, I would like to retain the cuing light as well.
Mike_New
31-07-2010, 05:12
The power for the cuing light is supplied from the main circuit board, so no problema.
Ammonite Audio
31-07-2010, 05:49
It's not beyond the intelligence of most DIYers to route the DC supply cable through the existing power switch on the deck, in order to preserve functionality. I didn't do so myself, but the wires and microswitch are easy to locate. The thick brown and blue wires can be seen below, and are helpfully marked "SW" on the small power PCB.
http://i43.tinypic.com/6zmv41.jpg
My switch turns on/off the strobe light, which has been rendered superfluous with Mike's platter ;)
I don't want a remote power switch personally, I leave my Timestep PSU on all the time.
The Vinyl Adventure
31-07-2010, 15:22
Yeah to be fair, even I could make the on off switch work as intended. I am happy with how I have made mine work... It stays on all the time, but the on/off switch has strobe on/off duties.... Not that I can hear any difference with it on or off...
Citation16
31-07-2010, 18:48
Here's a question....
Would either the PH SR5 or the TS HE Psu make as big a difference with a normal Technics platter? or do you need the heavier platter to get the difference/benefit ?
Regards D S D L
Yes, for sure the power supply will make a positive diffence with a normal Technics, as I have tried that first before going for the Mike New platter & bearing.
Spectral Morn
31-07-2010, 21:29
Yes, for sure the power supply will make a positive diffence with a normal Technics, as I have tried that first before going for the Mike New platter & bearing.
Thanks I will look into that at some point.
Regards D S D L
Citation16
06-08-2010, 00:37
Martin,
Great review. The platter and table look devastating!
I am ordering Mike's bearing with special option mentioned above, platter, and his SME armboard (to replace the timestep unit).
I'll post details when I receive the parts, and pics of the installation, as well as sonic impressions.
Fun times ahead!!
Cheers
Pete
Pete, when are you getting the platter & bearing ? It will be very interesting to read your comments and impressions.
I don't expect them for a few weeks.
Mike is getting the thicker aluminum blanks for the platters next week from what I understand.
chris@panteg
21-08-2010, 17:25
Hi Martin
I was wondering how you are getting on with the MN platter any more thoughts ?
It's still sounding great, Chris. The sense of unrestrained dynamics and wonderful detail make the best albums sound superb. I'm impressed with Mike's engineering and just how well it integrates into the whole, improving on the areas where the Technics is already good.
chris@panteg
21-08-2010, 20:24
Sounds excellent Martin '
Your 1210 has to be one of the most sorted out there at the moment , and in terms of cost , the combo as a whole certainly is , would be interesting to compare it with top end belt driven deck of similar value ! would it not .
Something like a top spec Linn or Roksan , maybe even a Voyd ref , though for me the most interesting comparison would be a nicely sorted SP10 mk2 with either the 507 or SMEV , i believe your deck would give all of them a run for their money:).
More likely, a NAS HyperSpace, which easily sees most Linns and Roksans off, doesn't need the messing about of the old Void decks and costs about the same as a fully tricked out Techie if bought new.
pure sound
21-08-2010, 21:33
More likely, a NAS HyperSpace, which easily sees most Linns and Roksans off, doesn't need the messing about of the old Void decks and costs about the same as a fully tricked out Techie if bought new.
what 'messing about' would that be?
I'd like to compare it with an SME Model 10 deck.
That'd be interesting, but I think a 20 would be a fairer comparison ;)
Marco.
My MN platter, MN bearing with stiffening plate, and MN SME armboard are 1.5 days away :)
Here is a pic of my platter as it was being born:
http://www.head-case.org/forums/members/digipete-albums-vinyl-rig-picture3536-counter-bore-magnet-mn.jpg
chris@panteg
22-08-2010, 00:55
what 'messing about' would that be?
The Voyd as i remember it needed less fettling than a Linn or Roksan ! the motors needed a yearly adjustment ,otherwise they could become noisy .
Martin ' yes a comparison with the model 10 would be good ' but as i don't know how much better your deck is with the MN bearing and platter ? i would be inclined to agree with Marco , pitch up against the model 20 ! why not .
what 'messing about' would that be?
Setting them up and making them work.
Perhaps you had a technique for doing them right very quickly?
That'd be interesting, but I think a 20 would be a fairer comparison ;)
Marco.
Well, the 20 is expensive isn't it and is beautifully finished, so it must be good to compare. NAS decks are so cheap aren't they, they can't be worthy.
You lot carry on - HiFi dave and I can smile smugly in the backgound :lolsign:
chris@panteg
22-08-2010, 11:39
Dave ' that's not what i am getting at , ok sure compare it with a NAS , i'm just curious where it is the grand scheme of things if its blown away by the 20 ' fine .
If the Hyperspace floors the modded Techie ! and i would like to compare them as in cost terms its about equal , then i for one would like to know ' i am not saying it will or could be better , this is not the Spanish Inquisition you know;).
Gents,
Just finished installing Mike New bearing with stiffening plate, platter and SME armboard on my Technics last night. Let the table run all night at 45 rpm.
The new platter makes this table a tank, weighing in at least 10 lbs heavier than the stock platter
(which seems like a toy now, as does the Timestep armboard, which is feather light compared to the thick solid copper armboard I got from Mike).
So far so good. I hear more realistic voices with more weight, the bass is a bit more defined and organic, and the highs also sound a bit more natural;
just sounds more analog than before. All in all, a good, though costly set of mods.
Only place left to go at this point is to transplant the bearing, platter and tonearm into a solid slate plinth, or something like that :)
Oh yeah, I forgot, this is with the KAB PSU. Works just fine.
I have the module from the SR5 on order due in next month from Paul Hynes.
http://www.head-case.org/forums/members/digipete-albums-vinyl-rig-picture3563-pete-mn-mods.jpg
Nice one Pete. I have the base plate on its way from Mike. How did you find drilling the holes - easy or nerve wracking? I can see from your photo that your platter is riding higher than mine. That would give me some welcome VTA range from my Dynavector.
Martin,
Yes, the plate lifts up the bearing around 5mm (and thus the whole platter). Now VTA is no problem.
The platter Mike built for me is also 2mm taller than standard, and has a re-contoured profile with the stiffener plate in mind (I think).
Not nerve wracking, but you should be comfortable disassembling the table and putting it back together, as well as drilling holes through the base plate as a guide (pre-drilled) into the plinth, and drilling holes into the composite base as well. When you get to that point call me and I'll give you my lessons learned.
Over all fairly painless, though count on several hours of work, but straight forward.
Ammonite Audio
28-08-2010, 18:12
The stiffening plate seems like sound engineering to me. I'm sure that one of the reasons why Mike's bearing works so well is that it does significantly improve the structural strength of the otherwise fairly flimsy alloy chassis. A stiffening plate clearly takes that strengthening rather further.
On a totally different note for UK users, Morrisons Supermarket have a collection of granite place-mats, chopping boards and coasters for under a tenner each. A combination of these may help with fabrication of a support of sorts.
Just thought I'd mention it in passing :)
Granite coasters would be great for going under feet like the Isonoes that expect a hard surface.
I think they were £3.99 for a set of four.....
The MN copper tonearm board looks a good move, especially with the platter height being raised a little. There have been many comments about the OL Techie boards being difficult to "level," a sad state of affairs when all the Techies I've ever had anything to do with have been utterly consistent in the plinth castings.
chris@panteg
29-08-2010, 16:46
Granite coasters would be great for going under feet like the Isonoes that expect a hard surface.
Martin
i sometimes read comments from folk who feel the isonoes make little or no difference , could be they sit their deck on an mdf board which is useless for the isonoes .
Martin
i sometimes read comments from folk who feel the isonoes make little or no difference , could be they sit their deck on an mdf board which is useless for the isonoes .
Yeah Chris, that's completely true.
I had the isonoes standing on a MDF shelf, covered with hard vinyl.
Then I put on the shelf a square of glass 1 cm thick, and the sound changed a lot, with more controlled and deep basses.
http://www.boxedspace.com/public3/AOS_Forum_GlassOvershelf.JPG
I had a more impressive change, however. Without the glass over the shelf, raising the volume, all the bass frequencies tend to flatten. Since it was the same with the stock feet, at first I thought that was because of my 40 W Class A amp, reaching the clipping limit.
But with the glass under the isonoes, hey, more volume, more bass punch ;)
i sometimes read comments from folk who feel the isonoes make little or no difference , could be they sit their deck on an mdf board which is useless for the isonoes .
Indeed, Chris, I find the Isonoes nothing short of extraordinary for their isolation properties. To my ears they took some thickness out of the sound compared with the Technics original feet, lightened the sound compared with the Foculpod sorbothane feet and allow the cleanest sound at high volume of them all. I use glass discs underneath them but I'll bet that those granite coasters would be ideal too.
After more listening, I would add definitely more transparent, microdetails are now coming through with the platter, stiffening plate/bearing and armboard from Mike. All I can think of is that the stock platter was ringing a bit and muddying the frequency spectrum from top to bottom.
The techie now sounds fabulous, highly resolving and very organic.
The upgrade is not subtle. Definitely worth it, for me anyway.
It will be interesting to see if the Hynes PR3HD module changes the sound any, compared to the Kab PSU I am now using.
Hi Paul,
It's the SR5 you want to listen to, which is absolutely phenomenal!
I've got my Techie hooked up with one now, and quite frankly, it's a *MAJOR* upgrade on any PSU I've used so far :eek:
That massively over-specified transformer it uses seems to be doing the business!! I can't wait to hear it with Mike's platter at Martin's place on Saturday............
(A rather shocked and stunned) Marco.
I now have the Mike New base plate and will try fitting it this week. Looks complicated and I won't start unless I think I can finish it by Saturday.
Oooh, lurvely.... Get yer screwdriver out then, dude, as I've a feeling it will make a significant sonic improvement! :)
Marco.
Hi Paul,
It's the SR5 you want to listen to, which is absolutely phenomenal!
I've got my Techie hooked up with one now, and quite frankly, it's a *MAJOR* upgrade on any PSU I've used so far :eek:
That massively over-specified transformer it uses seems to be doing the business!! I can't wait to hear it with Mike's platter at Martin's place on Saturday............
(A rather shocked and stunned) Marco.
Hi Marco,
I assume the post was directed to me?
The PR3HD is the module in the SR5! Wow, I am now very anxious for it to arrive.
The bearing w/stiffener and platter are a significant upgrade in my view. Martin will definitely not be disappointed :)
Lol - yes! Where on earth did I get Paul from? :doh: :mental: :lol:
Ah, I see.... As I'm not into D.I.Y, I just know the completed unit as the 'SR5'. Well, I can tell you that you're definitely in for a treat!
The sheer weight and power in the lower registers, increased clarity and detail retrieval, and sense of 'rhythmic flow' the SR5 has given over the (already excellent) SR3 is very impressive and extremely addictive.
For anyone who used to have an LP12, and remembers the Norton Airpower PSU, and how it sounded compared to the Linn Lingo and Naim Armageddon, of the day ('bigger' and more powerful), the sonic effect it has on the Techie, compared to other PSUs I've heard so far, is almost identical.
Marco.
I spent most of tonight working on the SL-1210 to mount the Mike New Base Plate to go with his bearing and platter. Mike's instructions were excellent and the only things I can add to them are 1) you really need a vacuum cleaner with nozzle as the shavings and mess get everywhere; 2) there is an additional bit of filing to do which may only be relevant to certain castings, see later.
You definitely need a steady hand, a good clean work area and very good lighting. This is not a job to be rushed!
The kit of parts from Mike. Lovely engineering.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0064.jpg
The deck prepared for work.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0065.jpg
One of the more tricky moments: drilling down the three lugs to create a flat surface.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0066.jpg
The base plate offered up ready for tightening down. Note the casting number at bottom of plate which needed filing down.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0067.jpg
Underside of the chassis with the rubber base and composite middle layer removed. The nuts have been tightened down.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0069.jpg
Showing the bearing and PCB reassembled onto the base plate with new spacers.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0070.jpg
The deck assembled with the platter, ready for the arm to be re-mounted.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0071.jpg
The completed deck. Note the increased ride height.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0073.jpg
Close up of the ride height with a very happy Dynavector and lots of VTA adjustability.
http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/PICT0074.jpg
I must sleep now as I usually get to work for 6:30am, so listening notes to come tomorrow :)
chris@panteg
07-09-2010, 23:45
Great photo's Martin , fantastic bit of work you put in there , looking forward to reading about the result ' with high expectations naturally:)
Mike_New
08-09-2010, 07:10
Martin,
Thanks for your observations and comments. You will not believe this!! The diameter of the Base Plate was not arbitarially decided. It was chosen so as to just clear the casting-number which it does on both my units!! There are so many minor variations of the SL1200 over the many years of continous production. In future when this batch of 25 has gone, I will probably increase the diameter to just clear the rectangular block at the top of your image, and then mill a very shallow slot to clear the casting-number.
In fact for the 10 remaining Base Plates I will mill the slot, just for people like you, who make my life difficult!! In fact no one else has mentioned it, so it may only be pertinent for the very latest models.
Mike - mine's a new-ish Mk.2, perhaps you've been working on Mk.5 decks?
Mike_New
08-09-2010, 09:52
Martin,
For some reason I thought that you had a MK5, in fact both my experimental unit and my personal one, are both MK2s although both are early models I believe; one being an ex DJs unit.
Over time there would have been a number of die-mould sets made for the SL1200 and possibly the casting number was not assigned a critical locational dimension.
The fact is that anyone doing what I am doing must contend with these sort of variations. The very big advantage that I have, is that I control all the design and manufacturing myself, so I can react instantly to input from all of you out there, who are fitting my upgrades.
I left the turntable running all day today to let things bed in properly. Playing a variety of records tonight I can hear that the base plate has released more transparency in the area of the shape of notes and their position in three dimensional space. Everything hangs in the air in a wide and (reasonably) deep soundstage and there is precious little indication of two speakers generating it all.
Surface noise and pops/ticks are even more suppressed than before. Dynamics and the frequency extremes are as before (with the bearing and platter) but I detect a possible further tightening of the bass.
I would say that the preferred order of purchase is pretty much the way I have gone: the bearing representing a step-change improvement; the platter bringing about clarity, tonal neutrality and dynamics; the base plate topping it off with a further tuning of the best aspects of the Techie's performance.
Listening to Norah Jones' Not Too Late playing in the other room while I type this, it sounds like she's set up and performing in there. That's the kind of realism that generates goose-bumps.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.