Record Clamps

[snuffbox]

Thoughts please,worth having or not.
Been toying with the idea of getting one of those Michell ones.
Thought I'd check here first before parting with the hard earned.

[hifi_dave]

Sometimes they sound better, sometimes they don't. You need to try one and hear for yourself.

[snuffbox]

I used to come in your shop when you were in Radlet.

[hifi_dave]

That's good and a looooong time ago..:wheniwasaboy:

[snuffbox]

Also popped in for a gander when you moved to St Albans.

[Dingdong]

As Dave said it's something you need to try. What turntable setup have you got?

[Smoker]

i was skepical about them, but am a big fan now. the sound difference wasnt the clincher for me, it was how well it keeps the vinyl secure during playback. noticed the benefit on 45's the most as some skipped without a clamp and played perfectly with one.

[Marco]

Hi Paul


Thoughts please,worth having or not.
Been toying with the idea of getting one of those Michell ones.
Thought I'd check here first before parting with the hard earned.

The Michell clamps are very good.

If you do decide to go for one, I've got one for sale and I'll do you a deal. Just PM me if you're interested :cool:

Marco.

[snuffbox]

Pm'd Marco.
My instinct says a strong interface between record and mat makes for better sound and then I see mats that support the record on little bits of plastic and people swear by them..
I have a Roksan Radius by the way with an rb300 arm and a Linn Troika,the cartridge didn't cost me anything and its a good few years old now.

I've seen some horrendously expensive tt mats by the way,some costing more than my turntable.Whats the story on those then?

[Dingdong]

One of the things I noticed when I first used a clamp was that leading edges seemed a little more precise. I put this down to needle drag (might be wrong, but it seems about right to me). Adding the clamp made things a little more crisp. That was on my Thorens with Blue Horizon mat.
On the occasions were I forgot to put the clamp on it sounded as though it was running slow. The difference was that great.
Listening to Synsei's 1210 the other week with a Herbies mat, which has a tacky rubber surface, the clamp only made a small difference.

[vouk]

What's your t/t set up? Much depends on its design (suspended or not) and the weight of the clamp. I use(d) an Ortofon Stabilizer (looks nice) on an Amazon 2 t/t and found that it "overdampens" the sound at the expense of finer detail. Try before you buy certainly applies here.

[YNWaN]

i was skepical about them, but am a big fan now. the sound difference wasnt the clincher for me, it was how well it keeps the vinyl secure during playback. noticed the benefit on 45's the most as some skipped without a clamp and played perfectly with one.

To be honest, that doesn't make any sense to me. A record shouldn't physically slip on the mat even if a clamp isn't used (whatever the mat). I've used every kind of record mat from glass to acrylic, felt and point contact - I've never had a record slip at all. Even if we are talking about very warped records, the stylus shouldn't skip (I've never had it happen), unless the arm catches the edge of the warp as it goes round!

I produce a type of record clamp and I wouldn't put "stops your stylus from skipping" as one of its benefits :scratch:

[Dingdong]

What's your t/t set up? Much depends on its design (suspended or not) and the weight of the clamp. I use(d) an Ortofon Stabilizer (looks nice) on an Amazon 2 t/t and found that it "overdampens" the sound at the expense of finer detail. Try before you buy certainly applies here.

Isn't the Ortofon thing just a heavy weight? I don't like the idea of putting a big weight on top of the bearing. Can't see it doing any good. I like the idea of lightweight clamps, though.

[seoirse2002]

I use a michell clamp and find it only works on certain records,and if I have one that is warped, it makes it worse by holding it down in the centre so that the edges rise on one side...not good...cart looked like it was on a rollercoaster...
but heres something interesting...I was planning on buying one of those mats that a lot of people swear by with the little plastic cones and as I have no vta adjustment, I decided to find the thickest album I had,which was an old 60s mono classical record and put that on the platter first...just to check for height.
I cant believe the difference in sound,especially in the bass. I then tried it with a modernday lp and finally an old 78....what a difference!(78 was the best)
Anyone tried this?
I have to say that my TT has a very thin mat anyway thats really just like suede on tinfoil so I dont know how it would work on other mats.
Try it an see.
GT

[YNWaN]

I put this down to needle drag (might be wrong, but it seems about right to me).

I would say it is wrong; and for these reasons. The force required to make a record slip on a TT mat (even a low friction one) is significantly greater than a stylus playing a record is able to impart - bear in mind that the stylus only presses against the record with a force of 1.8g (approx) and makes very little contact. In addition, if the record did slip on the mat, the speed variation would be enormous - static friction must first be overcome before kinetic friction can be achieved - insufficient traction is ever generated to move between these two states.

What a record clamp/weight does is to couple the record more tightly to the mat and, in some cases, the mat more closely to the platter. In some (many) cases it also couples the record more tightly to the main bearing and therefore more tightly to a source of extraneous noise. Record weights often avoid coupling to the bearing (as they do not rely on gripping the bearing shaft to apply force), but then they rely on mass and this increases bearing load, which usually increases bearing noise. Their increased mass also makes them unsuitable for most sprung suspension turntables as the suspended mass is increased beyond that intended.

[snuffbox]

One of the things I noticed when I first used a clamp was that leading edges seemed a little more precise. I put this down to needle drag (might be wrong, but it seems about right to me). Adding the clamp made things a little more crisp. That was on my Thorens with Blue Horizon mat.
On the occasions were I forgot to put the clamp on it sounded as though it was running slow. The difference was that great.
Listening to Synsei's 1210 the other week with a Herbies mat, which has a tacky rubber surface, the clamp only made a small difference.

Years ago I used to have a brown tacky rubbery sort of mat,had to wash it to keep it clean from dust and hair that would stick to it.

[keiths]

I used the Michell clamp with my Technics SL1500 and found it made a slight difference with some records and none with others. With my Lenco I use the Trans-Fi Reso-Mat without any clamp.

[Dingdong]

Years ago I used to have a brown tacky rubbery sort of mat,had to wash it to keep it clean from dust and hair that would stick to it.
Please don't tell us what sort of hair used to stick to it. :lol:

[seoirse2002]

be careful if buying the michell one,there are 2 types,and one made just for TTs with a short centre stub
GT

[YNWaN]

The Michell clamp couples tightly to the main bearing, which I do not consider a good idea.

[snuffbox]

be careful if buying the michell one,there are 2 types,and one made just for TTs with a short centre stub
GT

Good point,just measured it and once a record is in place theres about not a lot.
5mm ish and some of that is taken up in the radius where its rounded off.
Not a lot to play with there so it looks like I'll have to try a weight.
Bugger

[Dingdong]

The Michell clamp couples tightly to the main bearing, which I do not consider a good idea.

So what would you suggest?

[Batty]

Anyone tried a record weight on a Rock mkII?

[YNWaN]

So what would you suggest?

I would suggest a relatively light record weight (but I use a system of my own that works in a different manner).

[hifi_dave]

Roksan, for instance, do not like record clamps and even go as far as making removeable centre spindles on their more expensive turntables. They don't like the spindle transmitting any bearing noise to the record.

[Marco]

I agree with a lot of the comments here, but much depends on the particular turntable being used with a particular record weight or clamp; in other words, it's about finding a partnership that works. Yes, it's that word 'synergy' again...!

Therefore, I dislike the notion that there is a 'universal solution' to this issue, simply because one doesn't exist.

If you have a suspended deck, I'd go with what Mark suggests, but if you run an idler or direct-drive, better results are obtained, in my experience, with a heavy (but not too heavy) record weight, such as the Bruil, which I use. In this instance, it's about getting the mass right, in order to allow the weight to do its job properly without putting undue stress on the bearing.

As ever with these things, one simply has to suck it and see! :)

Marco.

[Haselsh1]

I'm thinking here that this is very much a case of 'different' but not necessarily 'better'. I swap between a record weight made of milled solid aluminium and the standard Project RPM-4 record clamp. Is there a difference...? Well, yes there is but as for which one is best, I haven't a clue. One is just different from the other and quite often I prefer it without either.

[YNWaN]

I'm not a fan of the sound of heavy record weights, or of scew-down record clamps.

[Dingdong]

Maybe a magnetic platter and clamp would work.

Okay, I'll get me coat.

[Marco]

I'm not a fan of the sound of heavy record weights, or of scew-down record clamps.

...on the specific turntables you've heard them with so far.

It's important you add that bit, Mark! ;)

Marco.

[YNWaN]

The sonic effects have been of much the same type though, irrespective of the turntables I have heard them on. All the turntables with screw down clamps, that I have heard, sounded worse when the clamp was done up tightly (for example).

[Dingdong]

This just got me wondering if something like 4 small pads of sorbathane under my Michell clamp would make an improvement. It wouldn't need to be clamped down tight, but should prevent the record from moving. What do you reckon?

[YNWaN]

The record doesn't move anyway.

[Dingdong]

Maybe I was thinking more of needle drag.
What do you think are the main reasons for using a clamp or weight?

[YNWaN]

Did you not see post #15 Mark?


I would say it is wrong; and for these reasons. The force required to make a record slip on a TT mat (even a low friction one) is significantly greater than a stylus playing a record is able to impart - bear in mind that the stylus only presses against the record with a force of 1.8g (approx) and makes very little contact. In addition, if the record did slip on the mat, the speed variation would be enormous - static friction must first be overcome before kinetic friction can be achieved - insufficient traction is ever generated to move between these two states.

What a record clamp/weight does is to couple the record more tightly to the mat and, in some cases, the mat more closely to the platter. In some (many) cases it also couples the record more tightly to the main bearing and therefore more tightly to a source of extraneous noise. Record weights often avoid coupling to the bearing (as they do not rely on gripping the bearing shaft to apply force), but then they rely on mass and this increases bearing load, which usually increases bearing noise. Their increased mass also makes them unsuitable for most sprung suspension turntables as the suspended mass is increased beyond that intended.

There is insufficient traction generated by the stylus to overcome the static friction imparted between even the record mat and the record (even a mat with very low surface friction).

Edit: You may be aware that the effect of stylus drag on platter speed is a hotly discussed topic in some fields. If there is sufficient traction generated by a stylus to slow an entire platter, then there must certainly be sufficient static friction between the record, the mat and the platter to achieve this slowing.

[Marco]

The sonic effects have been of much the same type though, irrespective of the turntables I have heard them on.

And so you're ruling out all of the other variables in the equation (of which there are many) and somehow magically *know* that what you heard was solely down to the sonic effect of their screw-down clamps? ;)

Marco.

[doodoos]

Just played a track with clamp on / clamp off - heard no difference.

[Marco]

You won't on some turntables.

Marco.

[stevied]

Nottingham analogue don't use record clamps on there turntables

[Dingdong]

Did you not see post #15 Mark?



There is insufficient traction generated by the stylus to overcome the static friction imparted between even the record mat and the record (even a mat with very low surface friction).

Edit: You may be aware that the effect of stylus drag on platter speed is a hotly discussed topic in some fields. If there is sufficient traction generated by a stylus to slow an entire platter, then there must certainly be sufficient static friction between the record, the mat and the platter to achieve this slowing.

Sorry I must have skimmed over it. So what would be causing the effect I heard with and without a clamp on my Thorens were it sounded kind of slower when I didn't use it?
Just trying to learn more stuff.

[YNWaN]

There is a psychoacoustic effect where altering the tonal balance between treble and bass (which is what clamps/weights often do (by altering the damping imparted to the record by the mat) can alter the perceived pace of music. It is well recognised that full range systems often sound less subjectively 'pacey' than those with significantly less extended bass response.

It is also possible that adding the clamp/weight is increasing the mass of the platter and this is literally slowing the motor. However, this is extremely unlikely with something as lightweight as the Michell clamp.

[Marco]

There is a psychoacoustic effect where altering the tonal balance between treble and bass (which is what clamps/weights often do (by altering the damping imparted to the record by the mat) can alter the perceived pace of music. It is well recognised that full range systems often sound less subjectively 'pacey' than those with significantly less extended bass response.


Perhaps, but quite simply, there is no conclusive way of knowing, in an alien system, whether the above is the reason why you don't like the turntables you've heard so far with screw-down clamps, as there are too many other unaccounted for variables in the equation that could be solely or partly responsible for what you're hearing.

Also, I suspect (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the testing you've done in this area will likely have been carried out on low-mass belt-drive turntables, which don't have the necessary torque to overcome the negative effect of adding the extra mass of a heavy record weight. It's a different ball game entirely on something like a modified SL-1200, or SP10, which have heavy-duty bearings and the start-up and continuous motor power to dismiss such issues with consummate ease! ;)

Therefore, with a heavy(ish) record weight, you get the benefit of closely coupling the record to the mat, and the mat to the platter (presuming that you favour a coupling approach, rather than a decoupling one), without incurring any detrimental effect from the added mass, which is precisely why I use the Bruil! :)

That approach, however, won't be as successful on the average belt-drive turntable, simply because the added mass of a heavy record weight will be negatively exposed by the partnering motor mechanism's lack of torque, in comparison to that of their D/D counterparts.

Marco.

[YNWaN]

I'm not sure how my quoted post relates to the point you have made Marco. Irrespective of variables that may, or may not, be occurring, the record is definitely not slipping and therefore rotating slower. It would have to slip in an extremely controlled and even manner for this to be the case, the forces just don't add up.

I'm afraid I'm not very 'on board' with your 'it all depends on the specific situation - too many variables etc.' premise.

[Marco]

Why? It's called taking as many things into consideration as possible before coming to a final conclusion. Hardly a radical concept, I wouldn't have thought!

How else are you supposed to know if what you're hearing is attributable to one factor (the effect of a screw-down clamp), something else entirely, or the cumulative effect of various other things?

I'm afraid that I'm not 'on board' with your often rather over-simplistic and absolutist way of looking at things, based simply on a small test sample of turntables you've worked with ;)

Marco.

[vouk]

Isn't the Ortofon thing just a heavy weight? I don't like the idea of putting a big weight on top of the bearing. Can't see it doing any good. I like the idea of lightweight clamps, though.

Yep, it weighs a little over the half kilo mark - as heavy as they come and a little over the top.

[Marco]

Mark,

If you want to put this one to bed, I'll bring my Techy round to your place and we can try your record weight on it, and also the (heavy-ish) Bruil one I use, and see whether the effect you're describing applies to high-torque direct-drive turntables, as well as with others you have tested.

We've been threatening to have a sesh for a while anyway, so it'll be a good excuse to make it happen. Invite Simon, too, as three pairs of ears will be better than two! :cool:

Marco.

[keiths]

There's a guy who posts on Lenco Heaven who hand-makes record weights from exotic hardwoods (zebrano, ebony, lemonwood etc) and slate. Weights can be between 350g and 560g. Cost is around £50 plus delivery.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y277/pigrot/LENCO/IMGP1201.jpg

http://i973.photobucket.com/albums/ae217/bm1972/Clamps/DSC00781-1-1.jpg

I think they look fantastic, but I know the Reso-mat I use isn't designed to be used with a weight.

[Tarzan]

l use a Michell clamp and also an Oyaide weight, and both sound better than no weight, clamp etc, plus the Oyaide looks ascool as hell.

[Marco]

Mark,

If you want to put this one to bed, I'll bring my Techy round to your place and we can try your record weight on it, and the Bruil one I use, and see whether the effect you're describing applies to high-torque direct-drive turntables, as well as with others you have tested.

We've been threatening to have a sesh for a while anyway, so it'll be a good excuse to make it happen. Invite Simon, too, as three pairs of ears will be better than two! :cool:


Are you up for this, Mark? :)

Marco.

[snuffbox]

Ooooh..............going for a clampoff...............:eyebrows:

[The Grand Wazoo]

Anyone tried a record weight on a Rock mkII?

I think it came with a clamp did it not?

[Marco]

Ooooh..............going for a clampoff...............:eyebrows:

Lol... I think Mark's gone all shy! ;)

Marco.

[YNWaN]

No, I'm not shy - just seen it.
___________________


I think it came with a clamp did it not?

Yes, I thought so - one that screwed into the a threaded hole in the centre of the record spindle.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Yes, & in clear plastic, so you could see the label

[YNWaN]

Yes, I've got a reflex version of the same clamp.
____________________


I'm afraid that I'm not 'on board' with your often rather over-simplistic and absolutist way of looking at things, based simply on a small test sample of turntables you've worked with ;)

Marco.

That's because you assume my opinions on such matters are over simplistic; however, that is not the case (they just don't agree with yours, which is hardly the same thing). For my part, I find your views at least as absolutist, the only difference is that you claim otherwise. I'm also far from convinced that you are immune from preconception prejudice.

Please don't assume you know me Marco, you do not. I think it's best I leave this thread now.

[Marco]

No, I'm not shy - just seen it.


Lol... So? It could be a learning curve for both of us! :)

Marco.

[Marco]

That's because you assume my opinions on such matters are over simplistic; however, that is not the case (they just don't agree with yours, which is hardly the same thing). For my part, I find your views at least as absolutist, the only difference is that you claim otherwise. I'm also far from convinced that you are immune from preconception prejudice.

Please don't assume you know me Marco, you do not. I think it's best I leave this thread now.

Oooh, he's throwing his toys out the pram now, like a big girl!! :lol:

Come on, what's to lose by doing the comparison at your place with my T/T, daftee? Your pride at (perhaps) being wrong? I'll be big enough to admit it if I am!

Marco.

[Batty]

I think it came with a clamp did it not?

Indeed it did however the thread no longer engages, I have an engineering drawing of a wieght which I have given to our fitter/turner at work to 'knock one up' when he has the time.

I was wondering if anyone had used a weight on the Rock and how it went.

P.S. the clamp that came with my '86 Rock was black not clear.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Oh right, I see. Sorry, I thought you maybe had acquired one secondhand & not known about the clamp.

[BTH K10A]

I've found the benefits of using a clamp or weight can be record dependant too.

I've not done any in depth comparisons as to whether its the weight, thickness, manufacturer or even the flatness of the record but there certainly are differences.

[Smoker]

some good info here for sure, my experiment was only on 2 record players, my gyrodec and a friends technics 1210 so very small tests with probably insignificant results that only came from me worrying about my 45's lol they play fine on my gyro when played with a clamp but skipped on his 1210. when it happened i immediately raised the arm carefully and replayed the same part only to hear it jump again. I replayed it again using my michell clamp and it played back fine, but since dirt could have been the culprit too i wont go making wild claims of success or logic :eyebrows:

I will let him know about the bruil weight if thats a better fit.

[keiths]

I've found the benefits of using a clamp or weight can be record dependant too.
That's what I've found too, Andy. I'm sure it's something to do with damping resonances in the record rather than anything else.

[Marco]

That's a very good point, Keith :)

And you're not going to dampen any such resonances by using a low-mass record weight! ;)

The point I was trying to make to Mark (YNWaN), before he ran off in a strop (and I certainly didn't want to fall out with him about it), is that the reason there are so many record mat or clamp/weight solutions available is because there many different ways of tackling different problems - and ALL are relevant in *some* way.

Quite simply, it is impossible to create a 'universal solution' to any of those problems because each turntable one uses with a particular mat or clamp/weight, will react differently, due to its particular design, to what those items are intended to do.

I'm sure that the items Mark has designed are superb (they certainly look it), but it is not guaranteed that they will have the same positive effect on turntables other than the one he designed them for (namely his own), although no doubt they will benefit other similarly designed turntables (i.e. low to medium-mass belt-drives).

In my experience, the relationship between a turntable and its mat and record weight/clamp must be similarly symbiotic, as that of its tonearm and cartridge, i.e. all items must work synergistically together as a system, in order to produce a desired effect. There is no 'perfect' anything in audio; and so neither does there exist a 'perfect' record mat clamp or weight.

Heavy record weights can (and do) work very well on turntables with sufficient torque to overcome any negative effect of the added mass, which is what I've found with my SL-1210.

I don't think it was in any way unfair or unreasonable to have made that point. We're all big boys here, and so should therefore be able to take constructive criticism on the chin.

Anyway, this is an interesting discussion, chaps, so let's carry on with it :cool:

Marco.

[jostber]

That's a very good point, Keith :)

And you're not going to dampen any such resonances by using a low-mass record weight! ;)



The Furutech Monza has resonance dampening features:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue45/ramblings_furutech.htm

[DSJR]

I am naturally anti the heavy-weight style since I fear for some cheaper main bearings (obviously not the MN bearing Marco uses, although the Linn LP12 bearings of old wore out on the stock platter weight, so be careful), and I agree that SOME decks (like the NAS models) don't "need" a weight or clamp. having said that, the Mentor I owned, with its graphite top platter (as in NAS Heavy Kit models upwards) was a bit unforgiving of dished records.

Does anyone remember the lightweight plastic tripod thing that was suitable for sprung decks? A pain to use, as all clamp types are, but it worked well I remember...

The Michell clamp doesn't have to be tightened to within an inch of its life, does it? maybe just nipped up is enough?

[seoirse2002]

http://http://theartofsound.net/forum/picture.php?albumid=122&pictureid=732You mean this one? Its made by audio Technica...

[seoirse2002]

http://theartofsound.net/forum/picture.php?albumid=122&pictureid=732

[flatpopely]

I have heard Marks clamp on my LP12, it was an improvement and I have asked for one. What was interesting that on Marks deck he likes it in combination with his record mat, I do not like the combo on my LP12.

I would say though that a clamp that connects the stylus to the bearing via the record can't be good!

[seoirse2002]

Believe it on not, I have now taken to using another record as a mat!!!This is because, on the Michell,the mat seems to be made of a silver tinfoil like material covered in suede,and its very thin.
I have found an old 78 picked up at a boot sale is fine...makes a huge difference,especially in the bass...I know it sounds weird,but try it and see.
GT

[bogle111]

FWIW I think there is considerable info here that is relevant, and a whole lot more that is misconstrued.

Clamps (including Oracle and the Michell), can sometimes help to hold a warped record rigid. They may in some way help reduce a warp, but not overcome it. They will always work on one side better than the other where warps are concerned. Alter the sound, yes, on many but generally speaking, suspended chassis types are not improved - Linn LP12, Ariston etc.

Weights will sometimes have an effect of "holding" the record on different turntables giving a different tonal balance but do minimal remedial work to a warped record. Warps vary, whereas a weight is constant.

Sound wise is up to the individual. On many DD turntables, a clamp is better than nothing much of the time, however the effects of a clamp must be tried with the characteristics of the cartridge.

I personally use something completely different, believing in the theory first used by Luxman, in completely "sucking" the record to the mat. Warps reduced to their least possible amount, and a stable foundation for the record overall plus rigidity for the cartridge to work on. Even Ringmats will not compete with this. This can make even a budget turntable sound really good IMO. Though it may look like a weight, it is very light - the mat though is reasonably heavy.

"I would say though that a clamp that connects the stylus to the bearing via the record can't be good!" The bearing should be of sufficient quality for this not to be a problem. Airborne vibration back through the plinth and the cartridge/arm is more of a hindrance.

But there are so many new mats, and manufacturers are always looking for the "perfect answer". It is interesting to see so many ideas & derivatives that have landed on the market in the last ten to fifteen years, that were thrown out for scrap decades before.

It seems the fewer the turntables, the greater the bull.

[synsei]

FWIW I think there is considerable info here that is relevant, and a whole lot more that is misconstrued.

Clamps (including Oracle and the Michell), can sometimes help to hold a warped record rigid. They may in some way help reduce a warp, but not overcome it. They will always work on one side better than the other where warps are concerned. Alter the sound, yes, on many but generally speaking, suspended chassis types are not improved - Linn LP12, Ariston etc.

Weights will sometimes have an effect of "holding" the record on different turntables giving a different tonal balance but do minimal remedial work to a warped record. Warps vary, whereas a weight is constant.

Sound wise is up to the individual. On many DD turntables, a clamp is better than nothing much of the time, however the effects of a clamp must be tried with the characteristics of the cartridge.

On my decks Peter I found the opposite to be true. The Thorens TD160 benefited hugely from use of the Michell clamp to the extent it was very obvious if I forgot to fit it. The SL1210 benefits slightly from the Michell but not much. Basslines are a little punchier and the top end is a little more defined, which brings me to a question: Would a weight be more suitable than a clamp on the Techy, baring in mind the only mod so far is a set of VA feet? ;)

[sq225917]

http://theartofsound.net/forum/picture.php?albumid=122&pictureid=732

Is that dire Straits 1st album George?

[bogle111]

On my decks Peter I found the opposite to be true. The Thorens TD160 benefited hugely from use of the Michell clamp to the extent it was very obvious if I forgot to fit it. The SL1210 benefits slightly from the Michell but not much. Basslines are a little punchier and the top end is a little more defined, which brings me to a question: Would a weight be more suitable than a clamp on the Techy, baring in mind the only mod so far is a set of VA feet? ;)

I should have been more precise, but tried to keep my answer short.

On belt drives with a "felt" mat (the rage at one time) like LP12, Ariston at one time and others, the Clamp influence was less distinct and not always preferred. On a belt with a rubber mat like a TD160 (especially the Super) the clamp was preferred. This was also true of the Focus, the Hydraulic and other belters. The problem we found in selling the clamp was that with suspended tables, the pressure usually exerted on the centre of the platter pushed the platter on to the base plate. I made a foamalux type material cut out that slid under the platter in order to put the clamp on correctly.

Turntables like a JBE (DD and heavy without suspension) and others with a different platter definitely benefited from the clamp. Other DD's like the Technics did benefit from the clamp.

We also experimented with weights, (784g) being the optimal found, had some effect but we, I found that it did nothing beneficial on BDrives, though could be found to sometimes change the sound on DD.

As for the clamp connecting to the bearing, the original clamp we used was the original Michell (no chamfer to outer edge) with strobe and had red suede on the underside, and did not find that any problem with the bearing. The clamp though has been improved over the years.

As with many things Hi Fi, I have found that after all the systems of drive were conceived and on reflection, that man went about the drive systems i the wrong order. The only benefit for an idler like a TD124, is up to speed fast. Belt always had too many variations though simple in design and the cheapest to produce with its' own built in echo chamber underneath, whilst DD is the most sensible. Turntables to me fall into 3 distinct categories as far as design goes:
Stone Age - wheels ah rumblin'
Industrial Revolution - belts ah flappin'
Simply Smarter - DD, the platter revolves at the same speed as the motor, with minimal servicing and set-up of suspension or isolation, plus gives more time for listening.

Suction mats like the Audio Technica, built in to the turntable like Luxman (with DD) is the best combination of produced t/t's, though all too complicated. I use a suction device to this day that is a forerunner to the Transrotor and the Thorens. The former being poorly made and the latter too complicated with faults.

When you see a cutting lathe and how flat and integral the whole process of cutting a record, then to me it only makes sense that the aim is to try to get the record as flat and damped as possible.

I on many occasions wanted John M to produce a DD (like a JBE motor), upside down platter (but very thick) version similar in style to a marble/acrylic Prisma with this suction device that he made parts for, but instead he stuck to belts. It would have been a scorcher. Manufacturers did not spend enough time listening to the competitions offerings.

Ironically, the only UK enthusiasts/manufacturers with a desire to produce a really well thought out DD turntable was Garrard (its' employees), but the management (Gradiente) could only number crunch. Sad to relate. Thorens then, didn't have funds to do much except sit on past successes.

Comments here, of course are IMO.

Regards
Pete

[synsei]

Ah ok Peter, that's a bit clearer now ;)

Isn't it ironic that during the 1980's the entire HiFi press were very anti direct drive. For instance, I remember reading a review in Practical HiFi of the Technics SL1800 where the reviewer (it was Barry Fox IIRC) was really quite scathing about DD. He seemed particularly put out that anyone would dream of coupling a noisy electric motor directly to the spindle. He didn't like the deck at all and he claimed to be hearing all sorts of artefacts that were supposedly being transmitted directly to the stylus from the mechanicals of the Technics. Now, to be fair I've not listened to an SL1800 but I assume that essentially it is not too far removed from the design of the SL1200/1210 internally. If this is the case then my own ears tell me that mechanical rumble is less of an issue with the SL than it is with the Thorens TD160. Perhaps it was a sign of times to come and the establishment was actually quite worried about this upstart new drive system from the land of the rising sun... :cool:

[seoirse2002]

It sure is...well spotted!!

[flatpopely]

TD160 has more rumble than a 1200 series TT?

Really?

[Macca]

TD160 has more rumble than a 1200 series TT?

Really?

My 1200 is not in the first flush of youth (according to the serial number it is from either 1990 or 2000, probably the former) and has no rumble whatsoever :scratch: I've never heard a TD 160 but if it has any rumble at all it is way behind in that respect.

[bogle111]

Ah ok Peter, that's a bit clearer now ;)

Isn't it ironic that during the 1980's the entire HiFi press were very anti direct drive. For instance, I remember reading a review in Practical HiFi of the Technics SL1800 where the reviewer (it was Barry Fox IIRC) was really quite scathing about DD. He seemed particularly put out that anyone would dream of coupling a noisy electric motor directly to the spindle. He didn't like the deck at all and he claimed to be hearing all sorts of artefacts that were supposedly being transmitted directly to the stylus from the mechanicals of the Technics. Now, to be fair I've not listened to an SL1800 but I assume that essentially it is not too far removed from the design of the SL1200/1210 internally. If this is the case then my own ears tell me that mechanical rumble is less of an issue with the SL than it is with the Thorens TD160. Perhaps it was a sign of times to come and the establishment was actually quite worried about this upstart new drive system from the land of the rising sun... :cool:

If the 160 has "rumble" then I would suggest that either the bearing is needing attention or the grommet dooda's holding the motor in place are poor. Either of these, in excellent condition should give a smooth, "rumble" free performance. Checking the platter shaft is easy, just take off the belt and rotate the whole platter quickly (say equivalent to 45rpm) and let go, it should go on for quite a few revolutions on its own. Some platter shafts were none too clever, though it was only for a short time in production.

The only other thing I can think of is feedback through the plinth when playing.

The only mag I can remember that said some nice things about DD was Hi Fi News. I think it was Mr Borwick. The reason I took to DD was that with all the R & D the Japanese had at their disposal, why were they all doing it. It had to have some merit, even if it was down to production costs, to put their reputation on the line. Anyone with a drill and spanner could concoct a belt drive of some merit. I concluded that the t/table cottage industry did not have the finances or collaboration to develop their own. I became more interested in clear or "clinical" rather than the tone the turntable added.

It also should be asked why they chose an SL1800. A lot of the Japanese companies did not bother with the press, and rightly so IMO - What Caravan last week, What Toilet Seat this week, What Audio next week. They were paid Journalists, not paid Engineers nor even experienced with audio knowledge in any way in many cases. A salesman in a well stocked hi fi store with all the right agencies knew more than these reviewers, but even certain reps got to them, and the honest salesman was doomed and deemed "traitor" if he disagreed. To be fair, generally SH & MC was reasonably good though.

Was a Technics representative there to ensure the equipment was tested to its' best. I doubt it. A lot of the reps could hardly set-up a t/table without an instruction manual, they were there to sell product, not play with it as was told to me. The UK press was wined, dined and primed by the smaller manufacturer by and large, they got little income from the likes of Technics in relation to overall turnover of the company. Technics didn't need them, Technics didn't want them. Reviews were intended for the gullible, the revenue benefited the Retailer and the Manufacturer, increased advertising benefited the magazine. The punter paid the price.

I have to stand up for places like Studio 99 and Mr Howard Popeck, people like this that didn't pussy foot or kiss-ass round the industry, - Linn, Naim especially, and to a smaller extent Mission, along with Hi Fi magazines that turned Bullshit into an art form. Classic Marketing Bull. All may have their own agenda true, but as long as they are not lying, know a bit about what they are talking about or bullshitting me, I'll listen. I was a Linn Naim dealer when in the trade and liked some of it, but save me the bull.:steam:

I can only hope the magazines (that are left) are better today.

Sorry for going off topic, but the mention of MAGASINES does it for me, doesn't matter where I am.:mental:

Regards
Pete

[Dingdong]

On my decks Peter I found the opposite to be true. The Thorens TD160 benefited hugely from use of the Michell clamp to the extent it was very obvious if I forgot to fit it. The SL1210 benefits slightly from the Michell but not much. Basslines are a little punchier and the top end is a little more defined, which brings me to a question: Would a weight be more suitable than a clamp on the Techy, baring in mind the only mod so far is a set of VA feet? ;)

I wouldn't go anywhere near a Teccy with a weiight if it has the standard bearing.
I think the slightly tacky nature of your mat is one of the major differences you see over your old TD160.

[bogle111]

I wouldn't go anywhere near a Teccy with a weiight if it has the standard bearing.
I think the slightly tacky nature of your mat is one of the major differences you see over your old TD160.

I agree. But then I don't like weights. Don't hear any benefit in them IMO.

[Dingdong]

I'm not a weight fan either. I'm thinking of trying 4 small sorbathane pads under my Michell clamp when I get a moment. The idea is to damp any vibrations from the spindle that would be transmitted through the clamp.

[bogle111]

This is what I mean. It makes the record solid with the mat, and the weight is negligible. The metal piece is aluminium.