PDA

View Full Version : Heybrook 'TT2'



Vinyl Grinder
17-02-2008, 18:14
Bought this before the weekend.Be here tomorrow, what a state it's in! Need a lot of TLC to get A1..First things scrapping that Airpax AC motor for a DC jobbie.I suppose at £75 including postage i aint gonna sniff at it.Folk say they sound like 'Sondek's but i don't think so.(Hadcocks not included in)

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Ellabox016.jpg

shane
17-02-2008, 20:52
That's one of the early the steel chassis versions. Although it seems to be accepted that the later alloy chassis is an improvement, I'm not totally convinced. Mind you, it's at least 25 years since I compared the two. Only the first hundred or so had black platters because the finish of the first batch of platter castings wasn't all it should have been. What's the serial number?

The main thing to check is the condition of the spindle. It should be bright and clean, and there should be no discernible depression where it sits on the ball. The thrust bearing itself is a bog-standard 10mm steel ball which is unlikely to be worn. If it does show any sign of wear, simply take it out and put it back so that the spindle rests on a new area. The sides of the spindle are unlikely to be worn unless it's been run without oil for a very long time. The bearing area is so big that it should last for years without problems.

Heybrook can still provide belts, but I'd be surprised if they still had any major parts available. If it needs any major parts, I can put you in touch with the engineering company who did all the machining. There's nothing that couldn't be re-made by a decent engineering shop except for the platter, which was a bespoke casting for which I imagine the patterns have long since gone.

Vinyl Grinder
17-02-2008, 21:33
Hi Shane
I've no idea about what version it is or unit number till it arrives.

I was kinda hoping the suspension was gonna be this:

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/TT2-1.jpg

Was an impulsive purchase due to the reasonably asking price...

shane
17-02-2008, 21:54
The plinth, motor and armboard will look exactly like that, the chassis will not. Early TT2s had a simple cross-shaped chassis welded up from 2"x1" 1/8" wall steel tube that could have done service as an anchor for the Titanic. The later cast alloy chassis shown in your picture was supposed to be an all-round improvement but I'm not sure that it was really, and I know that Peter thinks it was a retrograde step sonically.
The truth is that the cast chassis represented a substantial investment, and once the patterns were made it was cheaper than the steel one so there was no going back. It was supposed to be lighter, more rigid, less resonant, more supportive of the arm-board and less agricultural-looking. It succeeded in the last aim. Not so sure about the rest!
If you ever get the chance to compare the two side-by-side, I'd be very interested to know the results!
When you get it, show us some pics.

Vinyl Grinder
17-02-2008, 22:24
Hi Shane

Yeh i know the other sub..I couldn't really make judgement over which as i'm not sure if the black paint on the platter is original or not being in such a state.

Heres the other one anyway.I'll report back when i get my mits on it:

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/TT21.jpg

Anyone got a pic of a TT1'?

shane
17-02-2008, 22:43
Anyone got a pic of a TT1'?

I'd be very surprised. There's no such thing!

Vinyl Grinder
17-02-2008, 23:29
I'd be very surprised. There's no such thing!

What i thought but seem to remember someone saying there was maybe one off!!...I also seem to remember an ex employee of Heybrook selling a stand for the 'TT2' that never went into production!He was an e-bay seller

:confused:

Marco
17-02-2008, 23:53
The TT2 was a great deck - used to have one, but my oh my, Andre, that's a sad looking specimen... :(

You've got your work cut out with that one!

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
18-02-2008, 00:00
The TT2 was a great deck - used to have one, but my oh my, Andre, that's a sad looking specimen... :(

You've got your work cut out with that one!

Marco.

When the master gets to work he's a genius..;)

Be a beauty when i get mi nice shiney Mayware on it..

shane
18-02-2008, 07:10
I also seem to remember an ex employee of Heybrook selling a stand for the 'TT2' that never went into production!He was an e-bay seller

:confused:

That would be me...

shane
18-02-2008, 10:00
You've got your work cut out with that one!

Marco.

No, I disagree. The major parts of the TT2 were very substantial and unstressed, so I can't really think of anything that's likely to have suffered that much other than cosmetically. If it's had a really heavy bash then I guess the sub-platter could wobble on top of the spindle, but that could be dealt with. The only thing I can think of that would be a real problem would be if any of the rubber spring mountings needed replacing. They were specially moulded for the TT2 and would be hard to replicate.
The only parts that would be subject to wear would be the motor, belt and bearing. The motor could be replaced with a DC jobbie, a swift call to Heybrook will procure a belt (I bought one last year, so they're still around), and as I said above, in the unlikely event of the bearing needing replacing, any competent engineering shop could knock up a new one. I could let you know more details of the bearing construction if need be, although I don't have the original drawings. Should have kept them when I left...

Marco
18-02-2008, 11:57
Hi Shane,

You're right, of course - I simply meant in a cosmetic sense. It's so bashed and scratched looking that I couldn't ever have something like that in my system (I like my gear to look pristine) but I'm sure Andre is very capable of sorting it out! :)

Me? That's a different matter entirely. I'm not exactly 'Mr D.I.Y', hence why I made my original comment!

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
18-02-2008, 13:57
No, I disagree. The major parts of the TT2 were very substantial and unstressed, so I can't really think of anything that's likely to have suffered that much other than cosmetically. If it's had a really heavy bash then I guess the sub-platter could wobble on top of the spindle, but that could be dealt with. The only thing I can think of that would be a real problem would be if any of the rubber spring mountings needed replacing. They were specially moulded for the TT2 and would be hard to replicate.
The only parts that would be subject to wear would be the motor, belt and bearing. The motor could be replaced with a DC jobbie, a swift call to Heybrook will procure a belt (I bought one last year, so they're still around), and as I said above, in the unlikely event of the bearing needing replacing, any competent engineering shop could knock up a new one. I could let you know more details of the bearing construction if need be, although I don't have the original drawings. Should have kept them when I left...

Ok landed this morning.It's one of the first ones with the metal welded cross suspension frame.Unit number:'532'...I've had it running & the motors in perfect nick, very strong when you grab the pulley when running.I've had a new belt in a bag for about 8 years so that's no problem.The bearings in perfect nic, infact like new..although the original owner obviously has no respect for his gear he's kept the bearing over oiled if anything.The only thing i was worried about was damage to the name plate by the power switch but it's just a couple of white gloss paint specs that can easily removed, always made me wonder why people persist on keeping there equipment out while they decorating the house.

Rubber mounts seem ok, i got them soaking in soapy water now, no cracks just a bit dirty, springs seem fine, i'll measure them against linn springs but i think the lins may be a lot stiffer than the Heybrooks..Sized & ordered all polished stainless steel bolts to replace the rust mild steel ones for a nice touch...

Need a new armboard.This will be laminated with shiney black acrylic for a classy touch.That's it really not a massive job, couple week's hard at it should do the trick.Platter & lid will take the largest amount of time.These lids are hard perspex & take a lot of effort getting scratches out.


Stay tooned folks.

shane
18-02-2008, 14:26
Did you check the positions of the springs before you took them off? You have to juggle with their rotation to get an even bounce. Most TT2s left the factory with a red line drawn down each spring and a little triangular sticker stuck on the chassis next to each spring. If they're still there, then bob's your uncle. If not, then a bit of trial-and-error will be called for.

There's no point in comparing the spring-lengths with Linn springs, they were completely different. The Linn's much heavier mazak platter means that their springs were much harder than ours. Incidentally we did try out a platter and sub-platter made from the same alloy as the Linn's but it killed the sound completely. Slow, dull and boring.

If you need a new lid, they were bought in from Linn, as were the felt mats.

Vinyl Grinder
18-02-2008, 15:50
Did you check the positions of the springs before you took them off? You have to juggle with their rotation to get an even bounce. Most TT2s left the factory with a red line drawn down each spring and a little triangular sticker stuck on the chassis next to each spring. If they're still there, then bob's your uncle. If not, then a bit of trial-and-error will be called for.

There's no point in comparing the spring-lengths with Linn springs, they were completely different. The Linn's much heavier mazak platter means that their springs were much harder than ours. Incidentally we did try out a platter and sub-platter made from the same alloy as the Linn's but it killed the sound completely. Slow, dull and boring.

If you need a new lid, they were bought in from Linn, as were the felt mats.

Yeh no worries Shane all noted, the stickers are still there.Aye the hinges & hinge pockets are Linn aswell, later Ariston, Logics etc all used the same hinges.I think a clear lid would look better than the smoked one.Trouble being the Linn lids these days seem to be of shitty quality than older ones, i noticed this & the recess for the Linn badge looks smaller than the Heybrook lid badge.No worries about the springs they look fine, as you say the platters not as heavy as the linns so shouldn't have put too much stress on them over the years.

CornishPasty
19-02-2008, 20:19
Is this what you made the frame for then big boy?

Vinyl Grinder
20-02-2008, 15:52
Is this what you made the frame for then big boy?

No Ralph but the idea did pass my mind..Things arn't going to plan with this Heybrook because of how it's constructed.My brains presently on fire at the moment...

shane
20-02-2008, 22:13
Just out of interest, what are yoy trying to do with it?

Vinyl Grinder
20-02-2008, 22:17
Just out of interest, what are yoy trying to do with it?

Hi Shane

Needs re-veneering as it's un savable.I'm not a fan of veneer as it is, i think it cheap shite to be honest. I'm gonna replicate surround in solid hardwood.I'm a fussy bugger, qwality is very improtant to me.

shane
20-02-2008, 22:55
Shouldn't be too hard. The veneered bit is just stuck round the outside to hide the innards and support the lid. It's the four layers of chipboard inside that do the work. Don't forget to put the arm-cable clamping block back in the right place.

Marco
21-02-2008, 11:38
Have any of you ever compared an LP12 to a TT2 with the same arm and cartridge in the same system?

I'd like to hear the results of that :)

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
21-02-2008, 11:51
Have any of you ever compared an LP12 to a TT2 with the same arm and cartridge in the same system?

I'd like to hear the results of that :)

Marco.

Some will obviously say they sound the same because of the simular look, but do they ech!, looking at the construction even without playing the 'TT2' will tell you it doesn't sound the same.

All that you see inside is a chunk of chipboard bonded together from 3 pieces .The top board is 3/4 ply as is the armboard, Motor mounting plate is behind the platter, platter is lighter than the linn.The armboard is not held on with 3 shitty screws like the Linn it's bolted on with studs from the board.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/TT2-1.jpg

pure sound
21-02-2008, 13:06
I've still got a Mk2 I take out occasionally. Its had various different arms on it including an SMEV and the Rega. For the kind of deck it is, it works quite well, reasonably stable sounding with a less obvious signature than the LP12's I've had here.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/TT2012.jpg

Never did a side by side with the same arm though.

Marco
21-02-2008, 14:30
Yes, but how does it compare to the SP10? :eyebrows:

Marco.

shane
21-02-2008, 15:07
I've still got a Mk2 I take out occasionally. Its had various different arms on it including an SMEV and the Rega. For the kind of deck it is, it works quite well, reasonably stable sounding with a less obvious signature than the LP12's I've had here.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/TT2012.jpg

Never did a side by side with the same arm though.

Next time you take the bottom off, can you take a picture of it? I've never seen a mark two, and I would be interested to see what was done to my original design. Who designed the changes?

Vinyl Grinder
21-02-2008, 22:45
I've not seen one either, I'd be intrested too as theres a couple of things i'm not happy about

looks a bit bigger than the original design also the underside seems to be set in a lot more.

Marco
22-02-2008, 00:35
I'd definitely have that TT2 to most LP12s I've heard. I thought Heybrook also made some excellent speakers. Does anyone remember those?

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
22-02-2008, 00:37
I'd definitely have that TT2 to most LP12s I've heard. I thought Heybrook also made some excellent speakers. Does anyone remember those?

Marco.

Original 'HB-1' & 'HB-3' Please..:)

Marco
22-02-2008, 00:53
Which ones were the big-ish stand-mount types? They had a fairly big bass unit, if I remember...

I had a pair of those and they sounded fab!

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
22-02-2008, 02:23
Which ones were the big-ish stand-mount types? They had a fairly big bass unit, if I remember...

I had a pair of those and they sounded fab!

Marco.

Original 'HB-3'

Here's a sorry looking pair...I prefered the sound of the original 'HB-1' to those tho.I keep saying original as Heybrook have re-introduced modern version's of these models..:lol:

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/HB3.jpg

pure sound
22-02-2008, 08:31
There were multiple x-over permutations of the HB3 during its lifetime.
Even the original HB1 eventually reached a Mk3 status. Always the Vifa M21 bass/mid driver but the tweeter changed from the D25 to a less good imho (smaller magnet) 26mm Vifa unit in the end.

The crossover was hardwired and always used film caps so isn't prone to ageing in the way it might have been with electrolytics.

The newer HB1's (with Kevlar drivers) are just a different design altogether and were made as a speaker that could be sold for £180 in modern times. Making the HB1 as was, with the drivers & cabinet it had, would result in an £800-£1000 pair of speakers now. Also, such wide speakers have simply fallen out of fashion as everyone (wrongly) wants tall & slim.

Marco
22-02-2008, 10:06
Yep, Guy, and I wonder why that is - bloody WAF. Too many folk are under the thumb! ;)

I think it's actually stifling the creativity of loudspeaker designers because their hands are tied having to produce designs that are 'domestically acceptable'.

Why is it I wonder that British men always pander to the wants of their other half, who appear to make ALL the decisions about what goes in the home?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression marriage was meant to be a partnership (50-50) so therefore such decisions should be made equally. It's definitely a British thing - it wouldn't happen in Italy, I can assure you! Some guys need to grow balls.

<Rant over>

:)

Marco.

Vinyl Grinder
22-02-2008, 14:12
Much prefer stand mount speakers anyday. Even though floor stand speakers are suppose to be wife friendly , i personally think they look somewhat silly, i honestly think for some it's a way to avoid pumping money into speaker stands...Marco you perfectly correct partnership is 50/50 but there's an unbelievable amount of mice out there, more fool them for getting themselves into that position..My systems in the living room & accept that it's a living room & respect the wife wanting it that way & i'm happy to go with that.The wife always comments that my speakers are ugly but she's happy with me to have them there if that's what i want..I'll eventually get a different pair, goes without saying really..

Marco
22-02-2008, 18:33
Sounds like an amicable arrangement, Andre :)

I just find it hugely amusing when I hear stuff like "the wife won't let me" from some guy, in relation to a hi-fi purchase, as if they were on a leash :lol:

Marco.

CornishPasty
24-02-2008, 07:07
I've told my missus that if there's any part of my hifi she doesn't like then she should look away when she polishes it.:eyebrows:

Vinyl Grinder
24-02-2008, 15:30
I've told my missus that if there's any part of my hifi she doesn't like then she should look away when she polishes it.:eyebrows:

Mine don't polish :lol:

Marco
24-02-2008, 18:39
I've told my missus that if there's any part of my hifi she doesn't like then she should look away when she polishes it.:eyebrows:


Aye, and on the way over from the kitchen she can bring me a beer!

Marco.

stu1
28-02-2008, 06:45
I may be just stating what all you from 'cross the pond' take for granted....

my personal experience is limited to a 6 month short ownership of a TT2--I wished I had kept it. I sold it to help finance a new amp/preamp setup, that I still have and enjoy...., but wouldn't miss it the way I seem to miss the Heybrook. If the opportunity occurs again in the future I may very well get another and keep it forever.

My TT2 was equipped with an Alphason Xenon titanium arm. It (the arm/table combo) was fabulous. It played music in a very convincing manner, at ease, not "showy" at all.

I think that in the correct setting, with a real music lover ,this could be one of the best kept secrets in new or used audio.

But alas, here in North America (western Canada to be specific) these are becoming a little like hen's teeth---non-existent!

Good luck. I hope you enjoy your new table half as much as I did mine.


stew

Vinyl Grinder
29-02-2008, 22:11
Aye well stay tooned, i've re-created a new top board with DC motor (Mounted in the correct position)...Looking sexy.

shane
29-02-2008, 22:37
Pictures please! Have you replaced the top board of the plinth, or the top surface of the arm-board? If the former, then how?

Vinyl Grinder
29-02-2008, 22:59
Pictures please!

Gis couple days Shane not quite finshed yet..

pure sound
01-03-2008, 09:19
For your benefit Shane. Underneath a Mk2.
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/P1010147.jpg

This just looks like a conventional Greaves 'picture frame' with a few chipboard blocks stuck in it. The original (Mk1) plinth looks more interesting. I have a few of those here & could transfer the relevant contents of this TT into one of them. It looks to me as though the Mk2 was cutting corners. But actually this sounds ok & is a 2nd deck anyway.

shane
01-03-2008, 10:03
Thanks Guy, that's really interesting. There are a number of changes that fly in the face of what we learned when we designed the original TT2. The original plinth was really a 4-layer thick block of chipboard with minimum size cutouts in the bottom three layers to house the chassis and motor, and the Greaves "picture frame" stuck on round the outside for decoration and to hold the lid on. It's perfectly possible to unstick it and run the turntable naked. Don't think it would improve the sound though. The idea was to create a massive vibration sink, and to avoid creating any acoustically resonant chambers inside. All that was obviously thrown out with this version! More puzzling is the way the arm board is attached. The old-style armboard was fitted with two M4 studs, but only one was fitted with a nut. This introduced a degree of loss into the armoboard/chassis coupling and resulted in a single path between the two for vibrational energy. I was never quite convinced by the theory behind that, but it definitely sounded better. Fitting a second nut killed a lot of the life in the sound. This one seems to have four wood screws. Interesting. I recon that if the old principals had been adhered to and the chip-board block of the original was extended to fill the gap left by the shorter armboard and moving the power switch, the result would have been better that either version. We shall never know...
The only benefits I can see in the new plinth are that it looks nicer (IMHO) and as you say was probably a good deal cheaper to make.
Am I right in thinking that you worked for Heybrook at one stage? Were you there with Stuart and Peter, or was it in the Peter Wanstall era? I see you're still local. I thought I was the only Devonian on any of these forums!

shane
01-03-2008, 10:14
Incidentally, I did once build an open version of the TT2 for exhibition purposes. Looked a bit odd.
I dug it out last year to try out a home-made unipivot.

http://www.thepippin.plus.com/Unipivot/DSCF0403.JPG

Didn't sound bad, but I then nicked the platter and bearing to build a slate-based idler drive which sounded
(and still does sound) a hell of a lot better than any TT2 ever did. Wish I'd thought of that in 1981!

http://www.thepippin.plus.com/Fakedeck/DSCF0037.JPG

(Those who frequent the WD forum will be faimiliar with this.
More pics here http://www.thepippin.plus.com/Fakedeck/ )

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 13:36
Pictures please! Have you replaced the top board of the plinth, or the top surface of the arm-board? If the former, then how?

I'm making a complete new deck, copy of most the original but obviosly different due to DC motor mounting at the front...

Here's top board ready for black finish, fit the bespoke motor mounting metalwork when it comes.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/TT2TOP.jpg

pure sound
01-03-2008, 13:39
I worked for JPW from 1996 & it acquired Heybrook (& the Boughtons!) soon afterwards. Everything Heybrook was moved from Liskeard to a huge new factory that was built at Langage in Plympton. At that time besides then owning Heybrook & Sequence, JPW were doing oem assembly for (amongst others) Richer Sounds (Gale, TDL) Monitor Audio, Mitsubishi, Denon and were making the wooden skeletons of Toshiba back projection TV's. It was really the wrong time to be investing in manufacturing facilities and many of these oem customers gradually found cheaper suppliers abroad. Eventually the overheads overtook the business & it went bust in 2001 and was acquired by Indian driver supplier Peerless who moved the production to Mumbai. I think they still make the last UK designed JPW & Heybrook models over there & sell them in various far flung places. Heybrook had no further electronics or turntable manufacturing after the takeover although some TT parts remained. I acquired all of those when the UK factory closed. It included several Mk1 plinths, springs, belts, mats, quite alot of motors which I sold (too cheaply!) to Rega and a couple of complete TT2 Mk2's of which this is one.
I missed out on a few inner platter/bearing parts but there was never enough of everything to actually have put any more complete TT's together. I just supply the parts I have now (usually belts & springs) to those who need them. I do also have the 'cut-away' display TT2 with the bearing sliced open!

Perhaps a sad end to a good brand but they had a good run for 20 years or so. I still buy & supply alot of Vifa M21 drivers (and foam fronts) to old HB1 owners whose surrounds have disintegrated. As said earlier, there aren't many 2 way designs with an 8 inch bass/mid made now and usually it makes quite good economic sense to keep a pair of HB1's in service as they'd be quite expensive to replace with an equivalent now.

Re the TT2 Mk2 armboard. It is just a piece of sprayed mdf. It was probably supposed to be fitted with 3 woodscrews but as this subchassis had 4 holes I used 4 screws!

Shane, were you related to Stuart?

shane
01-03-2008, 14:02
Shane, were you related to Stuart?

No, but I was close friends at school with Peter Comeau, and we both ended up working in Peter Wanstall's first venture, a hi-fi shop in the Barbican in Plymouth, upstairs from Robert Lenkiwicz's studio. (The JPW name started off as a spin-off with a record-cleaning machine to make some pocket money for PWs wife!)
The shop went bust in 1977, but a year or so before that Peter Comeau went off to be a hi-fi journalist, and subsequently designed a neat little 2-way reflex speaker, figuring (correctly, in my opinion) that he could do better than most of the stuff he was reviewing. He then teamed up with Stuart Mee (an insurance salesman who lived in Heybrook Bay and had been a reglar customer in the shop) to set up Heybrook. The two-way reflex became the HB2. I joined them in 1979, having spent two years doing other things, including cobbling up a turntable to my own design in my bedroom. This subsequently evolved into the TT2.
I left in 1984 when the company hit a rocky patch, and went to work for Toshiba mending tellys. Ugh!
I never saw Stuart again, but I still keep in touch with Peter.
I did go to the Estover factory once, when the Boughtons had bought out Stuart, and decided I was well off out of it. I think Peter left shortly after that, then Peter Wanstall took over the whole shebang.

Happy days...

pure sound
01-03-2008, 14:10
I'm surprised they hit a rocky patch in '84. It was around that time that the HB1 was winning the What HiFi award every year. They must have sold '000's of pairs for a while.

shane
01-03-2008, 14:21
I'm making a complete new deck, copy of most the original but obviosly different due to DC motor mounting at the front...

Here's top board ready for black finish, fit the bespoke motor mounting metalwork when it comes.

Hmm, neat as a neat thing. You've obviously done this sort of thing before!

Why have you relocated the motor? You'll need to juggle the springs around a bit to compensate for the different direction of the belt tension force. Someone once brought in a TT2 that he'd fitted a second motor to, exactly opposite the original one. We tried it out and it was a real improvement, but too expensive to put into production. My feeling was that the inprovement wasn't just down to the extra power of the second motor, but also because it took the belt tension out of the suspension, and allowed the suspension to do it's job properly. How about adding a second pully (a la Funk) directly opposite the motor? Migt be a bit of a job sourcing a belt, but you could always use two, I suppose.

pure sound
01-03-2008, 14:33
my first foray into the Hifi business.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/spktermsvoyd003.jpg

besides allowing the suspension to just isolate, it also allowed you to apply alot of power & use a lightweight (non resonant) platter if you wanted to. You can't apply that power with just one motor on a suspended design unless the motor is on the subchassis. If it's on the subchassis it has to be quiet and as a result probably won't be very powerful.

Just had a look at your Pippin pics Shane. Very impressive. Is it all quiet enough? Where did the idler and the bits that carry it come from? Custom made?

I was amused to see the 'new' rim driven VPI turntable at a show recently. Nothing new under the sun. Remarkably, Roy Gregory was able to tell me where it improved upon the belt driven VPI's he's enjoyed to date. I was just surprised he wasn't aware of those shortcomings before!!!

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 14:35
Why have you relocated the motor?

Mounting @ 7 o’clock position so that it is in line with the cartridge cantilever, this is the correct position

pure sound
01-03-2008, 14:43
Indeed. Also, that option wasn't really open to users of the common ac synchronous motors as cartridges would perhaps have picked up the radiated field.

spendorman
01-03-2008, 14:45
Ah someone who worked for JPW, perhaps you would know about the 110mm unit in the JPW Mini Monitors, who made it?

I have several Mini and Gold Monitors, not too bad for budget speakers. I also have the AP1, shame that the bass unit foam surrounds have rotted. Seems good sound, excellent build quality.



[QUOTE=pure sound;3319]I worked for JPW from 1996 & it acquired Heybrook

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 14:52
Ah someone who worked for JPW, perhaps you would know about the 110mm unit in the JPW Mini Monitors, who made it?

I have several Mini and Gold Monitors, not too bad for budget speakers. I also have the AP1, shame that the bass unit foam surrounds have rotted. Seems good sound, excellent build quality.




http://www.puresound.info/id2.html

pure sound
01-03-2008, 14:55
The Mini Monitor bass drivers were made by Peerless India. Its a good little unit but I'd have to buy a couple of hundred to get more. Its easier for people to buy a set of MM's from ebay & cannibalise them for units if need be.

The AP1 (actually called P1) used the same bass/mid as the HB1 which was the Vifa M21 WG-09-08. I have new production ones of those.

shane
01-03-2008, 15:50
I'm surprised they hit a rocky patch in '84. It was around that time that the HB1 was winning the What HiFi award every year. They must have sold '000's of pairs for a while.

Rubbish accountant...

shane
01-03-2008, 15:58
Just had a look at your Pippin pics Shane. Very impressive. Is it all quiet enough? Where did the idler and the bits that carry it come from? Custom made?



The motor and idler came from a defunct Akai 4000DS reel to reel. The motor is beautifully made, quiet and powerful. Rather reminmiscent of the Garrard 401 motor. Not quite as big, but better made and very quiet. The idler itself is a bit of a botch job and makes itself heard, but the speed, depth and dynamics are so far ahead of anything else I've had that I can forgive it that. Next step is to try it with a DD motor from an old Tecnics deck. That's going to need a bit of machining of the sub-platter to fit the rotor underneath, so don't hold your breath. Oh, and the arm has just been swapped for a Mayware Formula IV.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 16:01
Oh, and the arm has just been swapped for a Mayware Formula IV.


:eyebrows:

shane
01-03-2008, 16:02
Mounting @ 7 o’clock position so that it is in line with the cartridge cantilever, this is the correct position


This is a new theory for me. Why is mounting the motor in line with the cantilever a good idea? I'm not saying it isn't, I just don't see the logic behind it.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 17:13
This is a new theory for me. Why is mounting the motor in line with the cantilever a good idea? I'm not saying it isn't, I just don't see the logic behind it.

Pink Triangle adopted this many moons ago:

Explination at the bottom of the link page:

http://www.thefunkfirm.co.uk/PL2.htm

shane
01-03-2008, 19:03
Pink Triangle adopted this many moons ago:

Explination at the bottom of the link page:

http://www.thefunkfirm.co.uk/PL2.htm

Interesting concept. So they're saying that the motor pulls the chassis/platter/arm/cartridge about the place along the direction of the belt, and by arranging the motor so that the cartridge is moving fore-and-aft rather than side to side the effect is minimised. It would be interesting to get hold of an interferometer to try and measure some of these effects.

I did notice this paragraph: "[Note: Even greater improvement is brought by Vector Link because it eliminates the source of the problem." The Vector Link does pretty much what I was suggesting that the second motor on the TT2 did,so I guess I'm heading in the same direction even if the theory is different. It also gives more ammunition to the supporters of non-suspended turntables and direct drives which, by definition, won't suffer from this problem.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 19:19
I did notice this paragraph: "[Note: Even greater improvement is brought by Vector Link because it eliminates the source of the problem." The Vector Link does pretty much what I was suggesting that the second motor on the TT2 did,so I guess I'm heading in the same direction even if the theory is different. It also gives more ammunition to the supporters of non-suspended turntables and direct drives which, by definition, won't suffer from this problem.

I've never liked the idea of more than one motor! The motor has been placed at 7 o'clock one one reason only, where would you plan putting the other/others? placing them anywhere else is creating more of a disaster i would have thought, totally reversing what you just improved moving the motor, going on AK's theory an additional motor/motors would be a terrible idea.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 19:21
When i've finished this modded 'TT2' i'm gonna build the same without the suspension, i think a suspensionless 'TT2' would be the better sounding...

shane
01-03-2008, 19:29
No, that's not what I'm recommending. The idea is to have a second free-running pulley diametrically opposite the motor. That way the belt tension isn't pulling the suspension over. The Funk Vector uses the same idea, but with two extra pulleys rather than one.
The idea was suggested to me by the guy who brought in the twin-motor TT2 which, as I said, produced a real improvement over the standard item, but I think it would be even better if the second motor was replaced by a free-running pulley.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 20:26
Actually shane i once had Logic 'Tempo' & Logic 'Gemini' decks, both technically the same thing, 'Gemini' being a two motor version of the 'Tempo' few differences such as different platters, but i changed the two over during listerning. The two motor version did have the slight edge over the single motor.

pure sound
01-03-2008, 20:39
All of these multi motor TT's were prompted in the UK by Les Wolstenholme. The Voyd & the Logic ones particularly. I'm not sure how Mike Knowles got wind of it but the Alphason Sonata came out soon afterwards. I later saw the idea applied in a much earlier article from the 1970's in the French magazine L'audiophile. (Platine Delaleu) Again it was done for the reasons of trying to preserve the lateral stability which could/would be upset by the variable braking effect of a stylus acting on a rotating platter causing the whole suspended structure to be pulled around by one decoupled motor.

Multiple motors (if good quality ones were used, not the impex ones) could be controlled accurately enough and need not introduce noise to a suspended system.

You could simulate an extremely heavy platter but actually use a light acrylic or polycarbonate one. When implemented properly it works very well.

Vinyl Grinder
01-03-2008, 20:45
No, that's not what I'm recommending. The idea is to have a second free-running pulley diametrically opposite the motor. That way the belt tension isn't pulling the suspension over. The Funk Vector uses the same idea, but with two extra pulleys rather than one.
The idea was suggested to me by the guy who brought in the twin-motor TT2 which, as I said, produced a real improvement over the standard item, but I think it would be even better if the second motor was replaced by a free-running pulley.

I don't think just the one pulley would have the same effect as the vector drive triangular layout, it's in simular layout to the Voyd pic guy shows but without the three motors...

We could really do with Arthur Khoubesserian posting a bit here just to clarify his theory & convince me i'm on the right lines, but i know he's a busy bloke.

pure sound
01-03-2008, 21:09
The other thing AK is doing is not making it an equilateral triangle. But the Funk decks aren't suspended either so the benefit there might not be as significant.

pure sound
03-03-2008, 22:36
Some fun this evening adding near enough 4lbs of Micro Seiki Cu180 Gunmetal mat!

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/TT2Cu180.jpg

Required some major suspension re-setting. does sound good though

Vinyl Grinder
03-03-2008, 23:03
Nice
One on e-bay £150.00 he wants for it...

Vinyl Grinder
05-03-2008, 12:35
Getting there chaps, slow but sure.

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Motor1.jpg

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Motor1-1.jpg

Vinyl Grinder
09-03-2008, 10:31
Top board finished, just want alloy polishing, las job tho..

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Topboard1.jpg

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/Topboard2.jpg

Motor now in proper position.

:)

Vinyl Grinder
10-03-2008, 00:33
Guy im a tad suspicious about that last 'TT2' Something tells me the same person made the top boards that were present on the Systemdek '2X2'

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i318/murrayjohnson/TT2012.jpg

...............................

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/2x2.jpg

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj292/ELPFAN/2X22.jpg

pure sound
12-03-2008, 08:30
LOL. That's very interesting & they do seem superficially similar. The Systemdek's suspension points are arranged such that the subchassis sits at an angle whereby the main beam of the subchassis lies along the line between bearing & armbase. The TT2 however has the subchassis running across parallel to the front edge of the deck with the 'T' part front and rear. I imagine Systemdek would've kept all of their plinth manufacture 'in house' right to the end whereas Heybrook afaik stuck with Greaves for their plinths (including the Mk2)

pure sound
18-03-2008, 10:57
I'd always fancied one of Alphason's titanium tubed arms like the HR100S or a Xenon. The HR100S tends to be quite expensive (too much for a punt anyway) and I can't say I've ever really heard one at its best as they mostly tend to have been wired with the horrible vdH cable throughout. A Xenon came up for sale (in kit form!) recently. The seller had bought it, attempted to rewire it (dismantling it in the process) and decided it would be too tricky to re-assemble properly. Taking the chance I snapped this up & had it sent to the arm meister J7. I also obtained some Audio Note UK silver internal wire and a length of Audio Note (Japan) ANVx for the external lead and had those items sent to AO aswell. I gather that quite a number of the 1mm balls were missing from the bearings in this arm but Johnny was able to find suitable replacements. He managed to get the arm reassembled fairly quickly and we discussed how to arrange the earthing. I wanted to avoid running the signal down the copper screen keeping it only in the silver conductors. I asked Johnny to only connect the screens & earth lead at the arms's base and leave them unconnected in each of the phono plugs. Soon afterwards the arm arrived complete with the extremely precise AO protractor & fine instructions. The Xenon feels like a delicate thing next to the more robust SMEV I normally use. But it is very beautiful.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh107/pure_sound/armsmall.jpg

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh107/pure_sound/armfrontsmall.jpg


I don't have the means to install it on the SP10 so it went onto my Heybrook TT2 which until now had been fitted with an RB250. I had a blank armboard for the TT2 so it was fairly straightforward to cut the Linn type mounting holes needed. I also downloaded the owners manual from Vinyl Engine which was handy for getting some idea of how the anti-skate system was calibrated. I fitted the recently resurrected (& splendid) Mayware MC-2V.

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/hh107/pure_sound/xenon.jpg


In short this arm is fabulous. A joy to use and a startling improvement over the RB250 it replaced. The very fine ANUK internal wire certainly seems to allow the bearings to work very freely. Perhaps it doesn't have the architectural solidity to the sound or the organisation that the SME seems to have but it seems more fluid & perhaps more organic in the way it presents the music. It'll certainly be interesting to try it on the SP10 at some point but at the moment I'm just enjoying it for what it is. It certainly shows that Mike Knowles knew what he was doing when he took the trouble to develop that first one piece Titanium arm tube. Many thanks to Johnny at Audio Origami for so skillfully bringing it back to life.

Marco
18-03-2008, 12:23
Superb pictures and a great write-up, Guy - as usual :)

Alphason tonearms were fantastic. I used an HR-100S for years in an Ariston RD11S and it sounded absolutely superb. I bet the TT2 really sings now!

If you're able to get the Xenon fitted to the SP10 (or an SL-1210 ;)) that would be very interesting indeed.

Happy listening!

Marco.

vchang078
03-07-2008, 19:11
I used to own Heybrook HB3 ( the MK-I version ) and sold it. I missed
it so much I got another pair Heybrook HB3 Series-II P-type in Toronto. The
two versions sound totally different despite having the same drives.
The HB3 Mk-I is very easy to drive, sweet & crispy. A 30 Watts tube amp makes it sing. Whereas, HB-3 Series-II needs at least 50W tube power to
have a decent sound and the rendered music is more resembling a MacIntosh
speaker - solid in mid-range. It's good to hear someone from Heybrook who
can comment on the cross-over changes in the two HB-3 versions of the
1980s. What tube amps can be used to drive the HB-3 series-II as
good as the HB-3 Mk-I ?

Marco
03-07-2008, 19:19
Hi vchang,

Welcome to the forum :)

What system are you running yourself and may I ask how you found us?

Cheers.

Regards,
Marco.

shane
04-07-2008, 10:01
You might want to put your question on the WD forum run by Peter Comeau, who designed the HB3s.

http://www.wduk.worldomain.net/forum/index.php

vchang078
28-08-2008, 17:33
I run a heybrook HB3 series-2 with Audible illusion L-1 preamp, VTL ST70/70
power amp. Found this forum by searching Heybrook TT-2.

DSJR
28-08-2008, 19:46
We sold a few TT2's and I found the mk1 to be a bit "boomy" in the bass, the Ittok and similar lively arms suiting it best. The TT2 mk2 I really liked very much but didn't have as much to do with it as Rega had taken over for us and LP players were slowing up in sales at the time, sadly.