View Full Version : Funk Firm's new Strata platter and "spin" bearing
Hi, has anyone seen or tried the new techie upgrades from Funk?
No prices on the website.......
http://www.thefunkfirm.co.uk/turntable_upgrades/SL1200_upgrade.html
:)
RobbieGong
06-04-2015, 23:08
Sorry, I'm being thick - I dont get how it works or how you use it. Is it for the stock platter or any platter on a techie ?
It's excruciating. There seems to be some genuinely interesting ideas and engineering but phrases like: "A glass inner ring is constrained by an outer ring quickly to control the motion." are such a turn-off. A method of writing that assumes your audience is intelligent but knows little, and a generous amount of pictures is a fail-safe formula for communication.
I've just emailed Funk Firm for some clarification.....
:P
Audio Al
07-04-2015, 05:09
SL1200 Platter mk II
£840.00
I think the image on the page is the 'machined central hub'. This piece has the magnet attached and is placed on the bearing. The rest of the platter then locates on top of this via the recessed outer lip.
Very similar to the LP12 set up.
Ammonite Audio
07-04-2015, 07:53
Looks like a very sensible design.
keiron99
07-04-2015, 08:00
It's excruciating. There seems to be some genuinely interesting ideas and engineering but phrases like: "A glass inner ring is constrained by an outer ring quickly to control the motion." are such a turn-off. A method of writing that assumes your audience is intelligent but knows little, and a generous amount of pictures is a fail-safe formula for communication.
It's the sort of pseudo-scientific language that is used to sell shampoo.
Ammonite Audio
07-04-2015, 08:09
It's the sort of pseudo-scientific language that is used to sell shampoo.
It could have been better written, for sure. But, to me it does simply describe a glass platter with a peripheral glass ring to add mass and inertia where it has most effect, like the Rega RP10.
For me it was interesting to see that there is no mention of the FX-1200 any more. :(
That means that I have quite a rare tonearm now.
The picture on the website looks like the bearing, so I will be interested to see the response.
Ammonite Audio
07-04-2015, 09:16
For me it was interesting to see that there is no mention of the FX-1200 any more. :(
That means that I have quite a rare tonearm now.
The picture on the website looks like the bearing, so I will be interested to see the response.
The picture seems to show the alloy sub-platter, to which the magnetic ring thing is attached. I presume that the bearing is fixed to the chassis in the same way as the original. It will be interesting to see if Funk have come up with something innovative/different, compared with all the other Technics bearing options out there.
Oldpinkman
07-04-2015, 10:14
I think the Dalek is your man for information. I believe he has bearing, platter and FX3.
Cagey - Yours is unique mate - the only FX1200 the way it was meant to be - rigid aluminium instead of beachcaster carbon-fibre. Although Arthur changes his mind more often than I change my underwear, I can't see an FX1200 returning. The only valid reason for it, as opposed to plonking any of the funk arms on, was the "on the fly vta" - which I still think is for people more interested in fiddling with their equipment than listening to music. It is of course also covered by the AK47 design (if it retains that name - although he was distracted by wanting to put out a teaser for "F1" at Munich - his ultimate tonearm)
I'll leave Neil to talk about the bearing, but the main differences are covered on the Funk Web site. I believe it doesn't suffer the (very tiny) flutter problems reported in the magazine reviews of the Mike New Bearing. I think the 2 items are best as a pair - and I know AK was thinking (about 4 changes of underwear ago) of selling them as one item instead of 2, until I pointed out that people like to build their modified SL-1200/1210s one "inexpensive" component upgrade at a time.
And Hugo - you are sort of right (well completely right that AK can forget a new career as a copywriter). Strata benefits from the main bit of glass being bonded glass, and both the fact of the bonding, and the bonding agent used lead to a different material (like aerolam is not aluminium) which has properties of rigidity and non-resonance.
prestonchipfryer
07-04-2015, 11:53
Funk seem to alter their products like a whim of the weather. Very confusing.
Spectral Morn
07-04-2015, 12:52
I think the Dalek is your man for information. I believe he has bearing, platter and FX3.
Cagey - Yours is unique mate - the only FX1200 the way it was meant to be - rigid aluminium instead of beachcaster carbon-fibre. Although Arthur changes his mind more often than I change my underwear, I can't see an FX1200 returning. The only valid reason for it, as opposed to plonking any of the funk arms on, was the "on the fly vta" - which I still think is for people more interested in fiddling with their equipment than listening to music. It is of course also covered by the AK47 design (if it retains that name - although he was distracted by wanting to put out a teaser for "F1" at Munich - his ultimate tonearm)
I'll leave Neil to talk about the bearing, but the main differences are covered on the Funk Web site. I believe it doesn't suffer the (very tiny) flutter problems reported in the magazine reviews of the Mike New Bearing. I think the 2 items are best as a pair - and I know AK was thinking (about 4 changes of underwear ago) of selling them as one item instead of 2, until I pointed out that people like to build their modified SL-1200/1210s one "inexpensive" component upgrade at a time.
And Hugo - you are sort of right (well completely right that AK can forget a new career as a copywriter). Strata benefits from the main bit of glass being bonded glass, and both the fact of the bonding, and the bonding agent used lead to a different material (like aerolam is not aluminium) which has properties of rigidity and non-resonance.
Sigh.
At this stage I can't comment or offer any opinions or thoughts, it would neither be ethical or professional to do so before the review process is completed and published. I won't be drawn on this, so folks are going to have to wait.
Regards Neil
Oldpinkman
07-04-2015, 15:55
Neil - nobody asked you for an opinion or thought. Nobody asked you for a review or mentioned you planned doing one. I just pointed out you had the objects people were asking about in your posession and therefore were well placed to answer factual questions like "what special design features does it have", "how does it fit on the turntable" and wished to afford you that opportunity since you took such umbrage when I released a tiny bit of information about the products about a year ago when you were also doing an as yet unpublished review of Funk Technics mods. So I'll tell them it uses a saphire thrust plate and ceramiic ball, with a ptfe collar, and is in effect the funk bearing used in the other funk turntables, machined to fit the external dimensions of the original technics bearing, and a photo should appear on the web site any day now. This is in effect the same bearing that measured off the scale for the German magazine review of the SGD - where they described the measurements as "perfect". That one!
sq225917
07-04-2015, 16:23
I'm interested to see how long it is before that ceramic ball eats through the sapphire and grinds the bearing shell into dust with a fine abrasive sapphire paste. The bushes sound good though.
The bushes sound good though.
Neatly trimmed into a nice 'V' shape, one would hope.....
Marco.
Oldpinkman
07-04-2015, 16:45
I'm interested to see how long it is before that ceramic ball eats through the sapphire and grinds the bearing shell into dust with a fine abrasive sapphire paste. The bushes sound good though.
Sapphire is the 2nd hardest known substance, after diamond. Quite some time I think.. It's only the technics version of a well established funk design.
Not if its a silicon carbide ceramic bearing :eyebrows:
Oldpinkman
08-04-2015, 07:55
Funk seem to alter their products like a whim of the weather. Very confusing.
I find myself confused by this. Whilst I am usually first in line to moan about Funks reactive approach to product development, I can't quite see how it relates here. If the reference is to FX1200, that is an arm which has been "in production" for several years, and sold a grand total of ZERO production items. 3 dealer demonstrators of an early (FX prototype) version using carbon fibre tubes which were found incapable of achieving the performance needed to match competitor arms (SME 5, Graham) were "out there" and one of them, Cageys, was converted to a "production" aluminium tubed version. The decision to withdraw such a product from "production" is perhaps not so confusing - but comes under the heading of "Manning up and facing reality"
As an aside, to my personal amusement, Funk are currently "distracted" from the product launches Arthur would like to be working on because of the success of FX3. The irony here is that it is not really that different from FX-R. It just loses the stigma of being a "rega mod" - which had nothing to do with the arms performance, and everything to do with all those irrational buyer decisions. Still it was an obvious issue, and I'm glad Arthur was persuaded to address it - however bonkers and irrational the markets "need".
The Strata platter is essentially the one that was launched last year and featured in the AOS platter wars. AK has removed the lettering which was unpopular (although what's the betting will now be requested again) and tidied up the edge finish. But in essence, its the same product (spot the defensive comment about effective mass in his blurb - due to bad science in the platter wars). And the bearing is the one I have been promising Cagey I would smuggle out to him since "announced" last year - but has been languishing in a drawer.
What's changed, is that after more than a year of nagging to do something about the inconsistencies, typo's, and other issues on his web site, and having promised (still promising) an all singing all dancing professional site, he has finally got round to dealing with the copy aspects of the site, and doing a bit of hoovering and dusting.
Funk is an innovative business, providing truly original ideas, and an outlet for Arthurs relentless creativity - which is its raison d'etre for AK. But it also needs to turn enough cash to pay the rent - and that means focussing on the day job, and not tiny niche markets like technics mods. However, the technics products are designed, and available, so I guess it does no harm to list them on the web site - which is what the boy has done.
ChrisKemp
10-04-2015, 07:55
Where are the pictures of this bearing and platter??
Oldpinkman
10-04-2015, 08:24
I don't have any platter pictures atm, but it is similar to the ones in the archive - without the white lettering. I'll try to put a bearing picture up, but I am fighting with photobucket and really short of time today.
However - regarding pricing, in spite of what it says on the web site (still a work in progress) the price of the platter has been reduced. I have been suggesting to Arthur for some time that he split out the Technics mods business from his mainstream business which sells through dealers and distributors - since there is no real benefit in using a dealer for modification products, at least, not in the UK, and arguably not in the EU. I got an email this morning confirming that he will try that approach
So the platter is £480 not £820 and the bearing is £420. Anyone interested in an FX3 - they are £1589 (full retail - because the product is sold through distibutors and dealers). Carbon fibre arm board for FX3 on the Technics is £76 (or use whatever rega mount tickles your fancy. All prices inc VAT but carriage will be an additional charge, and product will be direct from Funk.
I will try to post a picture of spin (the bearing)
I should be getting a platter and bearing out to Cagey to have a play with, just in case I ever get to buy a house out there, and can invite myself round again for another "cote de boeuf" barbecue :) So he can let you know what he thinks on his Techie. Although it is a shop-soiled ex-dem (well prototype platter really) it should be full production spec, and working this time!!!
ChrisKemp
10-04-2015, 09:40
Thank you:) Great price on the platter too. Looking forward to some pics and comparing the bearing/ platter to the MNB and ETP. I have a MNB but not a platter yet. Maybe I'll go for the new Funk instead og the ETP:)
Oldpinkman
10-04-2015, 11:41
The Funk "spin" bearing
http://i1315.photobucket.com/albums/t582/oldpinkman/DSC_3115-1_zpscywzfhps.jpg (http://s1315.photobucket.com/user/oldpinkman/media/DSC_3115-1_zpscywzfhps.jpg.html)
And for good measure, the funk strata platter I am taking out to Cagey
http://i1315.photobucket.com/albums/t582/oldpinkman/DSC_3113-1_zpsbpbmspf6.jpg (http://s1315.photobucket.com/user/oldpinkman/media/DSC_3113-1_zpsbpbmspf6.jpg.html)
Now - don't say I never do anything for you Chris!! ;)
ChrisKemp
10-04-2015, 11:50
Wow they both look great!! Is that the way the platter looks or does it have the Funkplatter on top?
And thank you for the pics:):)
Oldpinkman
10-04-2015, 11:59
The platter is supplied with an Achromat bonded to it, included in the price. It is an integral unit - you can't get the strata and hub without the bonded achromat. The design relies on the composite nature of the bonded glass and bonded mat. The photo is of the "rig" I was spin testing to get a spin down time of 72 seconds from 33rpm (estimated)
I'm not sure -does that answer your question?
ChrisKemp
10-04-2015, 12:12
Yes it does and it looks really good. It seems to look a little more eksklusive than the ETP (glass vs plastic). But can one use this platter with MNB?
Oldpinkman
10-04-2015, 13:41
Yes it does and it looks really good. It seems to look a little more eksklusive than the ETP (glass vs plastic). But can one use this platter with MNB?
Ah - good question. When I have a crash helmet to hand, I'll check. Kevin will also doubtless be able to answer the question shortly. For now - I believe so. The issue was (if you enjoy a good laugh, read back in the archives - the platter wars), the issue was that the MN bearing is not externally identical to a Technics, and although it fits the standard Technics platter, it didn't fit the funk platter (which did also fit the technics bearing). I think AK has resolved this, and the new hub is MN friendly - although he did puff and blow a bit about why other manufacturers started making their product custom fit. Anyway - no point in going over all that again. I think it fits. I am going to smuggle it out to Cagey on Saturday, so he'll soon be able to tell you for sure.
Oldpinkman
10-04-2015, 15:30
See you tomorrow. :wave:
Hub and spin packed in camera bag. That bloody platters a lump though in its box. I may leave the packing behind and put it deep in among my clothes for padding. See you at Blagnac :cool:
ChrisKemp
10-04-2015, 16:13
Ah - good question. When I have a crash helmet to hand, I'll check. Kevin will also doubtless be able to answer the question shortly. For now - I believe so. The issue was (if you enjoy a good laugh, read back in the archives - the platter wars), the issue was that the MN bearing is not externally identical to a Technics, and although it fits the standard Technics platter, it didn't fit the funk platter (which did also fit the technics bearing). I think AK has resolved this, and the new hub is MN friendly - although he did puff and blow a bit about why other manufacturers started making their product custom fit. Anyway - no point in going over all that again. I think it fits. I am going to smuggle it out to Cagey on Saturday, so he'll soon be able to tell you for sure.
Looking forward to the review:)
Hub and spin packed in camera bag. That bloody platters a lump though in its box. I may leave the packing behind and put it deep in among my clothes for padding. See you at Blagnac :cool:
:yay:
I have Mk1 packing, should I need it. ;)
Customs informed and waiting :eyebrows:
What's Blagnac like, then? Are there some nice bars and eateries there? :cool:
Marco.
PaulStewart
10-04-2015, 18:04
Sapphire is the 2nd hardest known substance, after diamond.
Err, no it's not it's the third hardest naturally occurring substance and diamond is over 80 times harder. There are now some ultra hard materials, especially those based on boron/nitrogen lattice that are harder that diamond. Anyway, marerials based on rigid crystalline structure can shatter or chip at a microscopic level if stressed by a slightly "softer" material.
What's Blagnac like, then? Are there some nice bars and eateries there? :cool:
Marco.
Yes, if you know where to go. ;)
Yes, if you know where to go. ;)
As is always the case, mate. My experience of France is that there are some truly magical places 'tucked away' in every town, if you know where to look! :)
Marco.
sq225917
10-04-2015, 19:23
Re sapphire and silicon carbide balls it's a bad idea Just use a High grade steel ball of suitable sphericity. No need for fancy ceramics.
Oldpinkman
11-04-2015, 06:12
Terminal 5 has no priority pass lounge. Sod flying ba! We will be picking up an avis car cagey. Your toys are due in 10.30 local time.
And don't worry about your balls. This may be the first implementation of this design in a technics bearing, but the same ball and same thrust plate are used in the award winning funk bearings. The sapphire thrust plate with a tungsten carbide ball was first used in my pink triangle bearing. First use of ceramic was LPT, I think. But I will be sure to pass on the design tips to Arthur ;)
It was good to meet Richard and Sue again, even if it was brief.
I thought I would start off by listening to the Mk2 platter on the Mike New Bearing (MNB) as a "control", and I have to say I like what I am hearing. Good separation of instruments, good detail, and the bass seems to go deeper. :thumbsup:
Being critical of the MNB and Funk Mk2 platter combo, the hub and platter I have sit slightly high on the Mike New bearing, resulting in a small gap between the platter and turntable, meaning I can see the hub flange. This may be to a different taper on the MNB to the standard Technics design, but as the platter is currently sat on it, it's difficult to be sure. I'll look later. Anyway, it's not a problem as I have VTA on the fly.
I have transferred the magnet over from the Mk1 Funk platter, so quick swaps are now not possible. I think I may get a 2nd magnet if I can find one relatively cheaply so I can compare the platters later.
Onto first impressions of the bearing...
It looks well machined and nicely finished, but I don't think it's as big as the MNB. I'll confirm later with a picture.
It's similar to the original Technics bearing, in form, but that's where the similarity ends. It's been beefed up considerably. At first glance it has a larger diameter shaft and a thicker bearing attachment flange. IMHO it's what the original Technics bearing should have looked like. Pictures to follow when I have the MNB out of my deck.
It feels very smooth, and has very little drag (much less than my original Technics bearing with little signs of wear) and as expected, zero slop/play.
Oldpinkman
11-04-2015, 15:51
Good to see you again too Kevin. Glad you are enjoying the toys. Not surprised by your findings on the platter. I think it is particularly evident, especially the bass, with an f.x arm, which both reveals the detail in the bass, and keeps it dry. This currant bun down here is lovely. We are so pissed we missed that house.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8703/17110951795_182f04b0ea_z_d.jpg
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7712/17084968396_7c8f844a2c_z_d.jpg
Too many jobs to do to have a proper play more than I have so far today.
Just fitted "Spin" to my deck and I am currently playing the first side of an LP resting on the Strata platter.
Similar caution must be applied to the installation of Spin as with the Mike New bearing regarding the trimming of the solder tails.
Initial impressions are good, but I have to get back to the bathroom DIY... :(
British high fidelity
12-04-2015, 12:43
Apologies if this is quoted in the wrong section, quick question has any purchased or reviewed NVA's monoblocks
That's rather random and off-topic, Deano..... :scratch:
Marco.
Apologies if this is quoted in the wrong section, quick question has any purchased or reviewed NVA's monoblocks
Yes I have a pair of a40 monoblocks and I like them very much. They are excellent value and great sound for a handbuilt British product.
I do however think to avoid the thread drifting you should perhaps start a new thread or PM me any specific questions you have and I'll be happy to respond.
British high fidelity
12-04-2015, 14:49
Yeah sorry working from Android phone and having issues finding where to start new thread my apologies all
Intrigued by the Strata.
I have submitted a "contact" form to Funk in the hope I might get to evaluate a Strata against my current Funk Platter II with bonded Achromat for an A/B demo. The Spin is out for me as my MN bearing is bonded to the SL1210 chassis.
orbscure
12-04-2015, 16:30
Yeah sorry working from Android phone and having issues finding where to start new thread my apologies all
Perhaps as suggestion to the mod-team if I may... might be worth moving posts #44, #46 & #47 above into this thread (http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?37977-Advantages-of-Monoblock-amplifiers)? ;)
Intrigued by the Strata.
I have submitted a "contact" form to Funk in the hope I might get to evaluate a Strata against my current Funk Platter II with bonded Achromat for an A/B demo. The Spin is out for me as my MN bearing is bonded to the SL1210 chassis.
I'm Impressed with the Strata. The difference between my Mk1 and the Strata is more than I had expected to discover.
I feel really tired this morning.
Last night was a really late listening session. A sign of a good upgrade.
It's hard to say which component is doing what, but as a package they are sublime. I just couldn't stop listening to music last night. I was discovering new subtle detail I had not heard from my vinyl before.
I'll need to do some back to back testing to see which bearing I prefer, but as a combination it's the Strata and Spin over the MNB and mk1 platter.
ChrisKemp
13-04-2015, 06:35
Funk Spin + Strata
vs
Mike New Bearing + ETP platter
:popcorn:
I feel really tired this morning.
Last night was a really late listening session. A sign of a good upgrade.
That happens to me every now and then - hearing new detail is like finding buried treasure!
CageyH, what did the spin and strata II platter cost may I ask ?
I have the items on the "try it at home" scheme. I was interested to see what they did with my FX1200.
According to an earlier post from OldPinkMan, the platter is £480 and the bearing £420.
I believe that the website will be updated soon to reflect this.
Funk Spin + Strata
vs
Mike New Bearing + ETP platter
So we have:-
Funk Spin (£420) + Strata (£480) = £900 + Shipping
MN Bearing (£355) + MN Platter (£595) = £950 Shipped
And unfortunately, import duty if you get caught by customs now that there is no longer a UK distributor for Mike's products.
Any chance of posting some pics of the strata ?
Intriguing mods..... Does the spin and strata abolish the slight shouty sound of the standard techie ?
Have the mods been measure for their effect on wow & flutter , transmited noise through the bearing ?
There are a few pictures posted earlier on this thread.
With my FX1200 arm, fitted with an AT150MLX the Spin and Strata is not at all "shouty."
It wasn't shouty with the Mike New bearing and Mk1 Funk platter either, using the same arm.
I have no idea if measurements have been taken. All I can tell you is that it sounds pretty good to my ears.
Kevin,
Wow - they look nice !
Is the platter similar weight to stock techie platter ?
I see the bearing is beefed up from stock but can it still take original platter ? Thinking whether a staged upgrade path is a feasible option......
Thanks
Anthony
I have no idea about the weight of the platters. I will weigh them tonight (without the magnet assembly).
I believe that the Spin bearing will take a standard platter, but I have not tried it - yet. I see no reason it won't as AK tried to keep the interface the same.
I'll let you know after I have weighed, and then fitted the stock platter.
Oldpinkman
14-04-2015, 17:49
Kevin. You are getting back into platter wars territory with platter weight. (I think it weighs 2.2kg. However - there are 2 issues. Absolute weight matters because of bearing wear (and to some degree mounting). If the platter is to heavy the bearing will say "get off you're squashing me".
Dynamic inertia matters to the servo. That is affected by mass distribution. Mass at the periphery of the platter has more effect than mass at the hub (think of a playground roundabout and the different effect of a fat bloke sitting over the centre, and hanging off the edge). Mass distribution is fairly even on the strata. Concentrated at the edge on the original and others.
Oh, I don't intend to go there.
It was only in comparison to the standard platter as someone had asked. All I care about is the sound.
The standard platter (without mat and magnet) weighs 1.25Kg according to my calibrated(?) kitchen scales, but you would expect it to be relatively light as it's not very thick and rings like a bell when tapped.
The Strata seems very dead in comparison to a tap test. It's an unfair comparison to talk about the sound quality on vinyl playback though. ;)
WOStantonCS100
14-04-2015, 20:44
Possibility of a pic or two with all in situ? Interested to see how much higher the platter sits.
It does not sit very high. The arm base of my FX1200 is currently set at 2.5 for the VTA adjustment.
I'll post a picture up tomorrow.
WOStantonCS100
14-04-2015, 20:54
It does not sit very high. The arm base of my FX1200 is currently set at 2.5 for the VTA adjustment.
I'll post a picture up tomorrow.
Thanks. Looking forward to it.
Kevin,
I can't wait to see the images of your turntable with the new bearing & platter.....and see how the Strata looks on the techie.....
:)
As requested a few pictures of Strata mounted on Spin
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7657/17157246921_2cbb7173f7_z_d.jpg
A close up showing the clearance. IIRC it sits slightly higher on the MNB.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7654/17157246581_956486274c_z_d.jpg
A more normal view.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8782/17157246531_1b234e8e7b_z_d.jpg
WOStantonCS100
15-04-2015, 20:10
As requested a few pictures of Strata mounted on Spin
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7657/17157246921_2cbb7173f7_z_d.jpg
A close up showing the clearance. IIRC it sits slightly higher on the MNB.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7654/17157246581_956486274c_z_d.jpg
A more normal view.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8782/17157246531_1b234e8e7b_z_d.jpg
Thanks for the pics. I've a couple of questions if you don't mind. Is there clearance with a stock platter, as well? Is the orange Funk logo optional; can that be changed?
Do you mean is there a gap with a standard Technics platter on a Spin bearing?
I am not sure. I can check, but I have just got in, so it won't be until tomorrow. I think that the standard platter will be fine, as the strata is much more of a flatter, more solid design. You hardly notice the gap under normal conditions, and for me it does not pose a problem.
As for the logo, it was what was on the platter that AK sent out at short notice for me to try.
What I can confirm that it sounds really good as a combination.
I intend to fit my Mk1 funk platter at the weekend to try and identify the difference between the platters - which I don't think will be difficult, prior to moving back to the MNB to see which I prefer.
WOStantonCS100
16-04-2015, 00:47
Do you mean is there a gap with a standard Technics platter on a Spin bearing?
Yes, that's what I mean.
I am not sure. I can check, but I have just got in, so it won't be until tomorrow. I think that the standard platter will be fine, as the strata is much more of a flatter, more solid design. You hardly notice the gap under normal conditions, and for me it does not pose a problem.
As for the logo, it was what was on the platter that AK sent out at short notice for me to try.
What I can confirm that it sounds really good as a combination.
No problem. I can wait. Thanks for doing it! I'm ashamed to admit I'm a bit superficial. Orange is my least favorite color. I'm sure the gap would be less noticeable on a black 1200. Unfortunately, I've no black 1200s; all of 'em silver. Quite intrigued by the flat platter. Kinda reminds of an EMT 948??
I intend to fit my Mk1 funk platter at the weekend to try and identify the difference between the platters - which I don't think will be difficult, prior to moving back to the MNB to see which I prefer.
You've some work ahead of you. :) Interested in "hearing" your findings.
Kevin,
Your techie looks great.......
look forward to your impressions of the differences the various platters/ bearings make.....
Anthony
Yes, that's what I mean.
No problem. I can wait. Thanks for doing it! I'm ashamed to admit I'm a bit superficial. Orange is my least favorite color. I'm sure the gap would be less noticeable on a black 1200. Unfortunately, I've no black 1200s; all of 'em silver. Quite intrigued by the flat platter. Kinda reminds of an EMT 948??
You've some work ahead of you. :) Interested in "hearing" your findings.
There is no gap visible with a standard platter. It's barely noticeable with the Strata from most viewing angles. I could happily live with it cosmetically.
Yes I have some work to find out which one I prefer. I think that it will be interesting but I want to know which bit is really responsible for the perceived increased level of detail.
Kevin,
Your techie looks great.......
look forward to your impressions of the differences the various platters/ bearings make.....
Anthony
Thanks for the kind words.
As promised - standard platter on the Spin.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8728/16548524223_2d3f79e775_z_d.jpg
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7663/17167044082_c9085ccc08_z_d.jpg
WOStantonCS100
16-04-2015, 19:45
There is no gap visible with a standard platter. It's barely noticeable with the Strata from most viewing angles. I could happily live with it cosmetically.
Yes I have some work to find out which one I prefer. I think that it will be interesting but I want to know which bit is really responsible for the perceived increased level of detail.
Thanks for the kind words.
As promised - standard platter on the Spin.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8728/16548524223_2d3f79e775_z_d.jpg
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7663/17167044082_c9085ccc08_z_d.jpg
Ok, good. So, the "spin" bearing is a drop in replacement. Thanks for the pics. Will wait for further report. He's not doing that arm mod anymore though, is he?
Yes, figuratively speaking - it's a drop in replacement. Just check the clearance between the solder tails and bearing.
Unfortunately, I do not believe that the arm mod is available anymore.
I have been listening to the differences between vinyl playback using the Mk1 Funk platter and the Spin and MNB. (It's slightly quicker to change being a single piece).
My initial impressions are that the Spin allows more detail retrieval. There is not a massive difference between them (to my ears) but the Spin nudges it for me.
Not what I was hoping for being a Mike New owner. :doh:
Extended testing will continue at the weekend to confirm.
allthingsanalogue
17-04-2015, 13:49
Kevin. You are getting back into platter wars territory with platter weight. (I think it weighs 2.2kg. However - there are 2 issues. Absolute weight matters because of bearing wear (and to some degree mounting). If the platter is to heavy the bearing will say "get off you're squashing me".
Dynamic inertia matters to the servo. That is affected by mass distribution. Mass at the periphery of the platter has more effect than mass at the hub (think of a playground roundabout and the different effect of a fat bloke sitting over the centre, and hanging off the edge). Mass distribution is fairly even on the strata. Concentrated at the edge on the original and others.
Never to worried with the weight issue, Nottingham analogue space deck platter weighs over 6kg and I bet the MNB is better than the spacedeck bearing.
WOStantonCS100
18-04-2015, 09:11
The question of weight.
I believe I mentioned this long ago; but, why not again? Except for the bearing flange, the stock bearings for the 1200MK2 and the 1400MK2 are the same. However, the 13/14/1500MK2 platters are heavier than the 1200MK2 2kg platter. According to the factory specs the 1400MK2 platter weighs in at 2.5kg and is balanced. That's an extra pound for the Americans in the room. My record weight is 454 grams (or 1 pound or .5kg). I can feel the added weight when I hold these platters in hand for comparison. I'm pretty positive the SL-5350 does not have a substantially heftier bearing, yet it is an auto-changer and would be expected to handle the weight of the platter PLUS 6 LPs (which due to the nature of the medium, would provide quite an unbalanced load). Apparently, Technics wasn't too worried about the weight. I would, again, venture to say that even a stock Techy bearing was designed to handle more weight than we generally think. The 5350 is also a quartz dd, like the 1200; so, again, not only was the bearing expected to handle the load of the platter plus 6 LPs but it was also expected to stay on speed. So, on a 1200 with a lighter platter than it's siblings, to my mind, a slightly heavier platter and a record clamp are not going to phase the stock bearing or the motor drive/controller unit at all and in practice I have not found this to be so. Unless we're talking about extreme mass loading with no balancing, I have yet to find a credible reason to worry about taxing better made aftermarket bearings or the motor drive/control unit. All that to say, if an aftermarket platter weighs in at even 4kg, I would be shocked if the techy cared.
1200MK2 platter @ 2kg + 454gm record weight = the platter weight of the 13/14/1500MK2/M Series 2.5kg platter on the same essential bearing
aftermarket platter weighing in @ 2.2kg < the platter weight of the 13/14/1500MK2/M Series 2.5kg platter on the same essential bearing
now add 6 LPs @ an average of 120gm/ea for an extra .72kg to the weight of the 1200MK2 platter for a total of 2.72kg
then consider 6 LPs @ an average of 120gm/ea for an extra .72kg to the weight of the 1400MK2 platter for a total of 3.22kg
now factor in a better bearing
We could do more weight comparisons; but, I think folks will find (as I've already tested), it takes a decidedly large stack of records to phase the motor of a techy (6 LPs and a cake box of 100 CDs didn't phase it @ either speed). It will take an obnoxiously sizeable increase and unevenly distributed weight at the outer edge of the platter for the controller of a techy to throw a fit. How much weight is too much? How out of balance does it have to be? I don't know exactly; however, if your techy is thrown by a kg here of there, I'd imagine you've got much bigger issues on your hands (or in your deck). Even if an aftermarket platter weighed in at 4kg, I would be shocked if the techy cared.
Oldpinkman
18-04-2015, 14:03
Never to worried with the weight issue, Nottingham analogue space deck platter weighs over 6kg and I bet the MNB is better than the spacedeck bearing.
There's history. When the Funk strata platter was launched, there was a suggestion that there was a faint "weeble" of pitch instability due to the platter being too heavy for the meaty Technics motor. This was nonsense (technically) but folk (now departed from this forum) will hear what they hear. This, in spite of the fact that the previous MN platter weighed near 10Kg, and prior to the arrival of the MN ETP was considered testimony to the grunt and power of the technics DD motor.
So issue 1 was "is the platter too heavy for the Technics motor" - and to the extent this is an issue, then it is not weight on the scales that matters, but rotational inertia. This is why you can plonk a bloody great heavy record weight on without issues, but a heavy rimmed platter might cause (probably will cause) problems. So, inertia is not an issue with strata, since within a spit it is as the standard platter.
The next issue is whether the bearing is ground to dust by the bloody great weight (weight on the scales - not rotational inertia) that you dump on it. In this case, a heavy record weight might be a problem. It is possible part of the reason behind the MN bearing design spec, was to take the weight of his original platter. My Pink Triangle bearing - which is exceptional quality, couldn't take that mass, as it is an inverted small point, tungsten carbide ball on a sapphire thrust plate. Part of the reason the Pink Triangle worked (that bearing is key to its success) was the relatively light mass of the acrylic platter.
The funk bearing is certainly man enough for the strata platter - it was designed for it. Now I am back in blighty with a proper internet connection, I will check with AK how much total mass it is capable of withstanding - but I wouldn't bank on 10Kg being acceptable.
I'll post as soon as I know :cool:
Mike_New
18-04-2015, 23:23
"It is possible part of the reason behind the MN bearing design spec, was to take the weight of his original platter"
When I set out to design and manufacture the Bearing I did not specifically have in mind a heavy platter.
Rather, my self imposed ideal was to design a bearing with the maximum overall specifications possible within the restricted volumetric
envelope of the SL motor design. My very large floating ceramic ball is housed within the 13.5mm diameter precision ground and polished shaft.
As it happens this design does allow for the rotation of a heavy platter.
My efforts have proven worth while as it has now become the bearing by which all others are judged.
It is interesting that all other bearing 'suppliers' have never attempted to do what I have done. For the simple reason that they would not be able to earn the required profit margin on the tooling and production cost.
allthingsanalogue
20-04-2015, 19:45
My efforts have proven worth
It is interesting that all other bearing 'suppliers' have never attempted to do what I have done. For the simple reason that they would not be able to earn the required profit margin on the tooling and production cost.
:exactly:
It would appear to me that someone else has done exactly that. Spin is also completely re-engineered bearing, not just a reworked Techie bearing. The Mike New precision bearing has been the standard all others have been judged by, so you have done a cracking job. Having the opportunity to have both in front of me, and "audition" both, I can tell you it's very difficult for me to pick what I consider to be the better bearing.
IMHO, the spin has less drag, and it seems to me that it lets more detail through to the end user. YMMV but it's what my ears are currently telling me. The Mike New bearing appears to have more bass to me, and a less prominent midrange, and looses out on the finer detail. Hopefully I will be able to run a blind test soon on someone else to see what they think. They both are excellent products that make a massive difference to the SL1200. Whether I can justify selling my Mike New bearing and purchasing the Spin is another issue that means talking to my accountant.
I was also interested to see what it said in HiFi World, particularly this bit, which kind of puts me off fitting the base plate.
Also, a discrete 7hz flutter peak seems unlikely to come from a bearing there is no mechanism that could generate such an effect. This suggests that stronger mechanical coupling between bearing/motor/chassis may be strongly transmitting a discrete vibration. Is this the flutter talked about with Direct Drive, making its presence known due to more rigid structure ?
Lol... Regardless of what you think of the two bearings you have, don't pay any attention to that pish in HFW [beware the Cawley/Keywood clique]! If what they're saying exists, then it certainly isn't audible - far from it.
Did you read what I wrote about the base-plate, Kevin, when I had it fitted?
If not, search the archive here and have a look... Essentially, the BBP allows the MN bearing to perform at its maximum potential, which without it, you're only getting about 80% of what it can do.
Marco.
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 05:36
Marco. A measurement is a measurement. You are entitled not to hear anything as a result, or to prefer the sound of a poor measurement. This is that grey area where "hifi" is used to mean audiophile. Hi-fi means high truth. You can re-write "high truth" as "low distortion". "I like it better " is audiophile - and I am not criticising it. This is not an issue of philosophy or subjectivism. Just precise use of English language.
High fidelity=high truth = low distortion. Flutter is a distortion component, and it was reliably measured. It was very low level, and your lugholes clearly don't pick it up, but it's there.
(I am not necessarily persuaded by their hypothesis that it is latent to the design of the motor and "undone" by decoupling of poorer quality mountings. I think they may have left the glue bottle open, or picked the wrong mushrooms for breakfast) :D
Mike_New
21-04-2015, 06:08
What goes around comes around; or something like that!!
I think we are revisiting that very grey area of "what can be measured against what the very sensitive ear can hear". As discussed on this forum about 21/2 years ago.
If Mr. Funk has indeed decided to produce a wholely new bearing and housing then obviously it cannot be greatly different to my bearing if it is to fit into the SL1200 system. So therefore it may exhibit decent sonic reproduction time will tell.
But at this time in the history of the SL and it's falling number of followers it will have a hard time catching up.
Hi Richard,
Marco. A measurement is a measurement.
The bottom line is, if you can't hear its sonic effect, then it doesn't matter!! Furthermore, it's largely all supposition, as there's no proof that the effect alluded to (and reported in the review), correlates 100% with the measurements taken.
Also, you're assuming that the bearing and base plate were installed 100% correctly, using all the required fittings, which given that Mr Brook (of MCRU) supplied the MN bearing in question to HFW for review (someone who's 'renowned' for not always supplying all that's required for ensuring correct installation of said bearings and base plates), which I myself can attest to from personal experience.
Secondly, you're also assuming, given that Dave Cawley, supplier of the rival Timestep bearing for the Technics SL-1200/adversary of Mike New, and Noel Keywood (editor of HFW) are best buddies, that the review of the MN bearing was produced, shall we say, 'entirely without prejudice'. What? I hear you say.... Surely all hi-fi reviews and the hi-fi industry is whiter than white, and no such shenanigans go on? Mmmm... 'Course not! ;)
Aside from all of that, and most importantly, if you had to pay attention to every measurement taken of audio equipment, which appeared not to reflect its 'supreme efficacy', you'd end up buying nothing...!
As ever, the best and most effective way of assessing the performance of any hi-fi equipment, is to USE YOUR OWN EARS and LISTEN, especially when in the extensive personal experience of others and I, who've used the MN bearing and base-plate for some time, we have found that it utterly transforms the sonic performance of the Technics, with no audible negative effects whatsoever. That collective experience by discerning ears, as far as I'm concerned, is worth a damn sight more than any (inconclusive) measurements.
If you want a bonafide test that highlights which 'solution' for the Technics is best between the Funk Strata platter/Spin bearing and the Mike New ETP platter and MN bearing/base-plate, then at the next show Arthur participates in, ask him to set up two otherwise identical SL-1210s: one fitted with the former, and one the latter, and let the punters attending decide which, in their considered opinion, is best, and then report such on the various forums.
Heck, I'd even donate my own T/T for that very purpose, as I'd dearly love to hear the results myself! :exactly:
Marco.
Mike,
I agree that it will have a hard time catching up. You must have sold a few hundred of your bearings by now - last figure I remember reading was around 300, but I could be wrong.
The funk bearing is completely reworked. New housing and new bearing shaft. As can be seen from the pictures it's quite different to the Mike New bearing though.
I am hoping that when OldPinkMan comes to Toulouse next that he will have time for a blind test.
I have got changing bearings down to a fine art now, and have three bearings with which I can try and confuse him with.
WOStantonCS100
21-04-2015, 06:44
Measurements are measurements, IMHO, when independents who have no vested interest in any of the products being tested are the ones performing the test, if you know what I mean. And, said persons expertise in the area of measuring such things needs to be positively confirmed. Likewise, the test gear and conditions under which the tests are carried out should be fully disclosed with each manufacturer being able to provide and setup the specimens to be tested.
I don't know Keywood; but, DC has zero sway with me; not even if he was raving about the Mike New bearing. Whatever opinion I form of the Funk products sure as sheemy won't be based on anything from him or anyone in that camp. Respectfully. :D
I am hoping that when OldPinkMan comes to Toulouse next that he will have time for a blind test.
I have got changing bearings down to a fine art now, and have three bearings with which I can try and confuse him with.
With respect, Kevin, such tests need to be carried out near-instantaneously for the results obtained to be relied upon - and for that to happen you need two Technics T/Ts in situ, and to carry out what I outlined in my previous post. Otherwise, your 'aural memory' (existing between one bearing changeover and another) simply cannot be replied upon.
Regardless, however, any experiments of this nature are always interesting to conduct, and the results equally interesting to read about, so I look forward to that, even if there's about as much chance of the Pinkster acknowledging (should it happen) that the MN bearing was better in some way (and thus going against Arthur), than him voting for SNP at the forthcoming general election!!! :lol: ;)
Marco.
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 06:58
Measurements are measurements, IMHO, when independents who have no vested interest in any of the products being tested are the ones performing the test, if you know what I mean. And, said persons expertise in the area of measuring such things needs to be positively confirmed. Likewise, the test gear and conditions under which the tests are carried out should be fully disclosed with each manufacturer being able to provide and setup the specimens to be tested.
I don't know Keywood; but, DC has zero sway with me; not even if he was raving about the Mike New bearing. Whatever opinion I form of the Funk products sure as sheemy won't be based on anything from him or anyone in that camp. Respectfully. :D
Having been on the wrong end of spurious measurements and wonky conclusions about them (Martin Colloms and the famous dust-bug "slowing under load") I understand where you are coming from. However, it's not a difficult measurement to do, and the magazine are independant (certainly there can be no funk bias - there was no funk bearing at the time of the test). Incompetent possibly, but independent. Mike is presumably also capable of measuring (he has a bearing and base plate), and refuting the claim in a review of his product he must surely have read. It is worth noting that the resulting total weighted wow & flutter was less than my PT produces in standard trim! I did say it was tiny. But measured, and real. :)
It is normal for all of us to defend and prefer the items we have already made a substantial (and possibly irreversible) commitment to. The bonding of the bearing and base plate may well enhance performance, but it is a near-impossible claim for your average punter to confirm. You can't A:B back and forth. It sure as hell locks in loyalty though! ;) (For psychologists, the reaction is known as cognitive dissonance)
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 07:02
With respect, Kevin, such tests need to be carried near-instantaneously for the results obtained to be relied upon - and for that to happen you need two Technics T/Ts, and to do what I outlined in my previous post. Otherwise, your 'aural memory' simply cannot be replied upon.
Regardless, however, any experiments of this nature are always interesting to conduct, and the results equally interesting to read about, so I look forward to that, even if there's about as much chance of the Pinkster acknowledging (should it happen) that the MN bearing was better in some way (and thus going against Arthur), than him voting for SNP at the forthcoming general election!!! :lol:
;)
Marco.
Sadly I don't think Mrs S will authorise the necessary time, given the pigs breakfast of our attempted house purchase ambitions. It would however not be hard for me to pack a spare 1200 too.
If it's a blind test - then I am not going to be able to not choose the Mike New. I wouldn't know which bearing I am choosing. That is the point of blind testing!!!!!
And you don't need instant A:B's or anything of the sort. You just need results that are not random or near random - but demonstrate that you consistently BLIND can pick between A and B with no idea as to which is which, or whether it is A or B that is being played. It may be soul-less, but its shocking reliable ;)
If it's a blind test - then I am not going to be able to not choose the Mike New. I wouldn't know which bearing I am choosing. That is the point of blind testing!!!!!
Yes, of course, but the point is, given your great friendship and undying loyalty to Arthur, as broadcasted by your good self on every hi-fi forum under the sun, after the results of the blind test are revealed, and should you have picked the MN bearing as being more preferable, would you admit that in public? ;)
Sorry, and I mean no offence, but I have to be honest and say that I have my doubts. The bottom line is, mate, you're hardly what one could call a neutral observer.
Marco.
Marco,
You, or anybody else passing, are welcome to pop in and hear the difference.
After last night I am pretty sure that there is a difference but once again it will boil down to which kind of sound you like.
Both are quality products. Both will do the job well.
It's just going to be down to personal preference (again).
I prefer the Funk. Mrs H will prefer the Mike New (as it's already paid for).
As for comparing the Mike New Bearing and ETP platter against the Strata and Spin, if you are comparing just the bearings then the platters also need to be the same.
I will continue my pretty irrelevant "tests" over the next couple of weeks and post my opinion. No measurements will be taken, but I will trust my ears. The same ears that let me know that the MC5000 was pretty special for the price per metre.
WOStantonCS100
21-04-2015, 09:26
Having been on the wrong end of spurious measurements and wonky conclusions about them (Martin Colloms and the famous dust-bug "slowing under load") I understand where you are coming from. However, it's not a difficult measurement to do, and the magazine are independant (certainly there can be no funk bias - there was no funk bearing at the time of the test). Incompetent possibly, but independent. Mike is presumably also capable of measuring (he has a bearing and base plate), and refuting the claim in a review of his product he must surely have read. It is worth noting that the resulting total weighted wow & flutter was less than my PT produces in standard trim! I did say it was tiny. But measured, and real. :)
It is normal for all of us to defend and prefer the items we have already made a substantial (and possibly irreversible) commitment to. The bonding of the bearing and base plate may well enhance performance, but it is a near-impossible claim for your average punter to confirm. You can't A:B back and forth. It sure as hell locks in loyalty though! ;) (For psychologists, the reaction is known as cognitive dissonance)
What I'm saying is that for obvious reasons, that test and the resulting measurements are suspect, at the least. The magazine may be independent; but, DC was in the mix. Several things about it (should) raise an eyebrow. The test has also to my knowledge not been duplicated on any other MN bearing, in any other 1200 and confirmed by anyone else that I've seen come forward. It really has nothing to do with the Funk bearing which may also turn out to be a fine alternative to the stock.
If you're an "average punter", you don't upgrade your 1200. I guess I'm not that locked into loyalty because I have two 1200's atop my racks. One has the MNB the other the stock bearing. I don't have the base plate (but neither did the "testers"). Nevertheless, I can A/B all day long if I want to; but, it only takes about 10 seconds. Anywho, that's what I told my psychologist. ;)
And, no, a measurement is not always a (valid) measurement. For example, last night I was measuring 100K ohm volume pots in my preamp as I am replacing the 12-step attenuators (which don't give me enough control). The measurements kept shifting all over the place. After a while I started to think maybe the pots were just junk. Then it occurred to me that perhaps the batteries of my MM needed replacing. After I did that, poof, proper, valid and repeatable measurements. Nothing wrong with the pots at all. Simplistic example. Yes, indeed. However, like I said, I'd be fool to take the Keywood/DC test as gospel truth. And, yes, it does annoy me that said results of that one test are bandied about as if they are definitive and conclusive. I think not. Far from it. If this were the Funk Spin bearing tested in like manner, I'm sure Arthur would be pissed and rightly so. I'm sure there would be all kinds of people coming out of the wood work demanding retests, confirmations, etc.
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 09:32
Hi Richard,
If you want a bonafide test that highlights which 'solution' for the Technics is best between the Funk Strata platter/Spin bearing and the Mike New ETP platter and MN bearing/base-plate, then at the next show Arthur participates in, ask him to set up two otherwise identical SL-1210s: one fitted with the former, and one the latter, and let the punters attending decide which, in their considered opinion, is best, and then report such on the various forums.
Marco.
Or get Mike New to do the test at the next show he or his distributor participates in. Not terribly likely really. I am of course unfussed about all this, and just helping Cagey have a bit of fun, because I have a nice suspended sub-chassis integrated design belt drive which I much prefer. However, I might see if I can get Arthur to let me borrow a fully funked SL1200 for a head to head. I would make that FX3 and my Dynavector cartridge, with the Pip 2 as preamp, against a rival "full record player solution". I'm not going to mess about with a component by component evaluation. So - it wouldn't be to determine the best component or cocktail of them. Just to compare a Funk solution with another non-funk, complete solution.
But not for the foreseeable future.
I haven't had the opportunity to evaluate a Mike New bearing, and have no interest in doing so. I have no reason to doubt it is a fine bit of engineering, and has manifestly produced some good results and pleased a lot of happy customers. Arthur has now produced his version, and that too is high quality engineering which lifts the performance from the stock bearing significantly. To get on my favourite rant, given the sad demise of proper hifi dealers stocking enough of the market, it will be really hard for most punters to compare or evaluate, and they will probably pick from the comments of others and reassure themselves they have done wisely, without having had the opportunity to compare. Its a bit like buying bloody tyres. I am really pleased with the Goodyears I have fitted to replace the old Pirrellis, but had no opportunity to evaluate them against the 10 or so other likely contenders, which for all I know would have performed even better.
Not my problem. I have a lovely Pink Triangle :D
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 09:36
I can A/B all day long if I want to; but, it only takes about 10 seconds. Anywho, that's what I told my psychologist. ;)
You can't easily A:B the benefits of bonding the bearing and/or base plate was what I meant. Marco would have bonded his base plate, decided it sounded better, and told everyone so. He was in no position to wonder, and go back and listen to the unbonded again. For most of those commenting about the merits of bonding, it is a one way trip - and nobody is likely to say "shit - thats ruined it". Forget cognitive dissonance. Call it human nature. :)
WOStantonCS100
21-04-2015, 09:54
You can't easily A:B the benefits of bonding the bearing and/or base plate was what I meant. Marco would have bonded his base plate, decided it sounded better, and told everyone so. He was in no position to wonder, and go back and listen to the unbonded again. For most of those commenting about the merits of bonding, it is a one way trip - and nobody is likely to say "shit - thats ruined it". Forget cognitive dissonance. Call it human nature. :)
Well, except where DC (who has displayed such in a plethora of instances in a plethora of places) is concerned, I'm not going to speculate on anyone's character. Personally, I've had quite a few "shit - that's ruined it" experiences and have had to revert. But, for me, that's not the issue. My issue remains as I've stated. I'm not betting on that one test. I would also highly recommend that anyone considering a new or refurbed bearing from Mike New, Funk Firm, Applied Fidelity or anyone else, perform due dilligence with as many credible sources as possible. Kevin is an end user, has both bearings and has a preference. Even as a preference that carries more weight than someone who attempts to steal ideas, sell f'd up bearings on the auction site, bad mouth what he can't replicate.......................... ;)
BTW: I may be speaking out of turn; but, I'm pretty sure if Marco hated the bonded base plate, he could obtain another 1200 and reinstall the bearing without it. I'm not sure; just have a sneaking suspicion. He might have to sell his rims, though. :lol:
We have had "platter wars", so let's not let this descend into bearing wars please.
As I said, both are quality, re-engineered products. I have a preference. Yours may be different.
As far as the bearing base plate went, the fact that it was irreversible was my concern, and why I chose not to embody the mod. Again, personal choice. There is no right answer. Your ears may be different to mine.
I would love to hear what an ETP does in my system, but I have no real intention of buying one.
The invitation still stands, but I am sure that AK will want his lovely bearing back at some point.
Marco would have bonded his base plate, decided it sounded better, and told everyone so. He was in no position to wonder, and go back and listen to the unbonded again.
Indeed. The fact is, there was no need for me to 'wonder' whether bonding the base-plate to the chassis was a good idea or not, as for me it made perfect sense to do so, simply because it improves the integrity of the whole bearing/base-plate/chassis interface, and was therefore a 'no brainer' - as indeed was fitting the base-plate itself, which has the same effect on the ability of the MN bearing to fulfil its design parameters, thus allowing it to perform to its fullest potential.
And the results speak for themselves... After fitting the base-plate to my T/T, and bonding it to the chassis, the resultant sonic improvement was considerable, and which I don't believe would've been achieved any other way.
Like I've said before, without fitting the BBP, you're only realising about 80% of the potential of the MN bearing (a fact confirmed by my using the bearing itself for years without the base plate), so in my considered view, anyone with an MN bearing not wishing to fit a BBP, due to concerns over 'induced flutter' are fretting over nothing and simply shooting themselves in the foot!
Marco.
Hi Kevin,
We have had "platter wars", so let's not let this descend into bearing wars please.
As I said, both are quality, re-engineered products. I have a preference. Yours may be different.
Absolutely - I couldn't agree more. There are no "bearing wars" here, though: only differences in opinion, mostly from those with the practical experience of using the products in question, in order to know what they're talking about.
I think that your comparisons between the MN and Funk Spin bearing are invaluable to AoS members, and much appreciated, so keep your thoughts coming! :)
Marco.
Marco,
I have read what you have said about the BBP, but my concerns still stand.
These are simple.
1. It's not reversible
2. It close couples the bearing to the main structure, meaning any vibrations (airborne or otherwise) will have more effect on the bearing. I am still not convinced that this is a good idea. In reality, does it make a difference as the bearing is coupled to the plinth, just not so robustly. Who knows.
Would a vibration damping material or a support of similar construction to the sound damped steel give a better benefit? I thought that ideal bearing would be insulated/isolated from vibrations wherever possible.
Anyway, I currently have Strata mounted on The Mike New It sits a bit higher, but it's still within adjustment range (not forgetting that the Strata I have is not the final production version). The main thing is, it gives me a sound I could quite happily live with. I still feel it loses out on the top end a bit compared to "Spin".
Marco,
I have read what you have said about the BBP, but my concerns still stand.
These are simple.
1. It's not reversible
2. It close couples the bearing to the main structure, meaning any vibrations (airborne or otherwise) will have more effect on the bearing. I am still not convinced that this is a good idea. In reality, does it make a difference as the bearing is coupled to the plinth, just not so robustly. Who knows.
Would a vibration damping material or a support of similar construction to the sound damped steel give a better benefit? I thought that ideal bearing would be insulated/isolated from vibrations wherever possible.
No problem. If you have concerns, you have concerns. I can't change that, mate. The above imponderables will always exist until someone is able to isolate and address any that are of genuine concern.
All I know, and all that matters to me, is that I used an MN bearing for 2 years, before fitting a bonded base-plate, and carrying out the latter resulted in a SIGNIFICANT improvement in the overall sonic performance of my T/T, and thus the musical enjoyment I obtain from using it, which categorically proves to me that any negative aspects of fitting a bonded BBP to the Technics, are TOTALLY OUTWEIGHED by the benefits.
Simples! :exactly:
Anyway, I currently have Strata mounted on Spin. It sits a bit higher, but it's still within adjustment range (not forgetting that the Strata I have is not the final production version). The main thing is, it gives me a sound I could quite happily live with. I still feel it looses out on the top end a bit compared to "Spin".
Sure, and that's fine, as it's clearly what you hear in the context of your system. Therefore, if you want to change your MN bearing for a Spin, then go right on ahead - and enjoy! :)
Marco.
I actually meant to say Strata on Mike New in the last paragraph.
As to changing the bearing, it's certainly a possibility at this stage, as long as my accountant sanctions the purchase. I still have not come to the conclusion about which combination Imprefer. There is almost too much choice now.
Spectral Morn
21-04-2015, 19:16
I am able to share my thoughts and views on this now, having listened extensively to a Strata platter, Spin bearing and FX 3 arm and put these into a 7000 + word review here http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/21/04/2015/uptown-funk-the-funk-firm-upgrades-for-the-technics-12001210/
I was not able to compare the Mike New bearing to the Spin as I only had an early version of the Strata Hub which would not fit on a Mike New bearing properly. A second sample which did fit was found to have a poorly set sensor stator so ran at the wrong speed - that was rushed to sort Martin T and myself out with hubs to listen to the platter with the Mike New bearing - and as such was not up to Funk's usual standards. This was during the 'Platter Wars' thread as OldPinkMan refers to it.
Sadly back then things in my view were revealed way too soon as the Strata was not a finished product as the incompatibility with the Mike New bearing revealed and the subsequent changes, reduction in size (so one can play records with the lid closed), removal of lettering etc. It should be stated now, clearly that this is no longer the case, a current Strata will work with a Mike New bearing as Kevin has found.
Of course back then this was important as many Technics fans use the Mike New as an upgrade and to have not been able to use it was a bit of an own goal limiting potential end users. Now with Funk having a bearing the Spin this is less of an issue re Funk now having a complete set of compatible and synergistic upgrades, however Mike New and any bearing based on an OEM Technics bearing can use a Strata.
I would have liked to do the comparison but was unable but the Spin is a big improvement on an OEM Technics bearing which I guess isn't that big a surprise.
My main conclusion is that these Funk items work very well together and in particular with a Funk arm, the resulting synergistic pairing going beyond the individual parts and end performance being a sum of the parts. This may explain some of the listening experiences found when not using a Funk arm.
Marco made some comments earlier about listening being flakey and folks doing swaps needing two decks. Well yes in an ideal world two identical decks, with identical arms, identical equally run in cartridges etc would be the ideal but tight methodology, extensive listening notes and doing comparisons quickly would to a degree work well as a viable alternative, which is what most reviewers do.
Comparing different Technics decks only reveals differences between those different approaches, either a complete manufacturer option or a mixture of that and end user selected items. Do I believe its possible to state what's best ultimately ? No I don't only what suits individual listener bias and particular system synergy requirements, that may of course translate to many others liking that option or only a few or possibly only one.
Anyway the Strata is now a complete finished product, the Spin also and FX3, and these worked very well together and in my case worked well in the context of my system.
Regards Neil
Idlewithnodrive
21-04-2015, 19:54
Yes, of course, but the point is, given your great friendship and undying loyalty to Arthur, as broadcasted by your good self on every hi-fi forum under the sun, after the results of the blind test are revealed, and should you have picked the MN bearing as being more preferable, would you admit that in public? ;)
Sorry, and I mean no offence, but I have to be honest and say that I have my doubts. The bottom line is, mate, you're hardly what one could call a neutral observer.
Marco.
Surely the very same must be said of the MN mods on this hallowed forum. Hardly neutral.
If the Funk stuff can compete on this forum it can compete anywhere, so surely a great place to give it a baptism (of fire) :)
Hi Mike,
Surely the very same must be said of the MN mods on this hallowed forum. Hardly neutral.
No, it's completely different. I'm not a personal friend, of many years, of Mike New, and nor is anyone else here that I'm aware of. We're simply enthusiastic users of his products - and for good reason. The relationship between Richard and Arthur K, in that respect, is rather different - and Richard doesn't even personally use any of the Funk products designed for the Technics.
If the Funk stuff can compete on this forum it can compete anywhere, so surely a great place to give it a baptism (of fire)
If it's genuinely good (which I'm sure it is) and bought by enough people, then *that* is what will make it succeed here. AoS isn't simply populated by Mike New 'fanboys', we welcome ALL equipment that genuinely deserves to be championed, especially stuff that helps keep the modded Technics alive :)
Marco.
Oh, it's genuinely good.
I think I can now put my finger on one of the differences in the bearings. It's highlighted by cymbals, well the decay of cymbals once struck.
To me it sounds more realistic with the Spin. With the Spin, you hear the cymbal decaying pretty much all the way to the noise floor, but with the Mike New in this combination, it finishes more abruptly. Maybe with a BBP it's different?
As mentioned before, it's going to be down to personal taste. I have not been able to turn the wick up yet to see what combination boogies best yet though.
sq225917
21-04-2015, 20:31
Url dns is down for the review page.
Spectral Morn
21-04-2015, 20:48
Url dns is down for the review page.
Such is life. It was aok earlier. The site is down at the minute.
Regards Neil
Its Back now :)
Oldpinkman
21-04-2015, 21:00
If comparing 2 decks Arthur and I use a moving magnet cartridge like the goldring 1042 and swap the same stylus between them to improve consistency. Whilst it's not the last word in cartridges it punches above its weight and is more than capable for that purpose.
Marco - I don't use funk (or anyone elses) technics products and so have tried to avoid expressing an opinion about them and concentrated on providing information about them
I am able to share my thoughts and views on this now, having listened extensively to a Strata platter, Spin bearing and FX 3 arm and put these into a 7000 + word review here http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/21/04/2015/uptown-funk-the-funk-firm-upgrades-for-the-technics-12001210/
Thanks for insightful review Neil - your effort truly appreciated.
Oldpinkman
22-04-2015, 05:38
I have inadvertently upset Neil a couple of times over this review, which is an epic work for a non-techie to plough through. However he plainly has the same pair of ears that I do. Although I didn't share all of his equipment experiences, I agreed with his findings on the ones I did. That is something of a (unexpected) forum first for me.
In particular I was unsure about preferring strata to acrylic with the standard technics arm (which we used when Arthur roped me in to listen for weeble or whatever the pitch instability was supposed to be called). Different altogether with an f.x arm (as I noted to Kevin in an earlier post). And after more hours spent listening to holly Johnson than any adult male should ever have inflicted on them - no f*****g Weeble.
Nicely done Neil. Apologies for the inadvertent transgressions. Have copyright on the filing cabinet photo on me ;)
WOStantonCS100
22-04-2015, 06:06
Thanks for insightful review Neil - your effort truly appreciated.
Indeed. Read it all.
Oldpinkman
22-04-2015, 07:11
Just a couple of wee issues with Neils review, which are no more than chinese whispers and artistic interpretation I am sure (particularly if you've ever tried talking with Arthur). I checked with the main man, who wanted to log in, but has lost his password, and is snowed under preparing for Munich, so...
The switch to strata was not to save cost. Strata is more expensive to produce. (The real issue was a search for a new platter material for funk turntables, to address the need for a bit of bass weight, for which Arthurs designs have been criticised since the original PT).
There were not really any mainstream carbon fibre tubed arms sold. They were all effectively "concept prototypes". The concept being prototyped was the carbon fibre cross bracing of the tube (which is the patented concept) and carbon fibre tubes were cheap and readily available and lower resonance. However, low resonance didn't matter with the FX cross bracing, and carbon fibre is very flexible, and the loss of rigidity lost detail retrieval. Indeed - the quest for rigidity was in large part the inspiration for strata (that, and remembering about the "secret" bonding compound) . Strata is now standard on Funk's flagship versions, and plain glass used on the cheaper ones.
Finally - a personal observation - strata is stone dead when you tap it. It's hard to tell on the production version (or, I think, Neils version) because it has the achromat bonded to it, which of course damps the glass, but if you take a bare platter, without a bonded achromat, it too is stone dead. I hope to pop down the week after next, and might try to do a quick video to put on youtube of a "bare" platter and how inert it is. (The secret bonding compound is allegedly the cause). If you are testing for "ring" you need to be careful how you do it. Try to suspend the object being tested on a bit of wire. I know of one member here who referred to the bare rega 300 arm as not ringing. If you hold it lightly by the lift arm, it does indeed seem fairly dead. Loop a bit of wire through the headshell holes and it rings somewhere around concert pitch C#.
Sorry to nitpick, on an otherwise fine piece of work, but I thought it important to clarify those points on Arthur's behalf (until he finds his password!)
:cool:
The real issue was a search for a new platter material for funk turntables, to address the need for a bit of bass weight, for which Arthurs designs have been criticised since the original PT
Oh dear.
Up until this point I was completely on board with the idea of this platter upgrade. I was even pretty close to contacting funk regarding a purchase but now what your suggesting is that the Strata 'adds bass weight'?
Should I interpret this as meaning that it adds its own signature or coloration of some kind (ie. more bass)? If so then it's game over for me I'm afraid. Could you clarify?
Oldpinkman
22-04-2015, 08:18
Oh dear.
Up until this point I was completely on board with the idea of this platter upgrade. I was even pretty close to contacting funk regarding a purchase but now what your suggesting is that the Strata 'adds bass weight'?
Should I interpret this as meaning that it adds its own signature or coloration of some kind (ie. more bass)? If so then it's game over for me I'm afraid. Could you clarify?
I guess this is subjective interpretation. No, I don't believe it "adds colouration". Very sloppy language on my behalf. Perhaps "restores bass solidity" would have been a better term. However, I have no idea whether it colours or not - not something that can be measured. The very first time I heard strata was with an F5 arm and Decca London cartridge, and I still keep toying with getting a Decca as a result, because it was perhaps the best I have ever heard that particular, very familiar LP (Dave Brubeck)
Subjectively, in overall presentation, Pink Triangle and Funk have often (always) been praised for "airiness" "ethereal" "mid range detail" "soundstage" "imaging" etc, and criticised for lacking balls in the bass. AK now feels this is down to issues of structural rigidity in elements susceptible to resonance (I have just been set 100 lines by him on this subject, with regard to my naieve question about his F1 prototype arm he is looking to tease with at Munich). So Strata addresses this. Arthur is completely convinced it is an improvement, and 30 years experience suggest he is unlikely to be wrong about this. I haven't won an argument on technical issues in all that time. Well not structural physics. I won an electronics one, but cheated and phoned a friend.
Even with the F5 arm strata improves bass resolution, weight and detail. With the FX arm - which can handle even better any resonance issues, and is subjectively "light" (well you notice the mid range imaging and space SOO much, you forget the dry tuneful bass), it is a match made in heaven, as Neil has alluded. With the stock Technics arm (and they were stock - standard headshell, standard arm wiring) I found it blurred the mid-range and lost that subjective "ethereal" which is what really does it for me with the Pink Triangle / Funk products (well, the best of them, anyway)
However, I believe you can try before you buy, so why worry what I think? (I think, following feedback from Kevin and Neil, and with Munich coming up and dominating AK's attention at the moment, you might want to exhibit a months patience before trying)
Hope that helps
:)
Yeah, nice review, Neil, and well done for taking the time not only to write it, but to fit and test all the various different components and compare them :)
Just a couple of small observations... Unless I missed it, I didn't catch which off-board PSU was being used throughout the duration of the review. I presume that there was one and that you weren't simply using the stock Technics power supply? In any case, some more info here would be useful.
I completely agree with your comments about synergy, and so no doubt the Funk mods will have been designed to work together in unison (along with a Funk tonearm), and thus 'voiced' as such, and therefore that was largely why the best sonic results were obtained with all of them in place.
It goes back to what I've always said about modifying the Technics, and that is that in order to avoid simply creating a disparate collection of parts (and an unrewarding sound), as opposed to a collection of components designed to achieve a particular goal (and a musically rewarding sound), you have to know *exactly* what it is you want to achieve, and most importantly, how to achieve it, which is easier said than done!
In that respect, I'd contend that those who've gone down the modded Technics T/T route and been disappointed or unconvinced by the results, simply didn't succeed in fitting the right 'bits'. The fact is, unless you know what you're doing, you can't simply combine, willy-nilly, a platter from one manufacturer, a bearing from another, a mat from someone else, and feet from Tom, instead of Dick and Harry, and a tonearm from Mary, and hope that you'll end up with Bob as your uncle: there has to be a strategy - and preferably a suitably considered and well-thought out one.....
That is why combining components from the one manufacturer is most likely to result in sonic synergy, and clearly that's the case with the Funk stuff, which is why I wouldn't hesitate recommending members here to go down that route. Also, as I've discovered from personal experience, most folk prefer it when others, whose ears they trust, do all the thinking for them! ;)
In that respect, in order that potential customers can buy a complete 'Funk modification package', for the Technics, I'd suggest that Arthur should consider including an off-board PSU and his own design of feet in that equation, leaving the customer with only to decide on which cartridge to use (presuming that a Funk tonearm has also been chosen as part of the selected components), and to offer all of that in a discounted package, whilst retaining the option of buying all the bits separately, at a higher price. That, I feel, would be the best way to sell his modifications for the Technics, then let 'word of mouth' do the rest.
Another observation I'd make is regarding the use of glass in the Strata platter. Having experimented in that area myself, I'm convinced that applying the use of glass in some way, within the design of a platter, is a good idea, and sonically beneficial. However, in my case, it's with the use of a Nagaoka crystal glass T/T mat. Did you ever try yours, mate? If so, I've not heard anything about it...
Since we've been talking about synergy, and how relevant that is to achieving musicality, when building a bespoke turntable (which let's face it, is precisely what modifying an SL-1200/1210 to this degree is), I can confirm that similar synergy is achieved with the combination of a Mike New bearing, base plate, ETP platter, and crucially, a Nagaoka crystal glass T/T mat.
Obviously I can't make any comparisons with what you've just listened to with the Funk items, but I can state quite categorically that all the items I've mentioned combine to elevate the sonic performance of the Technics into the 'big league', and as such remains as a viable and alternative choice for anyone looking to take their 'Techy' to the ultimate level of performance.
Simply add some decent feet, together with a tonearm and cartridge of your choice, thinking again here in terms of synergy, and creating a suitable PAIRING, in respect of all necessary parameters, not just two items you like the look of, and a quality off-board PSU - and you're good to go.
As ever, choice is good - and that is precisely what the new Funk modifications for the Technics has brought to the party, and in turn helping keep the modded Technics alive, which for me is *the* most important thing of all. In that respect, I wish Funk all the best, and hope that they get the level of success with these products that they deserve :cool:
Marco.
Spectral Morn
22-04-2015, 08:26
Just a couple of wee issues with Neils review, which are no more than chinese whispers and artistic interpretation I am sure (particularly if you've ever tried talking with Arthur). I checked with the main man, who wanted to log in, but has lost his password, and is snowed under preparing for Munich, so...
The switch to strata was not to save cost. Strata is more expensive to produce. (The real issue was a search for a new platter material for funk turntables, to address the need for a bit of bass weight, for which Arthurs designs have been criticised since the original PT).
There were not really any mainstream carbon fibre tubed arms sold. They were all effectively "concept prototypes". The concept being prototyped was the carbon fibre cross bracing of the tube (which is the patented concept) and carbon fibre tubes were cheap and readily available and lower resonance. However, low resonance didn't matter with the FX cross bracing, and carbon fibre is very flexible, and the loss of rigidity lost detail retrieval. Indeed - the quest for rigidity was in large part the inspiration for strata (that, and remembering about the "secret" bonding compound) . Strata is now standard on Funk's flagship versions, and plain glass used on the cheaper ones.
Finally - a personal observation - strata is stone dead when you tap it. It's hard to tell on the production version (or, I think, Neils version) because it has the achromat bonded to it, which of course damps the glass, but if you take a bare platter, without a bonded achromat, it too is stone dead. I hope to pop down the week after next, and might try to do a quick video to put on youtube of a "bare" platter and how inert it is. (The secret bonding compound is allegedly the cause). If you are testing for "ring" you need to be careful how you do it. Try to suspend the object being tested on a bit of wire. I know of one member here who referred to the bare rega 300 arm as not ringing. If you hold it lightly by the lift arm, it does indeed seem fairly dead. Loop a bit of wire through the headshell holes and it rings somewhere around concert pitch C#.
Sorry to nitpick, on an otherwise fine piece of work, but I thought it important to clarify those points on Arthur's behalf (until he finds his password!)
:cool:
Thank you for your positive coments and the apology.
Arthur was pretty clear when we spoke about the events that brought the Strata about. The company making the original platter were increasing production costs so this spurred Arthur to think about another option and the Strata was born, I scribled some notes at the time, which was quiet awhile ago. He had rung me on my lunch break and the conversation occurred while I was eating my lunch down by the sea on what was a lovely day.
The comment about the platter re ringing is simply a reflection on my not having the ability to test such with measuring equipment. Even the most inert item may still exhibit some but without measurements of these platters OEM, mk1, Strata etc I don't have any data so I would always be cautious re claims made therefore I try to cover myself by not stating absolutes just in case someone who does have measuring gear publishes contradictory info.
Re tonearms whether any sold or not Funk had arms out there, in the market place and reviewed etc that used Carbon fibre so it is fair and accurate to mention a transition from that to the current approach.
Tapping my knuckles shows it to be audibly inert but doing that with test equipment would be a different thing altogether.
Anyway glad folks are getting something useful from the review.
Regards Neil
Just a couple of wee issues with Neils review, which are no more than chinese whispers and artistic interpretation I am sure (particularly if you've ever tried talking with Arthur). I checked with the main man, who wanted to log in, but has lost his password...
I'll fling him a new password now :)
Marco.
Spectral Morn
22-04-2015, 08:45
Yeah, nice review, Neil, and well done for taking the time not only to write it, but to fit and test all the various different components and compare them :)
Just a couple of small observations... Unless I missed it, I didn't catch which off-board PSU was being used throughout the duration of the review. I presume that there was one and that you weren't simply using the stock power supply? In any case, some more info here would be useful.
I completely agree with your comments about synergy, and so no doubt the Funk mods will have been designed to work together in unison (along with a Funk tonearm), and thus 'voiced' as such, and therefore that was largely why the best sonic results were obtained with all of them in place.
It goes back to what I've always said about modifying the Technics, and that is that in order to avoid simply creating a disparate collection of parts (and an unrewarding sound), as opposed to a collection of components designed to achieve a particular goal (and a musically rewarding sound), you have to know *exactly* what it is you want to achieve, and most importantly, how to achieve it, which is easier said than done!
In that respect, I'd contend that those who've gone down the modded Technics T/T route and been disappointed or unconvinced by the results, simply didn't succeed in fitting the right 'bits'. The fact is, unless you know what you're doing, you can't simply combine, willy-nilly, a platter from one manufacturer, a bearing from another, a mat from someone else, and feet from Tom, instead of Dick and Harry, and a tonearm from Mary, and hope that you'll end up with Bob as your uncle: there has to be a strategy - and preferably a suitably considered and well-thought out one.....
That is why combining components from the one manufacturer is most likely to result in sonic synergy, and clearly that's the case with the Funk stuff, which is why I wouldn't hesitate recommending members here to go down that route. Also, as I've discovered from personal experience, most folk prefer it when others, whose ears they trust, do all the thinking for them! ;)
In that respect, in order that potential customers can buy a 'complete Funk modification package', for the Technics, I'd suggest that Arthur should consider including an off-board PSU and his own design of feet in that equation, leaving the customer with only to decide on which cartridge to use (presuming that a Funk tonearm has also been chosen as part of the selected components), and to offer all of that in a discounted package, whilst retaining the option of buying all the bits separately, at a higher price. That, I feel, would be the best way to sell his modifications for the Technics, then let 'word of mouth' do the rest.
Another observation I'd make is regarding the use of glass in the Strata platter. Having experimented in that area myself, I'm convinced that applying the use of glass in some way, within the design of a platter, is a good idea, and sonically beneficial. However, in my case, it's with the use of a Nagaoka crystal glass T/T mat. Did you ever try yours, mate? If so, I've not heard anything about it...
Since we've been talking about synergy, and how relevant that is to achieving musicality, when building a bespoke turntable (which let's face it, is precisely what modifying an SL-1200/1210 to this degree is), I can confirm that similar synergy is achieved with the combination of a Mike New bearing, base plate, ETP platter, and crucially, a Nagaoka crystal glass T/T mat. Obviously I can't make any comparisons with what you've just listened to with the Funk items, but I can state quite categorically that all the items I've mentioned combine to elevate the sonic performance of the Technics into the 'big league', and as such remains as a viable and alternative choice for anyone looking to take their 'Techy' to the ultimate level of performance.
Simply add some decent feet, together with a tonearm and cartridge of your choice, thinking again here in terms of synergy, and creating a suitable PAIRING, not just two items you like the look of, and a quality off-board PSU, and you're good to go.
As ever, choice is good - and that is precisely what the new Funk modifications for the Technics has brought to the party, and in turn helping keep the modded Technics alive, which for me is *the* most important thing of all. In that respect, I wish Funk all the best, and hope that they get the level of success with these products that they deserve, and if the Funk components you've reviewed, Neil, are now forming an integral part of your T/T based system, I wish you many happy hours of listening :cool:
Marco.
It's in the text, system details, review and a footnote, the PSU was a Paul Hynes SR7.
My next Technics review is the long promised PSU one should have it done in a few weeks. I had hoped to include the Funk setup in this but Arthur needed the FX3 back in a hurry so that went back with the hubs, bearing and platter. As the synergy between the items was so good to have not been able to use all three during comparisons with other companies Technics options would have been damaging to the integrity of a PSU review and unfair to Funk.
I agree Funk should consider doing their own PSU but in the mean time the Paul Hynes ones work well with the SR7 being the best. I didn't write about that during the review because it would have confused things in what was an already complex review and the main focus was Funk products not PSU options.
Regards Neil
Cool. What about the Nagaoka glass T/T mat, Neil? Did you actually end up getting one, and if so, have you used it? :)
Marco.
However, I believe you can try before you buy, so why worry what I think? (I think, following feedback from Kevin and Neil, and with Munich coming up and dominating AK's attention at the moment, you might want to exhibit a months patience before trying)
Cool; thanks for the clarification.
This is pretty much what I wanted to hear. Referring back to Marcos post above, I understand the importance of synergy (hence most of my system being from the same manufacturer) but at the same time when it comes to upgrading a system I'm already happy with I take a slightly different approach.
I tend to be very cautious of the 'purchase verification' reviews where people say they can hear improvements just because they spend money on something. And lets be honest, the internet is absolutely flooded with these.
I like to actually physically try for myself new upgrades. Even then, if I don't think something yields an improvement or positive benefit (even if it contradicts the findings of the masses) I will happily say so. Sometimes to great financial detriment!
Luckily I have a few similarly minded friends (some from the hi fi industry) which allows me the luxury of trying tons of different bits of kit and I always choose what sounds best to me regardless of 'trends'.
Oldpinkman
22-04-2015, 09:02
More concept than prototype at this stage, but Funk have an isolation platform, not feet planned, and a PSU "on the shelf". Of course (now don't shoot me Marco) by the time I bring that turntable out for a head to head, it is only a Technics SL1200 because in the Technics component count the name badge is included. It's actually a funk turntable, with a technics motor, plinth and name badge! ;) (Did I mention a broom?)
Spectral Morn
22-04-2015, 09:05
Cool. What about the Nagaoka glass T/T mat, Neil? Did you actually end up getting one, and if so, have you used it? :)
Marco.
Yes I did get one, but no as of yet I haven't used it. I felt a mats review was something I would do at some point soon too, so was going to leave it till then. I have about ten mat options here now so that would make a good addition for those who only want to stick with the OEM platter.
Regards Neil
Oldpinkman
22-04-2015, 09:10
Referring back to Marcos post above, I understand the importance of synergy
Yes. So do I. But I am less happy with the idea any manufacturer "voices" equipment. Funk don't. When Arthur designs, he designs HiFi. High Fidelity. High Truth. He doesn't say I'll make an arm which adds bass colouration to match a bright distorted cartridge. In this respect, my old buddy Ivor T had a point. From the source, you can only lose information (or mess it up). No component "puts back" or "helps" the signal originally on the recording. Best case, it can copy it without changing (or distorting) it. Hi Fidelity=Hi Truth = Low distortion.
Less than best case, it changes it. Those are the only 2 options really. You keep the source recording unchanged (hi fidelity) or you change it (distortion of truth) - and good components don't change it too much. Of course, no component is perfect, and as such it makes sense that you match and look for synergy. But they are compensating weaknesses, and the best option is to try to have small weaknesses, because although you can balance out tonally, you are always losing information or truth.
So synergy yes. Voicing no.
:cool:
More concept than prototype at this stage, but Funk have an isolation platform, not feet planned, and a PSU "on the shelf".
Good to hear about the PSU (wonder if Arthur could apply his usual lateral thinking in some way here?), and yes, an effective isolation platform would be even better. He mentioned something about the latter to me a couple of years ago, but nothing came of it.
That's a product I myself would certainly be interested in, as I fundamentally believe there is mileage to be had in doing something with the Technics plinth, whether that is redoing the design of the plinth itself (in a clever way), or improving isolation further with the use of some sort of 'platform'.
Of course (now don't shoot me Marco) by the time I bring that turntable out for a head to head, it is only a Technics SL1200 because in the Technics component count the name badge is included. It's actually a funk turntable, with a technics motor, plinth and name badge! ;) (Did I mention a broom?)
Lol... Absolutely, hence why I alluded to that fact in my previous (lengthy) reply to Neil. The 'heart' of the system, though, is the superb Technics D/D motor unit, and what it's capable of sonically when partnered with components that allow it to reveal its full potential, which is the WHOLE POINT of why any of us do what we do with our Techies!
Marco.
Just to add, I have not paid for these items. They are on loan. I am seriously considering buying them though. They work superbly with my FX1200. The bass is certainly not overblown.
I would actually prefer, from a financial aspect, not to like the new Funk bits.
I can live without them, but I am not sure I want to. ;)
Yes. So do I. But I am less happy with the idea any manufacturer "voices" equipment. Funk don't. When Arthur designs, he designs HiFi. High Fidelity. High Truth. He doesn't say I'll make an arm which adds bass colouration to match a bright distorted cartridge. In this respect, my old buddy Ivor T had a point. From the source, you can only lose information (or mess it up). No component "puts back" or "helps" the signal originally on the recording. Best case, it can copy it without changing (or distorting) it. Hi Fidelity=Hi Truth = Low distortion.
Less than best case, it changes it. Those are the only 2 options really. You keep the source recording unchanged (hi fidelity) or you change it (distortion of truth) - and good components don't change it too much. Of course, no component is perfect, and as such it makes sense that you match and look for synergy. But they are compensating weaknesses, and the best option is to try to have small weaknesses, because although you can balance out tonally, you are always losing information or truth.
So synergy yes. Voicing no.
Although I agree with what you're saying and don't dispute that's the case with Funk products, you misunderstand what I mean about 'voicing'. I presume that after Arthur has designed something, using logic, test equipment and every other necessary objective process available to him, that he sits down and listens to the end result?
In that case, what happens when (should it occur) all the 'objective boxes' have been ticked, thus measurably everything is 'perfect', but he's not happy with the sound? I presume that he then goes back to the drawing board, as it were, and makes some adjustments, then listens again, and repeats that process until he's happy? Or is he always amazingly lucky and gets it right first time? ;)
At the end of the day, this is hi-fi equipment we're talking about, designed to reproduce music, not a competition for 'innovative ornament of the year', so sound quality matters, thus EARS must be the arbiter in the final analysis. That is where 'voicing' comes in with ANY audio component.
If Arthur carries out the above process when designing stuff, then I consider that as 'voicing', just in the same way as an amplifier designer can take something from his test bench, which he's completely happy with in a technical sense, but when listened to 'in the real world', playing music as part of a hi-fi system, doesn't sound quite right.
However, a few changes to capacitors and resistors later (even ones that measure the same but sound different), the subsequent sonic signature of the amplifier 'clicks into place' and produces the musical type of sound that the designer was looking for. *That* is what 'voicing' is about. Essentially, designing audio equipment is about creating a 'recipe' - and like all good recipes, the quality of the final result is governed by the use of the correct ingredients...
It has nothing whatsoever to do with 'deviating from the truth' or deliberately introducing coloration - and so ALL the best audio designers 'voice' their equipment accordingly. In that respect, I should imagine that Arthur is no different :)
Marco.
WOStantonCS100
23-04-2015, 02:25
Just to throw a spanner in the works, with all due respect to synergy (and understanding what that means), I actually prefer "upgrades" that find a way to bring out the best in more than one or two scenarios. For instance, I've put ruby cantilievers in several of my carts and the result, so far, is that regardless of cart, the sonics improved. Dare I suggest it; but, I have cables that make the source component do it's thing better regardless of what it is. So, for me, if a product seems to only work it's best with a small finite set of other components, that's a detractor for me. What happens when the next best platter comes along? Will I have to now ditch my bearing and my tonearm? What happens if I upgrade my tonearm? Will I have to now ditch my bearing and platter? That would not be the position I would want to be in. I much prefer that upgrades that have the magic of a "broader appeal".
Mike_New
23-04-2015, 03:31
hi WOS,
You have hit the nail on the head, so to speak.
If an upgrade is a "real improvement" on what goes before then it should work in any conbination.
In regard to My Bearing; if other platters are made to the basic outline specifications of the original then they should work with my Bearing.
The first original Funk platters did not work with my Bearing for the simple reason that the machining specifications were no indentical to the original platter.
This concerning the exact dimentions of the centre boss according to a member who got one of the first ones
The test is that the OEM platter runs happily with my Bearing under all circumstances.
hi WOS,
You have hit the nail on the head, so to speak.
If an upgrade is a "real improvement" on what goes before then it should work in any conbination.
In regard to My Bearing; if other platters are made to the basic outline specifications of the original then they should work with my Bearing.
The first original Funk platters did not work with my Bearing for the simple reason that the machining specifications were no indentical to the original platter.
This concerning the exact dimentions of the centre boss according to a member who got one of the first ones
The test is that the OEM platter runs happily with my Bearing under all circumstances.
That's an odd statement Mike, as my Mk1 Funk platter fits your bearing just fine. The mk1 being the original Funk platter. My understanding is that your bearing deviates away from the standard bearing. I can check this easily tonight.
As far as upgrades go, the Spin in my system and my ears is a definite upgrade. I prefer what it does to Mike's superbly engineered bearing. This is down to personal preference, and possibly synergy. Spin does the business. Don't forget that Funk Firm use this same bearing combination in their award winning turntables. Is it a synergy thing with my F.X based arm? I can't say, as it's the only arm I have.
I have been happy with Mike's bearing since I purchased it, but after listening to a Spin in my system for a while, switching back to the Mike New bearing I feel that some detail is lacking, and it sounds heavier in the bass. Almost like a veil has been put over the music. This might just be me, but I am currently happier when I have Spin fitted.
It's unfortunate that I don't have an ETP so that I can compare the bearing/platter combinations as a complete package, but such is life.
Different strokes for different folks, and your taste may be different to mine.
Oldpinkman
23-04-2015, 05:55
Just to throw a spanner in the works, with all due respect to synergy (and understanding what that means), I actually prefer "upgrades" that find a way to bring out the best in more than one or two scenarios. For instance, I've put ruby cantilievers in several of my carts and the result, so far, is that regardless of cart, the sonics improved. Dare I suggest it; but, I have cables that make the source component do it's thing better regardless of what it is. So, for me, if a product seems to only work it's best with a small finite set of other components, that's a detractor for me. What happens when the next best platter comes along? Will I have to now ditch my bearing and my tonearm? What happens if I upgrade my tonearm? Will I have to now ditch my bearing and platter? That would not be the position I would want to be in. I much prefer that upgrades that have the magic of a "broader appeal".
No spanner. My previous point repeated. A good component is a good component because it allows more truth. Less distortion (of that truth). Synergy results from matched quality neutral components. There is no" voicing"
But to appreciate subtle differences in one part of the chain, the rest of the chain has to be good enough to reveal them. Also, in a transducer, and in this context the whole record player is mechanically part of turning electrical energy fed to the motor, into kinetic energy at the stylus, back to electrical signals at the phono leads, then the interaction of parts is unavoidable. Strata allows the bass from a recording to be (more) accurately reproduced. If that sets off a resonance in an arm with a 10db (or more) spike in that frequency area (and there are plenty of expensive arms with just such resonance characteristics) then you might not like the results.
But there is no voicing, no family "match". Each component is designed to do its job as accurately as possible. If all components do that, you get hi-fi. If you like the original just the way it was , you like hi-fi. If you like a different, personal taste sound, you get audiophile.
It's the graphic equaliser thing. You can shape the sound to be a tonal balance you like. The price is lack of fidelity. Maybe your tone adjustments get back the true balance of the original in your room in your system. But because they were necessary, that process loses some of the detail in the source.
We had this, I believe at pink triangle 30 years ago. Compared with the predominant linn sound of the day, a lush warm, "musical" sound, the pt sounded dry and light. Truth was, it revealed some horrible recordings. If it hadn't been for the arrival of cd, which did the same thing - reveal some horrible recording, but also force people to realise what master tapes sounded like, we might never have moved on.
Of course, no component is perfect, even if it is trying for neutral - for high truth. So there is always scope for matching or balancing components to get a balanced total system result. But I believe, and I know Arthur believes, the right way to do that is to make each component "hifi" (high truth).
If one of your components is badly out, making all the others neutral, will reveal that. Fx works in this context because it is the only arm I am aware of which has no resonance spike exceeding 3db. It's the only arm I am aware of to get anywhere close to that. +-3db is appropriate for a transducer (or component of one). A speakers frequency range is quoted at +-3db.
No spanner. My previous point repeated. A good component is a good component because it allows more truth. Less distortion (of that truth). Synergy results from matched quality neutral components. There is no" voicing"
I note that you didn't have the courtesy to respond to my previous post, Richard? I don't take the time to write considered replies for the good of my health.
I completely disagree, and think you have an erroneous view of 'voicing', certainly within the context I'm familiar. The fact is, Arthur will 'voice' his designs, via the process of design and listening, the same as any other audio designer. In that respect, he is not a special case.
Marco.
WOStantonCS100
23-04-2015, 06:32
I had a couple more thoughts/concerns after re-reading Neil's review:
The Graham 2.2 mismatch with the Strata platter: The 2.2 is described as having a slight "suck-out". So, why was it spot-lit by the Strata platter? No, the 2.2 is not a Phantom; but, it's no slack arm. (I drool over those who have one as a daily driver.) Does the Strata platter have a slight "suck-out" similar to the 2.2 which compounds this issue? If the Funk arm compensates by slightly "bloating" those frequencies, won't there be an over-bloating of those frequencies if the Funk arm is used with a more neutral platter?
Bonded Achromat: I don't think it's a secret that many do like what the Achromat brings to the table (pun intended). However, some do not, preferring, for instance, a massy alloy platter w/ felt mat or acrylic platter and no mat, etc. Since the Achromat is bonded to the Strata platter, you're stuck with it (just like adding the MN base plate). There was a mention (when fitting weights/clamps) that Spin bearing spindle height wasn't ideal in some instances for the use of a clamp. Likewise, I would imagine throwing another mat on top of the Strata's bonded Achromat probably wouldn't work real well, either. Even if one did, the Achromat would still be in the mix.
Let it be known that I am not discounting the Funk products. I'm happy to see someone else taking the 1200 so seriously. Nevertheless, there are some considerations here, just as there are with the MN base plate or the Applied Fidelity delrin mat that was, literally, screwed into a stock platter. I was actually quite interested in Funk-ifying one of my stock 1200 arms; but, that's not an option, anymore. And, I may still try out an Achromat. Heck, I've got enought 1200's to have a go at the MN, Spin, Applied Fidelity and stock bearing with all different platters. Can you say, "expensive proposition"?
Just food for thought. In the computer field, when there is a machine with every part from the same company, that differ from standard, we call that "proprietary". We learned decades ago (thanks for nothing, Compaq), that proprietary often means a headache or a large expenditure when there is a desire to upgrade or a need to replace "X". It often sounds like a great idea at first (and it's monetarily expedient for a manufacturer to make items that work noticeably better with "kin folk"); but, for the end user, it's not always the best option. Think mid 80s Japanese mid-fi rack systems.
Oldpinkman
23-04-2015, 06:58
I note that you didn't have the courtesy to respond to my previous post, Richard? I don't take the time to write considered replies for the good of my health.
I completely disagree, and think you have an erroneous view of 'voicing', certainly within the context I'm familiar. The fact is, Arthur will 'voice' his designs, via the process of design and listening, the same as any other audio designer. In that respect, he is not a special case.
Marco.
Gosh sorry Marco.*** I intended no discourtesy. I am not aware of any way in which Arthur "voices" his designs. He listens to them for sure - and often changes them as a result of listening (well - more often abandons than changes. I can think of one platter and one arm tube in that category). Worse, recently he has taken to getting me to listen to them! But no voicing. The objective is neutral - "HiFi". As I noted, no component is perfect, so the objective is minimising the imperfections. There is certainly no element of trying to design in a flavour to match and trade off another flavour. He may listen to the final result, but he approaches the design from the perspective of looking at the mechanical challenge, and the structural physics involved, and finding a workable engineering solution that will deal with the problem. Then he listens to the result - and as noted before - very often the result is worth listening to.
Not always. At the risk of giving away trade secrets (well, ideas not usually widely broadcast by Arthur) one of the duffers was a balsa wood arm tube. Going back to design principles, and F.X the design wants to avoid tube resonances interfering with (distorting) the signal. When we play a record - we are trying for the spinning record groove moving the stylus RELATIVE TO a cartridge body which sits still. The electrical signal - the music - is made by the RELATIVE movement of the stylus. RELATIVE to a static cartridge body. If they both move together - there is no signal. (When you move the cartridge and stylus at the same time from the arm rest to the start of the record - there is no sound, because although there is a big movement, there is no RELATIVE movement, between the stylus and the cartridge body (in which the generator coils sit).
From the "no signal moving the arm" above, we can see that ABSOLUTE movement of the cartridge body is not an issue. Similarly, it is not an issue if the cartridge body moves by the same amount at all frequencies. The problem comes when it moves much more at one frequency than others (the resonance spikes). As long as the vibration of the arm (on which the cartridge body is fixed) is the same at all frequencies, all that happens is the arm either boosts or cuts the output from the cartridge evenly. So low resonances are a good thing right? Well - turns out no. Even resonances are a good thing. But not necessarily exclusively low ones. The balsa wood arm tube had a nice smooth low energy resonance performance. But you could hardly hear anything out of the speakers. It needed an additional gain stage. The problem was the smooth resonances were being achieved with damping, and to keep a few secrets up Arthurs sleeve, damping is not necessarily a good thing. It adds complications. In this case, the complication was it stole all the output (among others). The various decoupling options for dealing with energy - to the extent they are a damping solution, suffer the same issues. So the need was for controlled tube (I guess with F.X we should be saying "beam") resonances without damping.
Enough - the design approach is work out the physics of how the kit makes the music, and try to design a solution with acceptable engineering compromises that maximises fidelity. Then listen to it. It is not to try to produce a particular "voice". To the extent that Arthurs designs are "voiced" they are "voiced" for "neutral"=High Fidelity = High Truth = low distortion (of truth). That is the nature of Arthurs various (very frequently patented) innovations in HiFi.
:cool:
edit *** Its payroll year end. I have over 30 payrolls to deal with. All need notifying of pension auto-enrolment staging dates. The software I used had a bug which cancelled all of the claims for Employers allowance, and needed all year end processes to be re-run by 22nd April. I have been skimming a lot!
Hi Biff,
With regard to the issue of synergy, and the point you've made in that respect.
I agree with where you're coming from, but I think we've all been there when a particular component that works very well in other applications, doesn't perform that way in the one we're trying to use it in - and that's likely to be the top and bottom of it in Neil's case, with the Graham arm and Funk Spin/Strata. It happens all the time with all sorts of kit.
I'm quite sure that I could fit the Spin/Strata to my T/T, and use it with my Ortofon arm, and everything else that's on my turntable, and it would produce an excellent sound (although not necessarily better than the one I'm enjoying with the MN bearing/BBP and ETP platter), as indeed would likely be the case with many others and their T/Ts. However, I guess time will tell if more folks buy the Spin/Strata and use it with non-Funk tonearms, but I don't expect there to be an issue.
Neil can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the sound he was getting with the Spin/Strata, with the Graham arm in situ, was exactly 'broken' and/or unlistenable; merely that it was much better when a Funk tonearm was introduced into the equation. I could do the same thing in my system, for example, by fitting a cartridge to my tonearm that works perfectly adequately, but simply doesn't perform as well as one that *truly* excels with it. That doesn't mean that the former cartridge is 'inferior', simply that the context I chose in that instance was not the ideal one in which to use it.
That said, I'm still a firm believer that when modifying the Technics, you have to follow some sort of strategy, and that's where the synergy obtained from using a collection of components from one manufacturer, which have been designed to work together in unison comes in - whether that be the MN bearing/BBP and ETP platter, or the Funk Spin/Strata, is immaterial, and simply down to personal choice and what works best to your ears and in your system.
I'd therefore be confident that the above approach would produce far superior results than, say, fitting an Inspire bearing to an ETP platter, with a Funk arm and Timestep PSU - hey you might be lucky and it could sound wonderful, but my point is you're more likely to get better results by using combinations of components that have been designed to work together, some of which have been tried and tested over many years, than creating a 'box of liquorice all sorts' :)
Marco.
Oldpinkman
23-04-2015, 07:09
That's an odd statement Mike, ... My understanding is that your bearing deviates away from the standard bearing. I can check this easily tonight.
To that I can add that the Funk strata platter fits fine on a standard technics bearing (direct personal experience). As well as obviously fitting a spin bearing. And the standard platter fits spin. There appears to be an obvious odd one out. I'll be interested in what Kevin finds.
However, providing the changes needed to the Funk strata platter to make it fit an MN bearing (or if you prefer, to restore it to "the basic outline specifications of the original") do not compromise the performance of the strata, then I will suggest to Arthur, for the sake of easier acceptance in a market where the MN is a significant presence, that he changes the design accordingly. It's not like its hard to do. I have already suggested a longer spindle for clamp users.
I don't suppose anyone could supply a copy of those "outline specifications" :scratch:
Mike_New
23-04-2015, 07:24
Why don't you just copy my Bearing exactly Richard then maybe you will get it right.
Gosh sorry Marco.*** I intended no discourtesy.
That's fine, Richard, but if I quote you and take the time to respond to the contents of one of your posts, I'd appreciate the courtesy of a reply, whether you agree with what I've written or not, otherwise it looks like I'm being ignored. Call it a bugbear of mine! ;)
I am not aware of any way in which Arthur "voices" his designs. He listens to them for sure - and often changes them as a result of listening (well - more often abandons than changes. I can think of one platter and one arm tube in that category). Worse, recently he has taken to getting me to listen to them! But no voicing. The objective is neutral - "HiFi".
Indeed. However, I think we're in the realms here of arguing over semantics, as the process you've just described is what I would refer to as 'voicing'. Quite simply, the term doesn't necessarily equate to a process of deliberately deviating from 'accuracy' or neutrality, in the way you seem to think. Use the term 'tuning' instead, if you prefer.
What Arthur does when designing his products is no different to what Anthony Matthews or Glenn Croft does when building their amplifiers - the only difference being that rather than 'fiddle' with armtubes and bearings, they 'fiddle' with capacitors and resistors, etc, in order to 'tune' (voice) the final results, sonically, that their equipment produces.
Quite simply, there is no 'magic formula' that allows one to obtain 'the truth', in the way you describe, because in reality there is no such thing [as EVERY piece of audio equipment imparts its own sonic signature or 'flavour' on proceedings, and so by nature isn't entirely neutral]: merely an interpretation of such by the designer concerned, arrived at via the process of building, measuring and LISTENING.
That final process, muchacho (where ears are used as the final arbiter to alter the sound produced by the equipment concerned), is called 'voicing', or if you prefer, 'tuning' - and every good audio designer does it. Simples! :cool:
Marco.
WOStantonCS100
23-04-2015, 08:17
Hi Biff,
With regard to the issue of synergy, and the point you've made in that respect.
I agree with where you're coming from, but I think we've all been there when a particular component that works very well in other applications, doesn't perform that way in the one we're trying to use it in - and that's likely to be the top and bottom of it in Neil's case, with the Graham arm and Funk Spin/Strata. It happens all the time with all sorts of kit.
I'm quite sure that I could fit the Spin/Strata to my T/T, and use it with my Ortofon arm, and everything else that's on my turntable, and it would produce an excellent sound (although not necessarily better than the MN bearing/BBP and ETP platter), as indeed would likely be the case with many others and their T/Ts. However, I guess time will tell if more folks buy the Spin/Strata and use it with non-Funk tonearms, but I don't expect there to be an issue.
Neil can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the sound he was getting with the Spin/Strata, with the Graham arm in situ, was exactly 'broken' and/or unlistenable; merely that it was much better when a Funk tonearm was introduced into the equation. I could do the same thing in my system, for example, by fitting a cartridge to my tonearm that works perfectly adequately, but simply doesn't perform as well as one that *truly* excels with it. That doesn't mean that the former cartridge is 'inferior', simply that the context I chose in that instance was not the ideal one in which to use it.
That said, I'm still a firm believer that when modifying the Technics, you have to follow some sort of strategy, and that's where the synergy obtained from using a collection of components from one manufacturer, which have been designed to work together in unison comes in - whether that be the MN bearing/BBP and ETP platter, or the Funk Spin/Strata, is immaterial, and simply down to personal choice and what works best to your ears and in your system.
I'd therefore be confident that the above approach would produce far superior results than, say, fitting an Inspire bearing to an ETP platter, with a Funk arm and Timestep PSU - hey you might be lucky and it could sound wonderful, but my point is you're more likely to get better results by using combinations of components that have been designed to work together, some of which have been tried and tested over many years, than creating a 'box of liquorice all sorts' :)
Marco.
Hey Marco,
I certainly hope that's the case (slight syngergy issue). However, a Graham tonearm noticeably sounding off enough to mention in a review (barring "The Robin", which I figure was purposefully entry level). That's a new one on me. That thing is meticulously built and has always sounded excellent to me on others' tables, pretty much regardless of platter or cart or mat (provided pure crap wasn't involved, you know what I mean). I've heard people preferring other arms. That's to be expected. But, goodness, that arm has been mated to a slew of well known and appreciated vintage and modern "audiophile" tables quite successfully. Thus, my brow raise. I've mated my T3 arm to both a 1200 with MN bearing, alloy Origin Live armboard and to my replinthed 1500 with a hardwood armboard, stock Techy bearing and about a 4" thick mdf/birch ply sandwich plinth. The setups are vastly different in approach. Yet, the T3 sounds noticeably great on either setup. Perhaps that's set a precedent for me, as I tend to favor stuff that just plain sounds great even in portability. The bonded Achromat is still a niggle with me. Not being able to change the mat or take the Achromat out of the equation, if I would want to, remains a con for me. It does sound like the Funk system works quite well together; just seems like there's a certain element of choice that one would have to suspend.
Oldpinkman
23-04-2015, 08:39
That's fine, Richard, but if I quote you and take the time to respond to the contents of one of your posts, I'd appreciate the courtesy of a reply,
Marco.
Since you quoted me, I guess I should respond. But since I've quoted you, you will also doubtess feel obliged to respond. We could be at this a long time.
I note your points. Certainly Arthur is worried about what things sound like and listens to them. The process kicks off with a "light bulb" about an engineering solution that will address a performance criteria.
With regard to your amplifier example - any amplifier designer is trying to get an amplifier which sounds good (or preferably the amplifier doesnt sound at all - a wire with gain). Some, with limited technical knowledge and skills , make a virtue of eschewing test equipment, and dabbling with bijou components, earthing and casing arrangements around circuits which are in essence minor variations on well established designs. Others (Owen Jones, Pip AHB2) innovate, and approach the matter from a theoretical understanding of the job they want the circuit to do, and produce ground up new designs and new circuits. The innovators tend to be patent collectors. Both Owen and Arthur have several, both current and expired.
In that context, any funk component should work with any other component since it has no special "flavour". All funk components tend to work together because they all aim for the same flavour or lack of flavour. (They don't all achieve it equally, which is why (say) an F5 doesnt sound identical to an FX3. It is not just that one lets through more detail, they are also tonally slightly different. That is a necessary compromise not a positive tuning choice.
Anyway - for the moment, it would seem that the only 2 people to have tried spin quite like it. That is not a bad start for the wee lad! ;)
However, a Graham tonearm noticeably sounding off enough to mention in a review (barring "The Robin", which I figure was purposefully entry level). That's a new one on me.
Sure, and it's best if Neil answers that one. However, to apportion the issue to a failing of the Spin or Strata I think is unfair, as there is likely a multitude of reasons, unknown to us, responsible for causing the issue Neil reported with the Graham. That's essentially my point, and in that respect, not to jump to any conclusions :)
The bonded Achromat is still a niggle with me. Not being able to change the mat or take the Achromat out of the equation, if I would want to, remains a con for me.
On that point, I do agree, although as a previous user of a MKI Funk platter (before changing to an ETP), I know that bonding an Achromat to it worked very well, so I can understand and appreciate the thinking there.
Still, what I'd have done is supplied a separate Achromat with the Strata (together with some adhesive pads), and then let the user decide for himself or herself whether to bond it to the platter later (thus in that respect enabling a 'before & after' comparison), or indeed provide the ability to use the Strata with other mats, where I feel that in certain applications there could be mileage in further improving the sound.
Marco.
Oldpinkman
23-04-2015, 08:56
Regarding the bonded mat - it isn't really so different to the original matless acrylic platter in concept. When designing a record support and termination, they can be made an integrated design. At least you can change the platter easily enough. If you produce a baseplate and bond it to a bearing, you can change that easily enough. It's when you start bonding that combination to the deck itself that you "lock in" the benefits, and "lock out" the opportunity to review the choice, or change to an alternative
But a platter which is both support and termination is where Pink Triangle started with the original Acrylic matless platter.
WOStantonCS100
23-04-2015, 08:59
Sure, and it's best if Neil answers that one. However, to apportion the issue to a failing of the Spin or Strata I think is unfair, as there is likely a multitude of variables, unknown to us, responsible for causing the issue Neil reported with the Graham. That's essentially my point, and in that respect, not to jump to any conclusions :)
I'm cool with that. Ohhhhhhh, Neil................... :)
On that point, I do agree, although as a previous user of a MK I Funk platter (before changing to an ETP), I know that bonding an Achromat to it worked very well, so I can understand and appreciate the thinking there.
Still, what I'd have done is supplied a loose Achromat with the Strata (together with some adhesive pads), and then let the user decide for himself or herself whether to bond it to the platter later (thus in that respect enabling a 'before & after' comparison), or indeed provide the ability to use the Strata with other mats, where I feel that in certain applications there could be mileage in further improving the sound.
Marco.
Yep. :)
With regard to your amplifier example - any amplifier designer is trying to get an amplifier which sounds good (or preferably the amplifier doesnt sound at all - a wire with gain).
Sure, but the BEST ones succeed in designing equipment that produces a sound which, as closely as possible, resembles that of real voices and instruments, and thus sounds 'musical', as opposed to those who insist all that matters is how something measures, and consequently end up creating equipment that produces a 'hi-fi' sound, not a 'musical' one.
The two aren't necessarily intrinsically linked - and it is the final process of listening (i.e. 'voicing' or 'tuning' by ear), once all relevant measurements have been carried out, where said 'musicality' is won or lost in any equipment design. That is a concept you seem unable to grasp.
It's also often why certain equipment sounds much better than others, at the same price point, not just because the designer in question may be more technically gifted, but often also because he or she has better ears - and a more open mind ;)
In that context, any funk component should work with any other component since it has no special "flavour".
I understand and appreciate where you're coming from, but I'm afraid the reality is that ALL audio equipment imparts its particular 'sonic signature' on the recorded music that it's reproducing for the listener.
No equipment is entirely neutral, Funk stuff included, which is why we all use different gear and systems, each imbuing music with our preferred 'flavour', and not some notional scientifically proven 'bastion of accuracy', as it simply doesn't exist.
Anyway - for the moment, it would seem that the only 2 people to have tried spin quite like it. That is not a bad start for the wee lad!
Agreed, and I'm sure that plenty more success is on its way! :)
Marco.
Yep. :)
You could even price the Strata with and without a bonded Achromat, thus cutting the cost slightly for potential customers. That would allow some flexibility for those wishing to experiment (as many do) with different mats - ones indeed which may take up less spindle length, which in turn would facilitate more choice of T/T weights and clamps with which to use with the Strata.
Marco.
Spectral Morn
23-04-2015, 12:13
I had a couple more thoughts/concerns after re-reading Neil's review:
The Graham 2.2 mismatch with the Strata platter: The 2.2 is described as having a slight "suck-out". So, why was it spot-lit by the Strata platter? No, the 2.2 is not a Phantom; but, it's no slack arm. (I drool over those who have one as a daily driver.) Does the Strata platter have a slight "suck-out" similar to the 2.2 which compounds this issue? If the Funk arm compensates by slightly "bloating" those frequencies, won't there be an over-bloating of those frequencies if the Funk arm is used with a more neutral platter?
The difficulty with describing a difference is one tries hard to grasp at adequate language to illuminate the difference but try and keep it in context and proportion.
If you go read all the Stereophile Graham reviews and then the first Phantom review that area where Bob Graham felt the 2.2 could be bettered he achieved with the Phantom, though he has fiddled again. The Graham 2.2 is a good arm but like all things it may work better in a different context and that is down to synergy and as no product is neutral with varying areas of success, or focus over others synergy to a degree isn't a patchwork but a more precise jigsaw, with bits fitting properly. But, synergy could itself be in question because it may not always be predictable if the listener has a contradictory listening bias.
I know that Martin T felt the Strata had a leaner more forward presentation than he liked preferring the ETP in his system, with his music, room etc and I think within the context of a Graham 2.2 and VDH10 cart on that review turntable the balance was better with the mk1 platter but at a slight expense of openness, air and detail but it was not massively different or lacking. Another listener even using my set up might have favoured that set up but to my ears the Funk FX3 addressed the lack, by restoring a more natural (to my ears) balance and was a more synergistic pairing.
I didn't try a Phantom (I have a mk1.5 Phantom on my SME Model 20) because I have a strong doubt it won't fit right being a much bigger arm, than the 2.2 and I really felt I had gone as far as I could have at that point in time with the review.
Regards Neil
Spectral Morn
23-04-2015, 12:33
Ok re the Bearing fitting thing..... (its in one of the footnotes on the review) here are the differences in the as Mike calls it the boss, I refer to it as the first recess before the hole the platter is lowered down onto which one fitted leaves the top of the bearing shaft sitting above the record centre hole.
The Technics first recess is 5mm deep and 20 mm across, the first Funk Hub didn't fit the Mike New bearing not sitting level with a slight rock but fitted a Technics and the Spin. The Second Funk Hub was 5mm deep and 22 mm across and fitted but due to an incorrectly fitted speed stator could not be used. According to Kevin the one he has there is 24mm across which fits the Mike New bearing.
http://www.djresource.eu/images/topics/technics/SL1200_platterins.jpg
In the photo above you can see the magnet assembly and the speed stator (red circle indicating that) the first recess in the middle of the speed stator and the hole in the centre of that which the top of the bearing spindle goes through.
The Mike New bearing has the longest spindle poking a good bit above the record, an OEM Technics bearing is next highest and the Spin was a bit shorter than a Technics bearing, by just enough that a Michell clamp with felt washer below the record could not grip the spindle. With felt washer removed it could, but only just.
Hope the above helps a bit.
Regards Neil
Which bit are you measuring?
From your description I measured something completely fpdifferent.
I can however confirm that Strata I currently have and my Mk1 platter fit the Mike New bearing.
Spectral Morn
23-04-2015, 18:16
Which bit are you measuring?
From your description I measured something completely fpdifferent.
I can however confirm that Strata I currently have and my Mk1 platter fit the Mike New bearing.
The first hole/recess in the middle of the sensor stator ring ?
Regards Neil
That is not what I measured :eek:
hi WOS,
You have hit the nail on the head, so to speak.
If an upgrade is a "real improvement" on what goes before then it should work in any conbination.
In regard to My Bearing; if other platters are made to the basic outline specifications of the original then they should work with my Bearing.
The first original Funk platters did not work with my Bearing for the simple reason that the machining specifications were no indentical to the original platter.
This concerning the exact dimentions of the centre boss according to a member who got one of the first ones
The test is that the OEM platter runs happily with my Bearing under all circumstances.
I have just measured the taper on my Technics bearing, and my Mike New bearing, and they are different.
It's only slight diameter wise, but different. The length of the taper has a bigger deviation from the original in comparison to the diameter.
To me, the cause of the poor fit would be the change in the taper of the Mike New bearing compared to the original, unless you have followed the exact profile of the original within the wider/longer taper?
Please note that I have not experienced the same poor fit that others have reported between platter and bearing.
Spectral Morn
23-04-2015, 18:45
I have just measured the taper on my Technics bearing, and my Mike New bearing, and they are different.
It's only slight diameter wise, but different. The length of the taper has a bigger deviation from the original in comparison to the diameter.
To me, the cause of the poor fit would be the change in the taper of the Mike New bearing compared to the original, unless you have followed the exact profile of the original within the wider/longer taper?
Please note that I have not experienced the same poor fit that others have reported between platter and bearing.
That might be the issue but the width of that recess was key to solving it. The first Funk one didn't fit properly, the second did, the only difference is the recess is 2mm wider.
What did you measure out of interest ?
Regards Neil
It was in the PM, but pretty pointless in this discussion. Top of the stator sensor to the base of the magnet (with the platter inverted) which is where your circle seemed to indicate.
Spectral Morn
23-04-2015, 18:54
It was in the PM, but pretty pointless in this discussion. Top of the stator sensor to the base of the magnet (with the platter inverted) which is where your circle seemed to indicate.
Would you measure that recess inner wall to inner wall, thank you.
Mike_New
24-04-2015, 00:12
Ok re the Bearing fitting thing..... (its in one of the footnotes on the review) here are the differences in the as Mike calls it the boss, I refer to it as the first recess before the hole the platter is lowered down onto which one fitted leaves the top of the bearing shaft sitting above the record centre hole.
The Technics first recess is 5mm deep and 20 mm across, the first Funk Hub didn't fit the Mike New bearing not sitting level with a slight rock but fitted a Technics and the Spin. The Second Funk Hub was 5mm deep and 22 mm across and fitted but due to an incorrectly fitted speed stator could not be used. According to Kevin the one he has there is 24mm across which fits the Mike New bearing.
http://www.djresource.eu/images/topics/technics/SL1200_platterins.jpg
In the photo above you can see the magnet assembly and the speed stator (red circle indicating that) the first recess in the middle of the speed stator and the hole in the centre of that which the top of the bearing spindle goes through.
The Mike New bearing has the longest spindle poking a good bit above the record, an OEM Technics bearing is next highest and the Spin was a bit shorter than a Technics bearing, by just enough that a Michell clamp with felt washer below the record could not grip the spindle. With felt washer removed it could, but only just.
Hope the above helps a bit.
Regards Neil
The first hole recess (counter bore) in the central boss is actually tapered, the error that Mr. Funk probably made was that he did not allow for this in the design of his platter. He probably measured the upper diameter instead of the lower one.
The first platters he made were probably partially sitting on this taper against the top of the bearing housing, and not correctly seating on the shaft taper.
Secondly the exact height position in the rotational plane of the pulse rotor is critical to correct opperation of the electronic servo system.
After taking exact measurements of the whole assembly I transfered these to my CAD system, at which time I was then able to calculate those measurements which were not possible to directly measure. (a process of reverse engineering)
I was then in a position to calculate the correct location of the taper on the shaft relative to the vertical mean position of the bisecting plane of the three pulse sense coils and the flux field of the 12 pole ceramic magnet.
I was then able to design (using the CAD data) and machine a reference setting gauge which allowed me to exactly establish these dimentions by adjusting the internal height of the carbide bearing pad on which the ceramic ball rests.
Thus on all my Bearings the exact height of the taper relative to the vertical position of the mean rotational plane of the magnet assembly is retained.
I still use the same gauge today!!!
My personal remit was that my Bearing had to work with the overall tollerance range of the OEM Platters and coil assemblies.
The same goes for the rotational location of the pulse generator as shown in the picture by Neil.
This must be located exactly relative to the flux fields of the ferrite magnet, if this is not done accurately then platter performance will vary to the point of indifference due to the vastly degraded performance of the whole servo system as has happened!!
I run my Platters for 3 hours to ensure they are correct before shipping them to customers.
Oldpinkman
24-04-2015, 05:19
Whilst I have limited direct experience, my understanding is that Mr funks many mk1 platters in the market fit and run just fine and dandy.
The mk2 runs fine and dandy on a technics bearing (direct personal experience) or on the superior spin bearing.
The only issues are running a strata platter, which fits a technics bearing, on a Mike new bearing.
According to Mr airbus in toulouse that Mike new bearing he measured deviates from the technics bearing measurement.
Maybe Mr funk should measure it. Any chance of borrowing your Mike new bearing cagey? Could you manage with spin for a few weeks until I can let you have yours back? Might be 6 weeks or so. Mr funk is real busy with the Munich show.
The Strata fits fine now. Well the one I have here does anyway.
I think the issue has already been solved?
A minor update - I have decided that I like Spin in my system more than the Mike New bearing.
As such, I am going to place an order as soon as my bonus comes through.
Oldpinkman
24-04-2015, 13:13
A minor update - I have decided that I like Spin in my system more than the Mike New bearing.
As such, I am going to place an order as soon as my bonus comes through.
On the subject of bonuses I think I need an urgent call to my fairy god-mother. I think the chances of me not wanting an AHB2 to see out my days are witheringly small - and I haven't even heard the bloody thing yet. Even if I can wangle a friend of staffs (designers) discount it's going to take some careful negotiation with SWMBO ahead of completing a french house purchase. I see its now crossed over from Pro to Domestic (HiFi News review) and USA to UK (although £ for $ on prices). Just been talking to Owen about a Pip to XLR lead to preserve the balanced connection. When I was learning sales, that was known as a "buy signal". I need to toughen up!!! :(
Would you measure that recess inner wall to inner wall, thank you.
21.9mm wide
5mm deep
Spectral Morn
24-04-2015, 18:58
21.9mm wide
5mm deep
Thank you.
Regards Neil
After deciding on which bearing I prefer, I have been playing with the platters.
Strata is currently in place and I have never heard my vinyl replay so detailed or expansive. There is no boomy bass. It's very detailed and tuneful. This is with the SAE1000LT in place, which some people think of as a bit of a bass monster. Placement of instruments is superb. You can draw up a mental picture of where each member of the band/orchestra is. It seems to add to the level of fine detail.
It's true that the Mk1 platter gives a different presentation, but it's a bit of a mute point as they are no longer manufactured. All I can say is that if you are in the market for a bearing/platter upgrade, give some serious consideration to the Funk package.
I'd still love to hear an ETP in my system as this is something I have not had experience of, so I can't tell you Strata is better than the ETP. I don't know how different the ETP is from the Mk1 Funk, I can only go on opinions here on the forum. It's also true that I have a Funk tone arm, so I get the benefit of the "full "package. And what a package it is, in my opinion, and that is all it is - my opinion.
Kevin, did you use any record mat over the strata or experiment with different mats?
Regards
Anthony
It comes with an Achromat bonded to it. I popped a Resomat on top, but it was kind of pointless as I was running out of VTA adjustment.
Kevin, did it sound appreciably different with and without the resomat?
Thanks,
Anthony
Yes. With the Resomat it sounded crap, as I could not get the TT set up correct.
Oldpinkman
30-04-2015, 12:20
I guess its worth repeating here what I have posted on another thread, and previously had told Kevin privately when he asked about a "matless" strata to try other mats. It kind of misses the point. (It's not available - that's just a statement of the manufacturers product range, not a debating issue).
But being interested in one - misses the point. The question is not "which mat to go with strata" . The question is "which platter to go with achromat?"
Arthur Khoubesserian has become a well known senior figure in the world of HiFi. He bust onto the scene with the original Pink Triangle, which came into a world of metal plattered, rubber or felt matted, AC motor driven Ariston/ Thorens look alikes, including the ubiquitous Linn LP12. The turntable was revolutionary - completely different, and so much so, not at all to everyones taste. At least, not until digital (CD's) came along and started to further ruffle the feathers of the "Linn school".
New features were a DC motor, a precision bearing on a sapphire thrust plate, inverted so that the pivot point was on the same plane as the record, a sub-chassis suspended (hanging from) rather than floating (sitting on) springs, a sub-chassis which was rigid (the LP12 in particular was boingy), asymetric (no standing waves from parallel edges), and "dead" (being made from aerolam - an aluminium corrugated sandwich) needle talk adjustment on arm board AND a platter to be used without a mat made from acrylic.
But it wasn't a list of bit-part innovations, it was an integrated design - and designed as such. The light-weight acrylic platter was essential for the inverted bearing. It's main purpose however was to be a close impedance match to a vinyl record. It was both the termination (mat) and support (platter) Playing a record on the PT platter effectively gave you a very thick record. There was no uneven transmission of waste stylus energy to the platter. The energy from that thick platter needed to go somewhere (see elsewhere about the perils of "beaming it" into the arm tube in the days before F.X). It went, via that high quality zero play bearing, into that non-resonant aerolam sub-chassis where it was dispersed. (Anniversary took this a stage further with a balsa aerolam laminate sub-chassis)
Having an acrylic mat or platter missed the point. Yes you had an impedance match. A slightly thicker record sitting on your metal platter. But where was the energy in that going if you didn't have an aerolam sub-chassis to disperse it?
ACHROMAT was a way of giving the PT smooth transit to dispersal in a mat. The material is a close impedance match to vinyl. The little bubbles disperse the energy as heat. AK regularly demonstrates how this can be heard at shows. Whilst Achromat is an "everymans" version of the integrated PT design, it is 90% of it (maybe).
So once you have achromat - you don't need an acrylic platter or an aerolam sub-chassis to follow that particular design route. So now - with the termination (connection to the record) and energy dispersal sorted, the only bit left is the "support". And ideally that wants to be rigid and non-resonant. Strata does that job better than acrylic.
Hence the move from mk 1 to mk2 platter was a function of optimising achromat.
Like I said - the question is not "which mat should I use with strata?" but "which platter should I use with achromat"? (always assuming you like the Pink Triangle / achromat approach in the first place)
Arthur Khoubesserian has become a well known senior figure in the world of HiFi. He bust onto the scene with the original Pink Triangle, which came into a world of metal plattered, rubber or felt matted, AC motor driven Ariston/ Thorens look alikes, including the ubiquitous Linn LP12. The turntable was revolutionary - completely different, and so much so, not at all to everyones taste. At least, not until digital (CD's) came along and started to further ruffle the feathers of the "Linn school".
Just think what would've happened had the LP12 been made as a direct-drive instead.... Now *THAT* would've ruffled feathers!! ;)
Or if anyone influential in the UK back then could've effectively demonstrated the benefits of that approach. How I wish I had been old enough then, knew what I know now, and had this forum to use to fight the risible and ridiculous 'belt-drive brainwash' that existed...............!!
But it wasn't a list of bit-part innovations, it was an integrated design - and designed as such. The light-weight acrylic platter was essential for the inverted bearing. It's main purpose however was to be a close impedance match to a vinyl record. It was both the termination (mat) and support (platter) Playing a record on the PT platter effectively gave you a very thick record. There was no uneven transmission of waste stylus energy to the platter.
ACHROMAT was a way of giving the PT smooth transit to dispersal in a mat. The material is a close impedance match to vinyl. The little bubbles disperse the energy as heat. AK regularly demonstrates how this can be heard at shows.
Yet, clearly (as is the case with everything in hi-fi), the Achromat, whilst very good at what it does [especially in an all-Funk context], as I've used one on and off for quite some time, still isn't a 'universal panacea' for the problems of accurate vinyl replay, otherwise I wouldn't have found a better solution on my T/T, and everyone in the world with a turntable, would be using an Achromat.
With respect, Richard, I think you're allowing your rampant Funk fanboyism to run away with itself and attempting to portray Arthur (as talented a chap as he no doubt is) in an almost God-like status, as if no other designer on earth is capable of addressing the issues of accurate vinyl replay in a novel or successful way, when that is far from being the case.
Therefore, I think you need to step back a little, take a deep breath, remove the blinkers (due to your friendship with Arthur) and acknowledge the fact that the world of high-end turntable design doesn't revolve around the Funk Firm - or indeed ANY other manufacturer.
There is ZILLIONS of choice out there for turntable and vinyl enthusiasts, with all sorts of unique and wonderful ways of extracting music from record grooves, and so in that respect there is no 'one true path'. Simply select what YOU think is good, and makes the noise you want it to, then kick back and enjoy the music. Choice *is* good.
Vive la différence! :cool:
Marco.
Oldpinkman
30-04-2015, 12:54
Nope Marco
Much simpler than that. I said "IF YOU LIKE the Pink Triangle sound" - achromat was intended to deliver it for general turntables rather than turntables which had that design philosophy as fundamental to them
IF you like that approach and philosophy, and want to use ACHROMAT - then strata optimises it
That simple.
(And I know AK has carried out extensive tests on direct drive for a reference turntable project - and much prefers belt drive) :cool:
Well, that's fine, but his is only ONE opinion. The problem you have is that you look up to and listen to too many 'gurus'! Owen this, Arthur that - use your OWN ears and trust your OWN intellect and instincts, when forming opinions on audio. That's what I do.
I simply couldn't live with most belt-drive T/Ts, as I can clearly hear what's wrong with them. To my ears, they are fundamentally flawed (in a way that direct-drive isn't, although that isn't perfect either, but its sins are more easily fixed), and Ivor T realised that too, but unfortunately commercial reality dictated that he had to go against his instincts.
The main point I'm making here, however, is to ask you to curb your incessant promotion of Funk, as it's bordering on the obsessive, unless you want to open a trade account in your name to facilitate that? So please bear that in mind. Cheers!
Marco.
Oldpinkman
30-04-2015, 14:54
No problem Marco
I use my ears, and have some lovely music to listen to.
I know the answers to the questions people ask about Funk products and can share the information and insights behind their development. I'm happy not to on AOS since that is your preference.
As for the significance of AK's and your contributions to HiFi , I guess long in the future history will judge.
I know the answers to the questions people ask about Funk products and can share the information and insights behind their development. I'm happy not to on AOS since that is your preference.
That's NOT what I'm saying, Richard. Why do you deliberately misconstrue what I've written and take it out of context? :doh:
What I'm saying, is curb your 'exuberance' a bit, and stick to answering direct questions more, which members may ask you, relating to operational/technical aspects of Funk products (if you consider yourself qualified to do so), rather than waxing lyrical about how wonderful they (and Arthur) are - especially products that you don't actually use in your own system.
That's all, so bear that in mind in future, and let's leave it there :)
Marco.
Oldpinkman
06-05-2015, 15:41
Brief update. Saw AK today - he is flat out for Munich where he has taken an ad space on the floor of the entrance door - showcasing the F1 arm. Saw parts for the F1 today too - and a new CGI for the arm (Don't shoot the messenger Marco, but it has been designed on paper and not listened to. Some of the materials needed don't even exist yet!). AK47 may be on show at Munich (saw parts)
And "Kinetic" - the isolation cradle for the SL1200 (not quite sure how that name fits the Funk range - sounds more like a bloody Linn product, but he was on a high and there was no reasoning with him). So looks like I can get a Technics direct drive powered (and badged) Funk turntable (power supply will not be hard) to put up against your Mike New version some time after that Marco. (I might add my "belter" to that mix too - but I'd prefer to have it pimped first)
Main point of the post though - AK was about to order a serious production run of "spin" and "strata" and I have persuaded him to wait until after Munich and get him to do his own measurements on the MN bearing, and check every last point Cagey has raised regarding fit before committing to final production. If necessary, at a price, he will produce a separate Mike New fit hub as an option with the platter - but he is going to wait to measure first. He insists his platter hub is "original Technics measurement" - but hopefully whatever the cause, there will be MN compatability.
Lots going on, but I know I have to curb my enthusiasm. ;)
keiron99
06-05-2015, 19:37
And "Kinetic" - the isolation cradle for the SL1200 (not quite sure how that name fits the Funk range - sounds more like a bloody Linn product, but he was on a high and there was no reasoning with him).
Any more info on "kinetic"? Is it just a sort of isolation platform?
I'm glad you asked that question. I am interested to know too.
Oldpinkman
06-05-2015, 20:30
It is indeed just a sort of isolation platform. It takes building a pink triangle in kit form to the next level. It was always intended for funks solid decks, but easily extends to the sl1200
Thanks for the update, Richard. Good news about the Spin and Strata, in reference to MN compatibility.
The Kinetic cradle is something Arthur mentioned to me a few years ago, but obviously due to his other (more pressing) commitments, didn't manage to get off the ground. I'm pleased that he's now turning his attention to it again, as it's a product I'm very interested in myself, and would most likely buy :)
Marco.
While I appreciate it's a little earlier to be drawing too many hard and fast conclusions I would like to draw attention to this review:-
http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/21/04/2015/uptown-funk-the-funk-firm-upgrades-for-the-technics-12001210/
Earlier on we talked of 'Synergy'. Now, there are a couple of important points I picked up on in this review.
It suggests that the design of the Strata which is now a bonded Glass arrangement was kind of forced due to the 'rocketing manufacturing costs' of the funk mk1 platter (which as far I can see was a very similar design to the MN platter being machined from a high performance plastic).
The review also suggests that until the Funk arm was added into the equation the sound of the Strata was actually worse than the MK1.
-
So it could be assumed from this that unless you are planning on using a complete funk package, ie. Spin, Strata and Tonearm, the MK1 funk or MN platter may in fact be a better option.
-
In my situation for example I have spent months comparing a variety of tonearms, arm boards and platter mats to arrive where I am now. I would like to upgrade my platter but at risk of moving too far away from a sound I'm happy (Read: ecstatic) with, don't want to change anything else....
Thoughts?
Funk firm run a "Try it at home"scheme, so there is little risk involved. If you don't like it, you can just send it back.
I can't answer the question about what platter works best with a non funk arm, as I don't have one. By the way, that review was posted earlier in this thread. As with all reviews, it gives you one persons opinion of how they found it. It's useful for determining if it interests you, but there is nothing like hearing it for yourself, and drawing your own conclusions.
but there is nothing like hearing it for yourself, and drawing your own conclusions.
Never a truer word spoken! Indeed, you are correct; I'd forgotten about the try before you buy option. I'll see if I can co-ordinate a trial of the funk and MN.
I'll be interested to hear your findings.
Oldpinkman
07-05-2015, 11:49
While I appreciate it's a little earlier to be drawing too many hard and fast conclusions I would like to draw attention to this review:-
http://www.adventuresinhifiaudio.com/21/04/2015/uptown-funk-the-funk-firm-upgrades-for-the-technics-12001210/
Earlier on we talked of 'Synergy'. Now, there are a couple of important points I picked up on in this review.
It suggests that the design of the Strata which is now a bonded Glass arrangement was kind of forced due to the 'rocketing manufacturing costs' of the funk mk1 platter (which as far I can see was a very similar design to the MN platter being machined from a high performance plastic).
The review also suggests that until the Funk arm was added into the equation the sound of the Strata was actually worse than the MK1.
-
So it could be assumed from this that unless you are planning on using a complete funk package, ie. Spin, Strata and Tonearm, the MK1 funk or MN platter may in fact be a better option.
-
In my situation for example I have spent months comparing a variety of tonearms, arm boards and platter mats to arrive where I am now. I would like to upgrade my platter but at risk of moving too far away from a sound I'm happy (Read: ecstatic) with, don't want to change anything else....
Thoughts?
OMG - I don't think I have the strength. AK and I were discussing this yesterday (how to address questions of this sort - he runs off a really short fuse). Ironically, I think that having followed my advice to "focus on the day job", the day job has now picked up to the point he is happy to do that and not stress himself with what I have suggested to Cagey is the "kit car" market (the day job in this context is FX3 and LSD). But lets debunk a couple of myths.
The acrylic platter of Mk1 funk was not replaced due to cost reasons. For definite. Machining acrylic is not that hard and AK has been doing it one way or another for over 20 years. Kid yourself not that the MN represents advanced plastics development for HiFi either. Both manufacturers found an existing plastic they thought suitable and machined it. The only real issue with machining plastics like this is that they "stress" and have to be left to "de-stress". At Pink Triangle, Sid was on the lathe, and next to Sid were rows of platters like Champagne ageing in "Pupitres" before they could be used. But its not f***** rocket science!
Whether you choose to believe me or not, the reason for strata as I have explained elsewhere was to find the ideal material to put UNDER achromat, once the achromat idea had provided a "Pink Triangle in a mat" solution (I'm not going to repeat the long version of the PT design as an integrated concept - Marco will explode!). If there was a "voicing" element to this, it was to address the relative weakness of Funk/PT designs in bass "solidity" and was primarily for the benefit of his £3000 plus Sapphire flagship turntable, which has also switched from Acrylic to Strata.
Strata makes sense if you have Achromats bubbles dispersing energy, and don't have a delicate suspended sub-chassis which can't take the weight, and a delicate small point inverted bearing which can't take the weight (hence the problems with modding my PT)
It sounds better with an F.X arm because it starts to reach the standard where you can hear the benefits of what an F.X arm can resolve. Funk products tend to work well together because they are all alternative takes on an attempt to make the product do the job its meant to do - reproduce a music signal without adding or taking away. They do it to varying degrees of imperfection, but they are all targeting a "science" solution to essentially not allowing a bad design** to f*** up. So they all have more or less the same type of compatible sound.
If you have concocted some mix of compensating problems - removing one of those items and replacing it with a neutral one will unbalance it.
I can't find a link to the HiFi World review of Saphire but it got 5 globes. Here is a link to Funks website for the flagship product http://www.thefunkfirm.co.uk/turntables/saffire_III.html
If you seriously think Arthur is going to put a new platter on his flagship turntable targetting "best in the market" reviews just because it saves 84p manufacturing costs (and it doesn't - to date it has cost more, although as production settles down I would expect it to be about the same), would you please tell me where I can buy the glue you are sniffing cos I could do with getting high :doh:
And I appreciate this is plumb centre of the Techipedia - so I forgive you, but the really interesting bit was F1 which is I think about to take Munich by storm. :cool:
** I should note in the context of Neils review, or any other context for that matter, that I do not at all consider the Graham arm to be a bad design. Quite the opposite - it is a superb arm, and was the "reference" that AK had in his sights for FXR to better. I can't speak for Neil and his review, but it may be similar to Cagey's "settling in" period with Strata - once you get used to it... :)
Just to be clear, my initial Strata trial was with the 2M Black and Mike New bearing. I think it was a set up issue that I hadn't quite got right. Strata has been sat on my TT for a good few weeks now, and I feel no urge to refit the Mk1 platter.
OMG - I don't think I have the strength.
Was there something about my question that caused you to take umbrage?
Kid yourself not that the MN represents advanced plastics development for HiFi either.
I don't think anything I posted suggested I was kidding myself. I too have spent many years machining plastic.
Both manufacturers found an existing plastic they thought suitable and machined it. The only real issue with machining plastics like this is that they "stress" and have to be left to "de-stress". At Pink Triangle, Sid was on the lathe, and next to Sid were rows of platters like Champagne ageing in "Pupitres" before they could be used. But its not f***** rocket science!
Richard, why the aggression?
Whether you choose to believe me or not... SNIP... Thanks for the clarification.
Now *that* is an insightful and thought-provoking précis! :lol: ;)
Richard, no offence, but one day you'll hopefully learn that, when it comes to telling it as you see it, 'less is more'.
Marco.
Oldpinkman
07-05-2015, 14:09
Was there something about my question that caused you to take umbrage?
I don't think anything I posted suggested I was kidding myself. I too have spent many years machining plastic.
Richard, why the aggression?
Thanks for the clarification.
I'm sorry Adam. That did come over as personally hostile to your post which wasn't the intention. The frustration was at the way a "myth" grows a life of its own. The basic point was simple. Strata was developed for a specific purpose - not for cost saving. There is no black magic - simple physics involved with that purpose. The idea that it was a solution to a Technics cost problem, simply doesn't work when you look at the big picture of Funk product development. It is in the nature of a forum that people speculate "pet ideas" about products which develop their own self perpetuating form. How many times do they have to be challenged? Does it matter? Arthur lost patience a year or so ago, and decided to just "let them get on with it". I understand why.
It was really a continuation of my discussion with AK yesterday regarding a series of "challenging" emails he had received. His question was "what should we do about the fairies at the bottom of the garden?". The "false" insights into how something works or why. It is fine for people to express their individuality - but the lines get blurred with factual errors on a forum.
The problem is, just because something is utter nonsense doesn't stop it driving you into the ground. The classic example was bloody Colloms and slowing under load. This myth - although rubbish at the time and still rubbish, led Pink Triangle to switch to AC motors on all turntables to stay in business and perpetuate the myth with marketing bullshit about what a good thing it was. The irony that the whole world, including Linn - whose AC motor we had to fit - have now changed to vastly superior and more costly DC motors of the type PT was using in the first place, is not lost on us. I recall a favourite email (letter back in those days) that I received at the time I was MD. Something like
" I am writing with my concerns about "dynamic wow" resulting from the use of a DC motor. Although I am unable to hear this myself, my friend who is a musician says he can hear it ...." I so nearly replied "Well listen to your music yourself, and stop getting your friend to listen to it for you!"
There are plenty of other myths. Maybe this place is not for me :cool:
Isn't a myth just a female moth?
I still think that people need to hear what these products do for themselves. They have raised my SL1200 to the next level.
" I am writing with my concerns about "dynamic wow" resulting from the use of a DC motor. Although I am unable to hear this myself, my friend who is a musician says he can hear it ...." I so nearly replied "Well listen to your music yourself, and stop getting your friend to listen to it for you!"
Like your musician friend, I fundamentally believe that 'dynamic wow', on playback, with low-mass belt-driven turntables, is a very real phenomenon. Indeed, considerable personal experience confirms it, at least to my satisfaction anyway.
If you love belt-drives, love them for what they're good at, not what they're not good at! ;)
Marco.
Oldpinkman
07-05-2015, 15:18
Oops. Forgot to finish my post. We agreed - there are a lot of fairies in the world, and we are not in the business of kicking them out of anybody's garden ;)
Enjoy what you've got Cagey. Its very special. But there is no problem in other folk keeping their fairies if they want to :cool:
Or you keeping your "fairies", too! ;)
Marco.
I have never found the fairies, but I do have a reasonable sized garden. Maybe they are hiding in the woods?
There are a couple hiding in Richard's wallet, I believe, copulating with the moths! :eyebrows:
;)
Wonder what the outcome of *that* will be?? :eek:
Marco.
Gordon Steadman
07-05-2015, 15:51
Like your musician friend, I fundamentally believe that 'dynamic wow', on playback, with low-mass belt-driven turntables, is a very real phenomenon. Indeed, considerable personal experience confirms it, at least to my satisfaction anyway.
If you love belt-drives, love them for what they're good at, not what they're not good at! ;)
Marco.
Thats wot people who listen to my music system say. "Wow, thats dynamic" Nobody has ever reversed the words to my knowledge and I have never heard it either. I just keep hearing this music stuff:lol:
Moths loaded with fairy dust?
In all seriousness Marco, you need to take the opportunity to hear what Spin can do when you get the chance. I was gob smacked at the difference.
I think that the platters are a personal choice, depending on what type of presentation you want. This you can tune with mats etc.
Thats wot people who listen to my music system say. "Wow, thats dynamic" Nobody has ever reversed the words to my knowledge and I have never heard it either. I just keep hearing this music stuff:lol:
Yesh, but it's the bootylicious boogieness of your fancee new tonearm wot is outweighing the wow.... :eyebrows:
Marco.
In all seriousness Marco, you need to take the opportunity to hear what Spin can do when you get the chance. I was gob smacked at the difference.
I'd love to, if or when you provide me with that opportunity. In the meantime, however, I'm happy to 'slum it' with the MN! ;)
Marco.
Gordon Steadman
07-05-2015, 16:02
Yesh, but it's the bootylicious boogieness of your fancee new tonearm wot is outweighing the wow.... :eyebrows:
Marco.
Your ears must be good if you can hear that from there. I've dumped all the other arms and the 'spider' is feeling lonely doing 100% of music duties. I haven't listened to a single CD since I fitted our leggy friend to the OL. Haven't even bothered changing the cheap AudioTechnica for a decent cart - too busy.
Good to hear, Gordon. Nothing gives greater satisfaction than when you've made something yourself that's good. Enjoy!
:gig:
Marco.
Don't you think that you have done enough "thread crapping" now Mike?
You have your own threads, so why don't you stick to promoting your products there?
Mike_New
08-05-2015, 05:00
I am terribly sorry if you cannot deal with this.
I was duty bound to let people know that my ETP Platter was being mis-represented.
You see it does not require normalising and Oldpinkman is not across the manufacturing methods I use.
Oldpinkman
08-05-2015, 05:24
Leave him be cagey. Technics mods are his only market and he appears uncomfortable with the idea anyone else can make ones with a valid performance. Arthur's markets and reputation are in the mainstream. I think anyone trying the products can decide for themselves - and discover why the old boy is regarded how he is by mainstream hi-fi. Or maybe not. It's not worth bickering over.
What I do find amusing, given the hard time I gave Arthur about his pants lack of market research and complete ignorance of Mike New, his products, their dominance of this tiny market, and extent of commitment from this forum, is that Mike seems at least as ignorant of funk and Arthur.
As the election is proving there is a bigger world out there. :)
Mike_New
08-05-2015, 06:21
Well said Richard.
I has always puzled me why Authur who's reputation is in "mainstream audio" (what ever that is) would bother to try and sell a few components into a tiny market
populated by the humble users of the old SL1200 machine. He must be falling on hard times.
In actual fact Richard I am more aware of what Athur is doing than you may think.
In fact if he wishes to contact me I might be interested in collaborating with him in supplying my High Precision Nitrided shafts for his own bearings. That way he will be advantaged in the increase in quality of his new turn table.
Ok guys, that's enough bickering! Let's move forward with the sentiments Mike has expressed in his last paragraph.
The reality is that the market for Technics T/T upgrades is tiny, in a worldwide pool. Therefore, let's work together, not against each other, in order to keep the modded Technics alive as a viable choice for the discerning audio enthusiasts, who are aware of what it's capable of, sonically. Ta! :)
Any more evidence of bickering will be removed without further warning.
Marco.
Spectral Morn
08-05-2015, 08:08
I see once again my reporting re what Arthur told me via a phone conversation, before a Strata was sent to me is being questioned by OPM (and by inference AK) in that what I have reported in good faith isn't so. I recall well what I was told and reported it faithfully.
My recollection of that conversation was that AK said that production costs on the mk1 were rising so this prompted a rethink on AKs part re a new platter, the Strata was the result of that rethink. I think this is as ok a reason for revising a product as any other and in no way undermines the new platter.
System synergy will always play a part in how products work, even new products and in some cases older products might gell better than new, even if that might be seen by some, or even the designer as not being the expected ideal. I was not able to compare a mk1 platter to a MN ETP (an early attemp with MCRU fell through and I was originally at the time unable to afford to buy one for the review. Later when I could afford to, he had stopped distributing MN products) or to a Strata but I can envisage a set up where an ETP could be the preferred choice the more synergistic option. As I didn't have one to hand the only item I could refer back to was the mk1 platter, which to my ears was a more synergistic option with the Graham 2.2.
The review was a very complicated one to do and write and the thoughts and experiences are unique to my system, room etc so others milage may vary, a point I always make regarding what I write.
I am a bit surprised that aniki seems so surprised this might be the case, that all Funk components might result in a more wholistic sound than a more varied mix made up of other companies solutions.
Regards Neil
Oldpinkman
08-05-2015, 10:27
Neil I recall your comment and don't contest it. I am certainly not implying any lack of trust for what you say, or impugning your good faith
Arthurs a lovely guy, and an old friend, but I frequently take things he says with a pinch of salt. Getting to look at the books, knowing the background to the material, I am aware that the comment you repeated, was missing the point.
Arthur was looking for a cheaper platter material. He wanted a viable material for use on his cheaper decks (LSD, Flamenca). He tried MDF which was interesting but unusable (damping gone crazy). He already had the idea for strata as a material for speaker cabinet design ideas he had (the "magic bonding agent" has been in a drawer for years). It was too expensive for the cheap decks, but worked impressively on Saphire.
But plain finish unbonded glass worked as an affordable solution on the cheap decks (once he could find somebody capable of cutting a circle the right size, and drilling a hole exactly in the middle - surprisingly hard to find) -where acrylic, as well as being relatively expensive (in a product where pennies matter), did not have the significance it had in an integrated design like a PT - now that achromat was providing a "PT in a mat". As Arthur put it - "looks like Roy Gandy had it right all along". Well - once you have an appropriate mat - not a felt mat. This is partly why AK sells those 2 cheap turntables with a felt mat. It enables him to hit a lower price point, and demonstrates how well Achromat works compared with felt. The "upgrade" to Achromat is an automatic sale every dem. I doubt there is a Flamenca or LSD out there being used without Achromat.
It also allows the decks to "head to head" with their main rival - Rega, and demonstrate the superiority is not down to Achromat alone. Trouble is - it's not easy to get that demo to the punters in the UK, where Rega dominate the dealers. It's a brave dealer will risk offending Rega with a rival product.
Neil is right. Synergy is real. Achromat works best with a solid dead rigid support. Strata provides that. Plain glass does an ok job for a cheaper turntable but does ring a bit. Acrylic is OK but not best, once you have started researching materials. The cost difference between acrylic and strata is negligible, depends on production runs and the engineering sub-contractor used, and has to date been more costly for strata. So much of this cost business depends on production runs. Often the materials cost relative buttons, and the costs are in machining. The machining costs are often tooling and set-up, and quality control - or should I say reject rate.
If you could order 40,000 off on a production run, the costs would tumble...:cool:
I was just browsing a few of my favourite shops looking to see if there were any interestingly priced RCA plugs to make up a cable for Pinky, and happened to notice that MCRU are now selling the Funk bearing. ;)
No sign of the platter there yet though.
I would be interested to hear if anybody else has tried one of the Funk bearings yet?
Well, I have put my money where my mouth is.
The Mike New bearing and Mk1 Funk platter have been sold, and Strata and Spin now take their place on my deck.
I did several back to back tests in my system ( which is now featuring a few new components), and the sound I preferred comes from the Funk combination.
Well, I have put my money where my mouth is.
The Mike New bearing and Mk1 Funk platter have been sold, and Strata and Spin now take their place on my deck.
I did several back to back tests in my system ( which is now featuring a few new components), and the sound I preferred comes from the Funk combination.
Hi Kevin,
Did you by any chance get to try the Funk Strata platter on the Mike New bearing before you sold it?
I'd be interested to know if the two items were technically 'compatible'.
Yes, I tried it.
Being perfectly honest it fitted, but the platter sat slightly higher.
I just didn't think that the fit was the best as it appears that the outer profile of the shaft taper on the Mike New bearing is different from the original Technics bearing and the Spin bearing.
It was not wobbly, I just didn't like the bigger gap under the platter. The fact I preferred Spin made it easier.
Yes, I tried it.
Being perfectly honest it fitted, but the platter sat slightly higher.
I just didn't think that the fit was the best as it appears that the outer profile of the shaft taper on the Mike New bearing is different from the original Technics bearing and the Spin bearing.
It was not wobbly, I just didn't like the bigger gap under the platter. The fact I preferred Spin made it easier.
Excellent. Thanks for the detailed response; just what I was after.
I suspect that the Funk Spin is utilising a genuine Technics spindle so that would make sense!
The spindle used is of the same profile on the taper, but it's a new part.
Epicurus
27-05-2018, 18:09
Hi again everyone, and I've been on a very long hiatus...
I just noticed the Funk bearing and, seeing that the Mike New bearing, which is now out of production, was required for those of us who wanted to use a Tenuto or Rubato mat, I can't help wondering if it can handle it. Could anyone shed any light into this?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.