Mike New Platter for Technics SL-1210

What I received: a composite aluminium/brass (?) heavy platter with neoprene (?) o-ring around a groove in the outer rim. Mike forgot to include two 8mm bolts to hold the platter while installing it but I had no trouble in sourcing a couple from work. These will be included in future shipments.

Setting up is straightforward provided you read the instructions carefully and TAKE YOUR TIME. Removing the magnet ring from the Technics platter and installing it onto the MN platter - ensuring correct alignment - takes only a few minutes but you need to heed the warnings about the aluminium material and not over-tightening any of the bolts. This heavy platter is not something you want to be dangling over the exposed circuit or lovely plinth without taking care to keep your balance and looking through the hole while lowering it down gently.

Finish is not in the SME category but the quality of engineering looks very good and the fit, roundness and accuracy of the centre taper are as perfect as the eye can see. The combination of MN bearing and platter fit tightly (don't forget the Vaseline) and sit level within the plinth. Without the outer strobe, it gives the deck an esoteric air and makes it look a little different from anything else out there. The L-shaped cut on the outer edge makes it easier to grip LPs than the slope of the Technics platter.

The top surface of the MN platter ends up close in height to that of the Technics platter so only small VTA adjustments will be necessary. Unfortunately my Dynavector arm will not go low enough to achieve correct VTA with just the platter and Herbies mat so I still need to use my Copper mat between the two. However, since this is a constant in my system it means that any differences I hear are purely due to the new platter itself.

What I am hearing from the off are three areas of improvement: deeper tighter bass, greater sense of soundstage and the space of the recording venue, and very fine detail in the high midrange. Those who know my system will appreciate that bass extension and power are not in short supply and it's important that everything does not become overblown. The extension and authority of this new combo are impressive, moving air and punching my chest without any tendency to bloat or excess. If there's no bass, there's no bass, simple as that. Good dynamic recordings sound magnificent and are the equal of my Ayre SACD player for bass and slam, and that's a compliment. The sense of recording space and atmosphere are amazing, making recordings sound even more different from each other. It's easier to hear into the mix but also easier to spot engineered sound or tape repairs on older cuts. I am also hearing some extreme fine detail in the mix, some tinklings and instrumental contributions that I've not heard before.

I am struck by the clean, low distortion transcription of all the records I have played so far. There is a sense of structural solidity that gets the best out of the system's strengths. Timing is extraordinary, the best I have yet achieved. I dare say my system's sound is not for everyone, but in many ways the tonal quality of LP and CD replay are similar and, in my mind at least, make arguments about LP versus CD redundant. Both sound superb and there is no jarring when switching from one to the other.

All I can say is well done, Mike! I believe there are a few of his platters in use around the world now and many more of his bearings, and I hope he is successful in manufacturing them in production quantities. I hope to acquire a Timestep HE PSU when Dave has them ready to sell, which should suit the new platter even more.

Equipment used: Dynavector DV507-II arm with AT-33PTG cartridge running through a Bob's Devices CineMag step-up transformer into a Whest PS.30R balanced phono preamp. Other Technics mods: Mike New bearing (mandatory for the platter), Timestep PSU, motor dynamics mod, Isonoe feet, Bruil weight. I have adjusted the brake potentiometer on the main PCB to stop the platter pretty quickly. Start-up time remains excellent.


http://www.mtc.me.uk/images/Technics%20MN%20Platter.jpg

Hi Martin,

I've got Mark Grant round for a sesh, so don't have the time to comment too much at the moment, but your review is very interesting indeed.....

I'll pop a few thoughts on later. However, your deck now looks so gorgeously over the top in an industrial chic sense!! :respect:

Laters,
Marco.

It looks nice Martin
Just a quick question that you may not be able to answer! I don't understand why the lip on the outer edge of the platter needs to be so pronounced. OK so I see why you'd want the record rim to be easy enough to grip, so the top diameter needs to be that dimension & the bottom diameter is that size so as not to have a great big gap there where the original platter was angled out to.
But....if extra mass is a desirable thing here, why remove so much metal from the platter edge where it does the most work? Presumably when you buy the platter, your also paying for the metal that's removed just as much as the metal that's left in the final product. I'd just have thought a higher step would be preferable.
Any thoughts?

It suits the Dynavector a treat, by the way!

Good observation, Chris. However, the platter is seriously heavy and doesn't need any more inertia than it already has. There's also the o-ring, probably better seated as it is rather than jutting into an area that's normally vacant.

I think Marco got it right - industrial chic :)

Great job Martin lad it moved things forward

Hello Chris,
The reason I have designed the outer rim profile the way I have, is so that the Peripheral Damping Ring (which is indeed an “O” ring of special silicon) looks aesthetically pleasing at the point where it is required for effective damping. All Alluminium platters of this size will ring at a specific frequency, and my solution to this problem is, I believe, rather elegant technically. You are correct about the outer diameter being set to come out to the edge of the chassis/plinth. If you look carefully at Martin’s very well focused image, you can just about discern where the platter lower edge finishes.

The main diameter of the platter top surface is set at just under 300 to allow for the bulge at the edge of the record.

. The whole design philosophy was predicated on trying to get the “centre of gravity” as low down on the bearing as possible, consistent with not fowling the componentry on the main drive PCB.
This is not as easy as it looks!! Because there are some critical issues concerning the positional location of the motor and coil assemblies, if the excellent characteristics of the direct drive system are not to be spoiled. I do believe however that the effort I put into this has paid off.

I am now in the position of being able to accept some variations in design parameters on a per customer basis.
The major ones being: Do you require a center relief for the record label to be machined into the top surface?
What diameter do you want the top surface to be? 300 or 296mm
I have observed that these two options are the most contentious when talking about platters!!! So now, as the customer, you can decide!!
Most people will probably choose to use some kind of mat on top, so the options do become somewhat academic.

I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.

As an aside, I have come up with a devastatingly easy way to lift up the total bearing and motor assembly by 6mm. this provides for a much easier way for people to install the tone arm of their choice and to use heavier material for the armboard. It also greatly improves the bearing mounting rigidity.
I do not want to move off topic with this, so I will supply details later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike_New

I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.

---

Please could you send mine on? ;)

Quote:

---

As an aside, I have come up with a devastatingly easy way to lift up the total bearing and motor assembly by 6mm. this provides for a much easier way for people to install the tone arm of their choice and to use heavier material for the armboard. It also greatly improves the bearing mounting rigidity.

---

Very interested in this Mike, when you're ready.

I have played with my arm mounting a little more and have just created enough additional lowering to be able to remove the copper mat. So now I am using the MN platter with just the Herbies mat on top. I cannot detect any sound quality change from before so I conclude that the MN platter is doing a superb job when compared with the Technics original, regardless of mats used.

Mike,
Thanks for answering my question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike_New

I kinda liked Chris’s observation about paying for the metal I machine away.. In the interests of customer satisfaction, I can collect the “swarf” and include it with the platter if you wish.

---

My comment was just a result of a little experience in the sawmilling trade years ago & I'm glad it wasn't taken as a criticism.

Cheers

Thankyou Martin for a most excellent and informative review , looking great.

Chris made an interesting point about the rim of the platter ' its useful to point out ! that with DD you don't really need high mass at the rim as in belt drive's , the mass is concentrated more around the rotor magnet , that's my understanding of it anyway though its more complicated than that, of course.