The Mike New ETP Platter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Having now taken delivery of the Clearaudio Harmonicer mat, and having achieved some rather interesting results with it, I'd just like to return briefly to Richard's earlier comment:



Do you mean the "very thick record" or the energy from the stylus, or both? :)

Marco.

---

Sorry Marco

Distracted by tax returns. Have just finished writing my "countdown to 31 Jan" list! Before the pitchfork wielders jump on me, I accept I am regurgitating the TT design theory Arthur taught me many years ago. And there will be Shrodigers cat lurking somewhere.

"The energy from the stylus" in this context means "waste energy". Wanted energy is the kinetic energy of the groove being whizzed past the stylus and wiggling it. In a perfect world, all of that would be uniformly transferred to the generator magnet or coils, and converted to electrical energy and the gain needed on phono stage would be much lower! In practice of course much of it isn't, and it's what the system does with that which affects the sound because it causes stylus wiggles in addition to the ones meant by the record groove, or causes the generator block not to remain "still" relative to the moving stylus.

I meant the "impedance match platter" makes a "very thick record". A thick record will absorb some of the energy, and reflect less back than a thin record on a "reflective" surface (metal platter, felt mat etc) but somebody or others law says energy cannot be created or lost, only converted from one form to another. That's going to be heat here. So the PT design idea was that energy "gets away" from the record surface, into the thick platter, and then passes down the bearing into the subchassis, where it is dispersed (as is the energy passing from the arm tube, assuming good arm bearings, via the same "tight" coupling to the subchassis. (Quite a lot of the energy not converted into electrical energy by the cartridge generator ends up in the arm, and a lot of it is also "dispersed" as acoustic energy - "needle talk". Bloody stuffs going everywhere.)

The achromat idea is that the mat has the impedance match, but does more of the energy dispersal itself (the "little bubbles"). And does it in a thinner material that can be used as a mat, rather than requiring a substantial TT mod like a platter change - and so fits many TT's.

Of course - the big deal is not necessarily getting rid of the energy (anywhere in the system - that is effectively damping) its making sure that whatever happens to it happens the same for all frequencies and not more for some and less for others. That's the idea with the impedance match (and arm tube resonances).

This could of course all be the senile ramblings of an old fart, but I don't have to look over my shoulder for AK correcting me atm since he's off-forum. :lol:

As noted previously, AK now has the view that dealing with energy is only part of it - you also need a surface which is rigid, and doesn't contribute further "colour" by ringing (plastic is pretty good for not ringing - not so hot for rigid).

If it matters, and you wanted his views, I should be seeing him Friday, but he's in a foul mood ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

It's not strictly necessary if every upgrade you applied made a positive improvement. You DID check that it sounded better afterwards? ;)

---

You wouldn't spend £695 on a new platter then keep it if it sounded the same or worse now would you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mains Cables R Us

You wouldn't spend £695 on a new platter then keep it if it sounded the same or worse now would you!

---

Or indeed any of the mods. My point is, the stock deck long ago receded into memory and is no longer relevant to the sound I now achieve.

Hi Richard,

Thanks for your thoughts on the matter. You've confirmed what I thought you were referring to. This sums it up best (and is cemented by the bit in bold):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldpinkman

I meant the "impedance match platter" makes a "very thick record". A thick record will absorb some of the energy, and reflect less back than a thin record on a "reflective" surface (metal platter, felt mat etc) but somebody or others law says energy cannot be created or lost, only converted from one form to another. That's going to be heat here. So the PT design idea was that energy "gets away" from the record surface, into the thick platter, and then passes down the bearing into the subchassis, where it is dispersed (as is the energy passing from the arm tube, assuming good arm bearings, via the same "tight" coupling to the subchassis. (Quite a lot of the energy not converted into electrical energy by the cartridge generator ends up in the arm, and a lot of it is also "dispersed" as acoustic energy - "needle talk". Bloody stuffs going everywhere.)

The achromat idea is that the mat has the impedance match, but does more of the energy dispersal itself (the "little bubbles").)

---

From the Funk website (in reference to the Achromat):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Funk website

The stylus accelerates at up to 20,000g. This means your groove wall is not so much caressed but more akin to being pummelled by a road hammer creating travelling shock waves.
When there is a material change (the record sitting on a felt mat, say, these waves are reflected and
energy reflected from the bottom of the record (a mere 2mm thick) is sensed by the stylus and heard as colouration.

Can we prevent his reflection?

Achromat is the ideal material to absorb energy from the record. There is no better.

But it is only 3-5mm thick and this is where the science kicks in.
Millions of tiny bubbles within create complex pathways and that's where the energy gets lost as heat.

---

So if the Achromat is the "ideal material to absorb energy from the record" (providing the energy dispersal), as you've mentioned, stated also by Arthur, and personal experience appears to confirm this, then why not combine it with a mat which has identical impedance characteristics to the record (vinyl) itself, thus achieving a notional 'perfect' combination? This is where the Clearaudio Harmonicer mat comes in....

It's early days yet, but my initial findings with this combination (in conjunction with the Funk MKI platter) are extremely positive, producing the most lifelike and musically convincing sound I've heard yet from my T/T - and with minimal outlay! Using the Achromat on its own, in comparison, compresses midrange information and casts a veil over proceedings, all of which is removed when the Harmonicer enters the equation. The Achromat on its own is still very good, but combined with the Clearaudio Harmonicer, the results are simply amazing!!

My experiences here lead me to strongly suspect that many of the benefits Martin reported with the ETP platter, after changing his Achromat/Funk MKI platter combo for one, were down not just to the ETP itself, but perhaps just as significantly to the removal of the Achromat and the providing of records with a more ideal impedance match, due to the fundamental influence, in that respect, of the ETP. This also makes the prospect of using a Delrin/ETP mat potentially rather exciting, especially for those who can't afford to shell out for a full ETP platter.

It'll therefore be very interesting making some proper comparisons when I obtain my own ETP platter for evaluation, and also demonstrating to Martin what I've found with the Harmonicer/Achromat/Funk MKI platter combination when I go to his place in December.

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by prestonchipfryer

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rega-Turnt...item2ecaa985dd


Like this? Not 20 quid though.

---

Yes, like that - but less expensive...

Just a quick mention for the Michell Record clamp, which is also made from Delrin. Have you tried one with the Harmonicer Marco? They may compliment one another ;)

Hi Dave,

You could be right, however, I've purloined a Clearaudio Clever Clamp (from a mate, who like you is clearing out his T/T paraphernalia and going all-digital), and as expected I guess, this works really well, in terms of gently clamping records to the Harmonicer/Achromat combo, providing the best interface I've heard so far between record and platter.

I'm also finding that the virtual complete removal of any mass, provided by a record weight (as the Clever Clamp weighs next to nothing), is a distinct sonic advantage with the Technics...

Here's the little chap in question: http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/7621/8jze.jpg

You Tube video, here:





Marco.

Good luck with that marco. You know what they say. The proof is in the pudding. Or the ears are the final arbiter. Watch out for cats ;)

Indeed, I came across the Clever Clamp a while back when I was looking for a clamp for my TD160 but I just couldn't bring myself to buy one, it looks like something you might find in a pound shop :eyebrows: I am probably doing the gadget a huge disservice, and I know I am going to be pilloried for typing what I have, but I just can't help the way I feel about it... Anyway, such things aren't going to be a bother for me from now on so I will butt out now... :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldpinkman

Good luck with that marco. You know what they say. The proof is in the pudding. Or the ears are the final arbiter. Watch out for cats ;)

---

Lol... The thing is, I'm loathe to get rid of a perfectly good platter, and one which I've enjoyed listening to music with over the last year (and which I spent a great deal of time auditioning and ensuring that it was right for the job) [the Funk MKI] *if* the issue Martin and others have identified is simply (or mainly) down to the Achromat, which can be resolved by the introduction of the Clearaudio Harmonicer.

Now, as of yet, I'm not saying that's the case, as I haven't heard an ETP platter on my T/T. If despite all that, the ETP is still 'no brainer' better, then I will buy one and let the Funk go, but I'm certainly going to need a *very* compelling reason for doing so (as I simply don't dispose of carefully chosen equipment, willy-nilly)! :)

Marco.