Alternative platters ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

The plan is for all three platters (Funk MK I and MKII, plus an MN ETP) to be at Martin's gaff, sometime before Christmas, where relevant comparisons will be made in his system, using both my T/T and his, and reported in full on the forum.

---

I now have the Funk Mk. II hub and platter and will be setting it up for listening tonight when I get home. When I relate my findings, everything I say will be 'IMO' ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YNWaN

Yes, I know I can David - the question was rhetorical; but you still haven't clarified what platters are available. You sell his FTP platter, Mike doesn't list it but does list an aluminium and copper one. He also shows, but doesn't otherwise mention, a platter with inserts. The OP question was about what platter options are there - so what platter options does he do?

1/ Funk Mk1 = solid acrylic platter?
2/ Funk Mk2 = Achromat and glass laminate platter?
3/ Just put an Achromat on it
4/ Put an acrylic mat on it
5/ put a copper mat on it
6/ Mike New FTP platter
7/ Mike new aluminium and copper platter
8/ Something else he makes?
______________

There is absolutely nothing wrong with performing measurements. I'm not suggesting that one should be a slave to such measurements but they are a useful tool that should be utilised where possible. Platter speed accuracy and rotational constancy is one area that can be measured.

---

There is a mike new platter on my website Mark, its made from an engineering thermoplastic hence ETP, its for sale via the UK so no import duty, vat or parcelforce handling fee to pay.

There is a copper version but I think Mike has stopped making it, he may advise better.

There is also the ETP platter with brass inserts which I do not list on my site "yet"

Hope that helps

P.S You can put the record straight onto the surface of Mike's platter or use a mat, I recommend the Oyaide BR-12

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I appreciate no-one has sent a bearing back. That implies to me it is at least as good as the exisiting bearing at doing the job it is intended to do, but that is all I glean from it. After going to the trouble of fitting it you would only return it if it actually made things worse. I'd be surprised if it did not improve wow, flutter and noise, or at least one of those parameters. It's the fact that we don't know if it does or not because no-one has measured this when it should have been the first thing done before offering it up for sale.

---

There is such thing as mechanical appreciation, which I've said before. You only have to hold the Technics and Mike New bearings in your hand, rotate them, feel the play, look at the housings and you KNOW the MN bearing is going to be better at its job. Listening to them only confirms that initial perception.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

I now have the Funk Mk. II hub and platter and will be setting it up for listening tonight when I get home. When I relate my findings, everything I say will be 'IMO' ;)

---

Cool - I look forward to it. Btw, have a look through your diary for which Saturday would suit in late November/early December, and we'll sort out a sesh. Hopefully, we'll also have an ETP platter to play with by then! :gig:

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synsei

An honest to goodness question Martin, if via a demonstration you heard for yourself the improvement the MN bearing can bring to a Techie would you still require a spec sheet?

---

In a back to back demo in my own system, 2 identical decks except for the bearing, if I heard a very noticeable improvement straight away then, no, I would not need a spec sheet. Even if it was in an unfamiliar system if the improvement was obvious then I would certainly buy one. You have to appreciate that there is no way I would attempt to fit this myself, which means carting the deck down to the pro shop, waiting a week or so for them to get round to it, collecting the deck, then trying to remember what the deck sounded like pre-modified, then finally, if I decided I didn't think it worth the money, reversing the whole process. Much easier just to look at the measurements.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

In a back to back demo in my own system, 2 identical decks except for the bearing, if I heard a very noticeable improvement straight away then, no, I would not need a spec sheet. Even if it was in an unfamiliar system if the improvement was obvious then I would certainly buy one. You have to appreciate that there is no way I would attempt to fit this myself, which means carting the deck down to the pro shop, waiting a week or so for them to get round to it, collecting the deck, then trying to remember what the deck sounded like pre-modified, then finally, if I decided I didn't think it worth the money, reversing the whole process. Much easier just to look at the measurements.

---

Having performed a bearing replacement myself (VA bearing) I can tell you with confidence that it is a doddle to do. If I can do it anyone can... :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

In a back to back demo in my own system, 2 identical decks except for the bearing, if I heard a very noticeable improvement straight away then, no, I would not need a spec sheet. Even if it was in an unfamiliar system if the improvement was obvious then I would certainly buy one. You have to appreciate that there is no way I would attempt to fit this myself, which means carting the deck down to the pro shop, waiting a week or so for them to get round to it, collecting the deck, then trying to remember what the deck sounded like pre-modified, then finally, if I decided I didn't think it worth the money, reversing the whole process. Much easier just to look at the measurements.

---

Martin, I'm sure that if it came to it, there would be a few folk here on AoS (some perhaps not too far from you), with the necessary ability to fit an MN bearing for you to your T/T, so don't let that be a reason to stop you from upgrading your stock bearing :)

As they say: 'where there's a will, there's a way' ;)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

There is such thing as mechanical appreciation, which I've said before. You only have to hold the Technics and Mike New bearings in your hand, rotate them, feel the play, look at the housings and you KNOW the MN bearing is going to be better at its job. Listening to them only confirms that initial perception.

---

That indeed is the reality... :)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

There is such thing as mechanical appreciation, which I've said before. You only have to hold the Technics and Mike New bearings in your hand, rotate them, feel the play, look at the housings and you KNOW the MN bearing is going to be better at its job. Listening to them only confirms that initial perception.

---

If an item is already doing 100% of the job it is required to do then engineering it some more is a waste of time and money. I'm not suggesting that is the case here but that is a principle that engineers operate on. So although I understand your point it is not a good enough reason alone to make me buy one. I seem to recall that Simon SQ did some measurements on his deck and an SL1200 so if he can do it I don't see what the big stumbling block is here. As I pointed out on another thread, measurements demonstrating the superiority of the replacement bearing would actually increase sales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

After going to the trouble of fitting it you would only return it if it actually made things worse.

---

No offence, but at £445 I would expect most people to return it if it didn't make for a significant improvement in percieved sound quality.
It only takes a few minutes to swap bearings so why would someone part with that amount of cash if they find it offers no improvement?