Alternative platters ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NRG

At least with cars, measurements are offered even if you don't base your buying criteria on them or place any importance on them...many after market car performance parts have measurements to back up the claims as well but HiFi? No, you must believe and trust your ears, no alternative criteria is offered.

---

What is the car measurement for engine responsiveness? Or for steering feel? For comfort of the driving position? There are lots of qualitative assessments where a measurement to produce a number is just not possible.

The reason i mentioned the speed thing with a heavier platter was that i was around at a noted forum members last week. He has a lovely set-up, much modded 1210, nice arm and cart, external power supply internal mods and an aftermarket platter of the metal variety. His deck sounded great, 33 1/3 sounded awesome, with bass timbre to die for (#jealous) but he couldn't spin a record up a 45 rpm for love nor money, not even close it was 44rpm or even slower (He's removed the slider). |So I was wondering if the designers of these things consider the 'whole' or just the part they work on. Because increasing the slider just increases the speed, it doesn't alter the compensation speed of the feedback loop as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oldpinkman

He's an influential moderator on the forum, described to me by Arthur as "Marco's No2"? :scratch:

---

No way! All moderators are equal, belonging to the same workers' collective and getting paid the same . . . err, hang on :doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YNWaN

Yes, also my thoughts. The compensation circuit of the 1200/1210 does not implement fuzzy logic and does not factor in the rotating inertia of the platter; it assumes zero inertia and instant response, hence the very light standard platter with minimal peripheral mass.
________________

---

Just out of interest was fuzzy logic technology around when the 1210 was designed so that platter inertia could be corrected. Sorry if I appear ignorant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

The fact that Martin sometimes benefits from that privilege is more a testament to the fact that he's known as a serious buyer (and someone with a reasonable disposable income), than his status here as a moderator.

---

For sure - I was working with vendors long before I became a mod here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sq225917

His deck sounded great, 33 1/3 sounded awesome, with bass timbre to die for (#jealous) but he couldn't spin a record up a 45 rpm for love nor money

---

That was a problem I found with a heavy metal platter, the fact that spinning at 45rpm really pushed the circuit's compensation to the limit. I could hear the 'warble' even after I removed the Sound Hi-Fi motor dynamics mod. For my ears, platters that weigh about the same as the Technics original are best suited to the circuit (strictly, have the same rotational momentum).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sq225917

The reason i mentioned the speed thing with a heavier platter was that i was around at a noted forum members last week. He has a lovely set-up, much modded 1210, nice arm and cart, external power supply internal mods and an aftermarket platter of the metal variety. His deck sounded great, 33 1/3 sounded awesome, with bass timbre to die for (#jealous)...

---

Most interesting, Simon. Maybe you can now see (hear) what all the fuss is about! ;)

So who was this "noted forum member" - surely he's not that shy (and would actually be quite proud of your assessment of his turntable)!!

Quote:

---

...but he couldn't spin a record up a 45 rpm for love nor money, not even close it was 44rpm or even slower (He's removed the slider). |So I was wondering if the designers of these things consider the 'whole' or just the part they work on. Because increasing the slider just increases the speed, it doesn't alter the compensation speed of the feedback loop as well.

---

A most astute and valid observation. It's one of the reasons why I abandoned the high-mass platter approach and went for the much lower-mass Funk (MK I) platter, as what you're describing became sonically obvious to me when making the comparison.

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

That was a problem I found with a heavy metal platter, the fact that spinning at 45rpm really pushed the circuit's compensation to the limit. I could hear the 'warble' even after I removed the Sound Hi-Fi motor dynamics mod. For my ears, platters that weight about the same as the Technics original are best suited to the circuit (strictly, have the same rotational momentum).

---

Ditto! :)

So where does the (heavier) MKII Funk platter sit within that theory? ;)

Marco.

Thats my deck that needs viagra to get it upto 45rpm! To be fair I dont actually play 45's or 12"'s, and I must admit that whilst the pitch stabiliser has been removed it can easily be replaced. I did do a little tinkering with the 35/45 RPM selector when I got rid of the strobe light and several LED's that I thought I didnt need. This was when I went through a process of getting rid of everything off the PCB and any any additional "garments" that I thought were surplus to requirement. The 1210's party trick is copious bass which is perfect for my system and may give credence to the theory of extra mass giving extra bass, this is useful for the music genre's that I prefer. I dont think I can be arsed buying another platter, I like what I've got. I'm finding I'm spending more time with my valve system at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by REXTON

Just out of interest was fuzzy logic technology around when the 1210 was designed so that platter inertia could be corrected. Sorry if I appear ignorant.

---

Technically it was, but it wasn't being used in contexts such as this as, essentially, it needed a programmed processor to be integrated, ie. a separate computing element..