Alternative platters ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YNWaN

Yeah, the monster motor, is there to better achieve the theoretical instant variation in speed, to better overcome inertia of the platter, not to overcome extra stresses placed on the system.

---

...and in broadcast applications in radio stations, to make start-up times even faster for broadcasters, and thus near-instantaneous! Start-up speed there is critical.

The huge motor/lightweight platter concept is also applied with great success on EMTs. I guess that there was something in it after all (with idlers and D/Ds, that is)... ;)

Marco.

Any low mass platter will start up quickly because it has low inertia; that doesn't inherently make it better though, that depends on the drive system as a whole.

Indeed, and that is what I was alluding to in the last sentence of my previous post. This is essentially an idler and D/D thing. The opposite (high-mass platter route) can happily apply when strings or belts are in the equation, and an absence of complicated loop speed compensation circuitry.

In fact, some of the best belt/string-driven T/Ts I've heard have featured the use of truly MASSIVE platters. Oddly those, to my ears, have also sounded most like a good D/D or idler (in terms of majoring on rock-solid stability and bass authority)...... ;)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synsei

Mike's website only needs updating and considering he is a one man band I am sure he can be forgiven for prioritizing production ;)

---

Folks,
As many of you already know but I will repeat it: I have not been able to contact the guy who put my website together for the last 12 months or more.
However out of the blue he emailed 2 days ago saying all my emails went into his 'junk folder', maybe he's trying to tell me something.
I do not have independant control for editing my website which must be corrected to the advantage of all.
I hope I can get it sorted soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike_New

Folks,
As many of you already know but I will repeat it: I have not been able to contact the guy who put my website together for the last 12 months or more.
However out of the blue he emailed 2 days ago saying all my emails went into his 'junk folder', maybe he's trying to tell me something.
I do not have independant control for editing my website which must be corrected to the advantage of all.
I hope I can get it sorted soon.

---

MIKE

Quick GET his phone number !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sq225917

Rexton's deck just couldn't reach 45, not even close. I imagine there's a voltage limit in the circuit some where that can be overidden to fix this, though the compensation loop speed will still be an issue. Heavy platters are probably not the 'ideal' for these decks as Marco has already noted. Which probably explains why even the Sp10 MK3 came with a light platter despite its monster motor.

---

The platter on an SP10 MK 3 weighs 10 kg , the motor and control circuitry is a different ball game to the 1200 of course .

I tried to point out some time ago that a high mass platter doesn't work on a 1200 , the compensation circuitry is set in stone .

[QUOTE=chris@panteg;497388]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sq225917

Rexton's deck just couldn't reach 45, not even close. I imagine there's a voltage limit in the circuit some where that can be overidden to fix this, though the compensation loop speed will still be an issue. Heavy platters are probably not the 'ideal' for these decks as Marco has already noted. Which probably explains why even the Sp10 MK3 came with a light platter despite its monster motor.[/QUOT


I tried to point out some time ago that a high mass platter doesn't work on a 1200 , the compensation circuitry is set in stone .

---

Why is it set in stone?? the RC network around the op-amps.
can be changed.
If you remember some 6-8 monthe ago I put forward the notion that a switchable arangement could be provided for this purpose, in conjunction with the comments and help from a guy in Holland, if I recall. But no one seemed to be interested.

Something else that's just crossed my mind about Andrew's set-up, which Simon heard and loved... Andy, did you have the ST-80SE plummed in at the time? :)

Marco.

What do you think Simon took round Marco... ;).

Lol - the Paradise... Thing is, did he get a listen to Andy's SUT, in conjunction with his own phono stage, while he was there? Specifically what I'm getting at here is Andy's own phono stage used directly in MC mode, versus MM mode with his SUT, if such a thing is possible in his set up.

If so, it'll hopefully have given Simon an inkling as to why Andy chooses to use an SUT, and why, in some circumstances, it improves matters.

Marco.