Funk SL-1200 Platter & Arm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by indus

Thank you.

On the surface of it the FF platter does seem to make more sense as it keeps mass closer to that of the original

---

And that is exactly the point where I feel the MN-copper-alli-platter has a clear advantage over the FF-platter (and the original!). Higher mass simply means more rotational stability = rhythmic security.
The original platter (perfectly damped with an SDS isoplatmat) topped off with a Timestep/Herbie's mat was clearly inferior to the MN-copper-alli-platter also topped off with the TS/Herbie's. The Boston Audio mat 1 is even better (never tried an Achromat because I dont like "plastic" on my TT).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazzBones

I guess... its the old different strokes for different blokes thing:rolleyes:

---

...and that's what I meant with my comment :)
Marco obviously prefers the FF platter, but that's Marco's preference.

I realise that I've been remiss by not posting my conclusive thoughts on the Funk platter, and how it compares with the MN aluminium one, in my system.

The problem is that there just aren't enough hours in the day to address everything that I need to do on here...

Anyway, I'll collate my thoughts over the weekend and post them here for the perusal of everyone interested :cool:

Marco.

Hi Michael,

Quote:

---

And that is exactly the point where I feel the MN-copper-alli-platter has a clear advantage over the FF-platter (and the original!). Higher mass simply means more rotational stability = rhythmic security.

---

Yes, but it's not as simple as that (if only it were). There are other, equally important, things to consider when using a high-mass platter on an SL-1200/1210; the effect of which I've heard all too clearly with my own ears.

I'll tackle this matter in more detail later :)

Marco.

:popcorn:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

I realise that I've been remiss by not posting my conclusive thoughts on the Funk platter, and how it compares with the MN aluminium one, in my system.

The problem is that there just aren't enough hours in the day to address everything that I need to do on here...

Anyway, I'll collate my thoughts over the weekend and post them here for the perusal of everyone interested :cool:

Marco.

---

and maybe collate a few more about those awesome power cords you have before DP reviews them very soon :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krugdoktor

And that is exactly the point where I feel the MN-copper-alli-platter has a clear advantage over the FF-platter (and the original!). Higher mass simply means more rotational stability = rhythmic security.
The original platter (perfectly damped with an SDS isoplatmat) topped off with a Timestep/Herbie's mat was clearly inferior to the MN-copper-alli-platter also topped off with the TS/Herbie's. The Boston Audio mat 1 is even better (never tried an Achromat because I dont like "plastic" on my TT).

---

I'll have a stab at this.

In a belt drive TT system maybe but DD doesn't work like that , if you put a high mass platter on the 1200 it will still turn at the correct speed but the PLL system is not able to react with the same instantaneous speed with respect to any changes in load , which is critical to any direct drive turntable system .

Indeed - and I've heard the effect of that very clearly. It was most obvious to my ears when I was swapping between the high-mass MN aluminium platter, and the lighter (acrylic) Funk one.

However, in some systems, it may be heard as a positive, depending on the sonic signature of the system in question, and how the user likes her or her music presented. It would be interesting to hear Mike's thoughts on how he perceives the sonic presentation of both of his platters, when used on his own SL-1210.

For me, I prefer the lighter, quicker, more rhythmically adroit, sound of the Funk platter (I haven't heard Mike's 'Engineering Thermo Plastic', platter), in the context of how I've modified my T/T, particularly as my system is in no way short of bass weight or 'heft'.

The 'tune-playing' aspect of music reproduction is also very important to me, and there the Funk platter trumps the MN aluminium one - as I've said, in the context of my particular system.

However, more on this later! :cool:

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Indeed - and I've heard the effect of that very clearly. It was most obvious to my ears when I was swapping between the high-mass MN aluminium platter, and the lighter (acrylic) Funk one.

However, in some systems, it may be heard as a positive, depending on the sonic signature of the system in question, and how the user likes her or her music presented. It would be interesting to hear Mike's thoughts on how he perceives the sonic presentation of both of his platters, when used on his own SL-1210.

For me, I prefer the lighter, quicker, sound of the Funk platter (I haven't heard Mike's 'Engineering Thermo Plastic', platter), in the context of how I've modified my T/T, particularly as my system is in no way short of bass weight or 'heft'.

The 'tune-playing' aspect of music reproduction is also very important to me, and there the Funk platter trumps the MN aluminium one, in the context of my system.

Like I said, however, more on this later! :cool:

Marco.

---

I agree Marco , quite right and I can imagine some listeners preferring a high mass platter, but like your goodself I suspect I would like the FF platter , I did listen to it very briefly last year at the show , very good indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris@panteg

I'll have a stab at this.

In a belt drive TT system maybe but DD doesn't work like that , if you put a high mass platter on the 1200 it will still turn at the correct speed but the PLL system is not able to react with the same instantaneous speed with respect to any changes in load , which is critical to any direct drive turntable system .

---

All I can say is that the "tune playing ability" and the timing were massively improved when I switched from the original platter which was perfectly damped by the SDS isoplatmat (worked amazingly well despite being quite light) to the MN-platter.
My Techy with MN bearing, MN platter, SME V and EMT JSD6 is the best thing I've ever had (Technics Q2, Audio Linear 4001, Ariston RD 40, Sondek, Well Tempered Reference, Thorens TD 738 were the other ones).
Maybe there is some synergy in my system because the QUAD 57 are not exactly bass monsters and the bass was also improved by the MN platter which could be too much for other speakers?
The Thorens TD 738 is more or less identical to an EMT 938 and the DD-EMT's rely on a very powerful motor combined with a very light platter so the resulting sound should be ideal but I can assure you it wasn't! It was far from bad (and a whole lot better than the diverse rubber-banders) but still the Techy is the one which makes me dance:)
Michael