Supporting the SL-1210

I have been visiting my (cr@p) woodworking skills to produce a heavy wooden baseboard, using a 38mm thick oak worktop offcut, to support the Techy. I am expecting some Foculpods from eBay to provide some isolation for this board, but nothing has arrived, so some cut squash balls have to suffice for now. The Techy is supported by three upwards pointed Stillpoints, which sit nicely in three places underneath where the alloy chassis is directly accessible (screw mounting points, without the screws). I hope that makes sense, but the pictures below should be clearer.

Anyway, the idea is to support the Techy without interference from any rubbery layers, and support it on a nice massy platform, itself isolated from external vibration.

I think it works - there is a "calmness" to the sound which is immediately noticeable. Also, bass weight appears to have reduced, but definition of bass notes is much better. I need to do much more listening, but if its playing of "Life on Mars" is anything to go by, this is something worth developing.

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...0/DSCF0541.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...0/DSCF0542.jpg

Ah, this should be interesting.

I went straight from the stock Techie feet to 2 inch sorbothane hemispheres off eBay (<£15 from The Missing Link folks, me being a cheapskate! :eyebrows:).

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...hanefooter.jpg

An excellent sonic upgrade bringing a much better focussed soundstage and more naturally presented detail, but I suspect there is much more to be had. And they have the aesthetic advantage that they fit precisely in the footer sockets of the Techie and so look made for the job.

I do believe that many do favour solid feet and support for the Techie.
I will be most interested in folks' experiences here.

Two very different solutions to the same problem.

I definately noticed a big imporovement when I binned the stock feet for Dave C's 'squidgy' feet and place the Techie on a proper Target wall shelf. The shelf itself uses a thin-ish sheet of glass which is decoupled from the metal frame by four squashy rubber buttons.

I've not tried any other alternatives, but possible options would be a slate slab to replace the glass and that hard contact points (such as Stillpoints etc) between the shelf frame and slab and/or the slab and Techie itself.

I'll get around to experimenting at somepoint, but my gut feel is that with a turntable where presumably it's more about stopping energy getting IN that sinking energy OUT, I'd have thought that damping and isolation would better, but I don't really know.

I noticed a dramatic improvement in isolation when I fitted Isonoes in place of the Foculpods I had previously been using. Not only do they look good, but the sense of the Techie being perfectly isolated from the real world is impressive. This is further helped by my system rack being suspended on sprung feet.

Bass weight was slightly reduced compared with the Foculpods, but tightness and extension improved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

I noticed a dramatic improvement in isolation when I fitted Isonoes in place of the Foculpods I had previously been using. Not only do they look good, but the sense of the Techie being perfectly isolated from the real world is impressive. This is further helped by my system rack being suspended on sprung feet.

Bass weight was slightly reduced compared with the Foculpods, but tightness and extension improved.

---

I have tried to like the Isonoes, but they seem to make the music sound like the musicians have ramrods up their arrses, in comparison with more 'direct' supporting methods, eg it's a rather contrived and polite performance. The same goes for the Herbies mat, which I really don't get on with (anyone want to buy it?). I know that Marco will disagree, but he has characterful cartridges, amps and speakers, which I reckon paper over the Isonoe shortcomings, or maybe in his case isolation really was needed above all else. Only this morning I had a listening session with the Isonoes and removed them again with some relief. The Technics does need some isolation - and the Isonoes certainly provide that - but I find you need to be careful that the cure does not kill the enjoyment of the music. Hence my wood block experiments, which will be complete only when the eBay seller of the Foculpods needed to isolate the block finally bothers to send them!:steam:

Hi Shuggie

Did you have the Isonoes sat on a very hard surface ' like Glass as apparently this is important , according to the Blurb that came with them anyway ? .

No, either on acrylic, or the oak block.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

I have tried to like the Isonoes, but they seem to make the music sound like the musicians have ramrods up their arrses, in comparison with more 'direct' supporting methods, eg it's a rather contrived and polite performance. The same goes for the Herbies mat, which I really don't get on with (anyone want to buy it?).

---

I just cannot reconcile what you are saying with what I hear. Both the mat (especially) and the feet made very positive improvements to my Techie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

I just cannot reconcile what you are saying with what I hear. Both the mat (especially) and the feet made very positive improvements to my Techie.

---

We are all different, so what makes you happy does not necessarily work for me, but believe me I have tried these components over a fair amount of time. I believe the explanation lies in the auditory system, which includes not only the various components of the ear, but also the processing within the brain - each one of us is born with a different listening apparatus and very different brain programming to turn listening into hearing. It's a bit like comparing MP3 codecs - much, much more complicated than just looking at simple time or frequency domain information - psychoacoustics comes into it too. That's why some people (not I) appreciate Schoenberg, Birtwhistle etc; also why some people (also not I) can see those 3D fractal images that were trendy some years ago; and not to mention tastes in art. I appreciate modern abstract art, but most people do not. Audio is no different at all.

I am very interested in exploring alternative ways of getting the Technics to work best for me, but please don't think that I am arrogantly assuming that you, Marco and others are wrong - quite the opposite, since I know you are very happy with what you have. I just find that the SRM acrylic mat sounds so much better to my ears, and that Stillpoints supports result in a much more musically satisfying sound than the Isonoes. It's interesting to note that Dave Cawley states clearly on his website that his squidgy feet are better than the Isonoes, and I can believe that. That the Technics needs some isolation is not in doubt, but isolation is but part of another more complicated equation (which I don't fully understand).

Agreed Shug,we are all different.One man's meat and all that...

Guys,

Support feet and mats are largely system-dependant, just like everything else - there is no one universally 'correct' solution, so you just have to 'suck it and see' :)

In the context of my system, Dave's mat and the Isonoes work best. I haven't tried the SRM acrylic mat on my 1210, so I can't comment on that (perhaps we could try that Shuggs next time you're up?), but the Sorbothane feet were truly dire - reducing dynamics, bloating the sound, and killing the music in the process. The Isonoes were just so much better in every way...

*But*, as I say, that's only in the context of my system - and of course my Techy sits on glass, not to mention many multiple layers of Mana supports! ;)

Marco.

Shuggie ' it must down to taste or whatever !

You see i had the SRM acrylic mat ' and i hated it :scratch: , sounded hard ' bright and shiny to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

*But*, as I say, that's only in the context of my system - and of course my Techy sits on glass, not to mention many multiple layers of Mana supports! ;)

Marco.

---

Hi Marco

Apparently glass is the optimum surface for the Isonoe's , which may explain at least partly why you prefer them ' though this can be argued i guess .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

I am very interested in exploring alternative ways of getting the Technics to work best for me, but please don't think that I am arrogantly assuming that you, Marco and others are wrong

---

Not at all and it's good to discuss these things. I am by no means close minded about the feet or anything else and I was asking Dave about his giant sorbothane feet at the show. I do hope you'll get something out of hearing my system but it really doesn't matter if you hate it - we'll have something to laugh about.

By the way, I'm not a Shoenberg fan and I absolutely loath Birtwhistle. I do love Glass and Ligeti, though. There's no logic to it at all.

If we all liked the same things,forums would be pretty boring!

Quote:

---

Hi Marco

Apparently glass is the optimum surface for the Isonoe's , which may explain at least partly why you prefer them ' though this can be argued i guess .

---

Hi Chris,

Yes I do think that is a factor, and there's also the matter of synergy... The Stillpoints supports Shuggie uses will undoubtedly impact differently on how a system reproduces music than Mana will - and so the effect of Sorbothane feet or Isonoes will synergise with the sonic signature of one support better than the other...

Quite simply, there are too many variables to consider for there ever be one 'perfect' solution :)

Marco.

P.S Ali, damn tootin'! :cool:

A small experiment was undertaken at Jerry Mansions last night ....

I swapped my sorbothane hemisphere squishy footers on my Herbie Mat-ed Techie for rigid mounting via some aluminium and RDC1 cones ....

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...0/DSCF5545.jpg

A fairly significant difference.

For those who prefer a somewhat diffuse and less-pinpoint presentation (I know some folks who do) then squishy is the way to go, but for those (like me) who prefer their music more precise and focused then the rigid support is better. I'm staying with the cones. :)

Curiously, with the cone support, my 250g record puck now improves the sound! ... with the squishy support it had made it worse. It's all about dynamic interactions, innit?! :scratch::)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jandl100

A small experiment was undertaken at Jerry Mansions last night ....

I swapped my sorbothane hemisphere squishy footers on my Herbie Mat-ed Techie for rigid mounting via some aluminium and RDC1 cones ....

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/i...0/DSCF5545.jpg

A fairly significant difference.

For those who prefer a somewhat diffuse and less-pinpoint presentation (I know some folks who do) then squishy is the way to go, but for those (like me) who prefer their music more precise and focused then the rigid support is better. I'm staying with the cones. :)

Curiously, with the cone support, my 250g record puck now improves the sound! ... with the squishy support it had made it worse. It's all about dynamic interactions, innit?! :scratch::)

---

Hi Jerry

Thank you for being curious about my own musings on this subject:)

It looks like you have the RDC cones placed against the rubber base of the Technics - is that right; also how many did you use (eg 3 or 4)?

The large circle of small screws underneath the Technics provides direct access to the alloy chassis, bypassing the rubber. I removed three of these to allow the Stillpoints to contact the exposed chassis points, and I do prefer the results. Would you try the same with the RDC cones (I realise that they'd have to point the other way)?

Regards etc

An interesting observation, Jerry, and exactly the difference I noticed when switching from Foculpod feet to Isonoes. Everything tightened up considerably, better focus, more midrange insight and no bass overhang. And my record weight improves the sound!

Of course, the surface the Techie is standing on must make a great difference to how it responds to feet. One thing I would expect with cones is poorer isolation but I await your further tests.

this is certainly an interesting thread, it would seem as marco says their are a lot of variables and different methods for suporting a techie with a veriety of different result..
im slightly worried i have to say, since my techie was sounding good last time it was on a different stand in a different house!
good to see you are now having success with a weight jerry, my one is in the post to you so you can see if that is any better still

this is certainly an interesting thread, it would seem as marco (sorta) says their are a lot of variables and different methods for suporting a techie with a veriety of different result..
im slightly worried i have to say, since my techie was sounding good last time it was on a different stand in a different house!
good to see you are now having success with a weight jerry, my one is in the post to you so you can see if that is any better still

Since it may be a while before a dedicated external plinth comes along, it loks like spiking the deck (or possibly blac-tacking) to a thick slate slab may be the best way to go. Perhaps the slate could be sat on sorbothane?

If there's ever going to be a dedicated plinth as well, then we really are at the point where only the motor is original(ish). I reckon that's pushing things too far and anyone would be better off with a Hyperspace!

But, I am pretty convinced that the SL-1210 needs some isolation, but not necessarily in or attached to its own plinth and of the soft and squishy or springy variety. Dave - think of your NA record player part of the way it works is to use a mass sink for isolation (the baseboard). What I am doing with the SL-1210 is little different from that, although my oak block board is perhaps too resonant to do the same job (layers of MDF might be better). By the same token, coupling the record player to the mass sink using blu-tak or anything else would probably not work, because you'd then get the fat sluggishness that mass often brings. What I am aiming for is the mass isolation, but as disconnected from the SL-1210 as possible.

Quote:

---

Perhaps the slate could be sat on sorbothane

---

Exactly!

Dave price mentions the Audiophile Base platform in conjunction with the technics. He found a noticeable difference. Ive also read Mike New mention the centre of the deck being as important a point of support as the four corners.
Dont know if that gives you any ideas as regards a plinth:scratch:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colinB

Dave price mentions the Audiophile Base platform in conjunction with the technics. He found a noticeable difference. Ive also read Mike New mention the centre of the deck being as important a point of support as the four corners.
Dont know if that gives you any ideas as regards a plinth:scratch:

---

I also have an Audiophile Base platform, and it has a catastrophic effect on the Technics' sound, being horribly overdamped, to my ears at least. If David Price likes that effect I'd be very interested to hear his reference system! So, a straightforward, heavy but deadish platform, is what seems to work best for me, with the Stillpoints, of course;) Hence a cheap and harmless experiment with thick MDF platforms coming up.

Mike New may well be right. The alloy chassis is not ultimately very stiff, but is rather more so once the hard plastic middle layer is screwed to it. Any unintended movement is to be avoided, of course, but that's just one element of a patently complicated equation. Using three mounting points that sit around the periphery of the platter well is as close as I can get to the centre of the deck while still keeping it level. The corners are not necessarily the best places to support the deck, since you are then supporting it by the rubber base at its most flexible points - there is fresh air underneath the chassis at the corners, if you take a look (the screw inserts for the feet are just that - metal inserts set into the rubber).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

Hi Jerry

Thank you for being curious about my own musings on this subject:)

It looks like you have the RDC cones placed against the rubber base of the Technics - is that right;

Yes

also how many did you use (eg 3 or 4)?

3 - always 3 cones - that way it is guaranteed not to wobble!

The large circle of small screws underneath the Technics provides direct access to the alloy chassis, bypassing the rubber. I removed three of these to allow the Stillpoints to contact the exposed chassis points, and I do prefer the results.

Would you try the same with the RDC cones (I realise that they'd have to point the other way)?

Yep - I'll experiment later with putting the cones under the screws.


Regards etc

---

:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

I also have an Audiophile Base platform, and it has a catastrophic effect on the Technics' sound, being horribly overdamped, to my ears at least. If David Price likes that effect I'd be very interested to hear his reference system! So, a straightforward, heavy but deadish platform, is what seems to work best for me, with the Stillpoints, of course;) Hence a cheap and harmless experiment with thick MDF platforms coming up.

Mike New may well be right. The alloy chassis is not ultimately very stiff, but is rather more so once the hard plastic middle layer is screwed to it. Any unintended movement is to be avoided, of course, but that's just one element of a patently complicated equation. Using three mounting points that sit around the periphery of the platter well is as close as I can get to the centre of the deck while still keeping it level. The corners are not necessarily the best places to support the deck, since you are then supporting it by the rubber base at its most flexible points - there is fresh air underneath the chassis at the corners, if you take a look (the screw inserts for the feet are just that - metal inserts set into the rubber).

---

Could it be one reason the Bearing works so well is that it takes the strain of the deck weight while its being supported at the ,not ideal , far most points?

I think the bearing works so well for a number of reasons, one of which is that it's structurally much stronger than the standard alloy Technics bearing housing (Mike New himself has mentioned this before), so it does probably add something to the overall alloy chassis structure's integrity. It's also better because the bearing shaft is so much better supported in the lateral sense, and finally the bearing bit at the bottom is a much better, quieter design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

If there's ever going to be a dedicated plinth as well, then we really are at the point where only the motor is original(ish). I reckon that's pushing things too far and anyone would be better off with a Hyperspace!

But, I am pretty convinced that the SL-1210 needs some isolation, but not necessarily in or attached to its own plinth and of the soft and squishy or springy variety. Dave - think of your NA record player part of the way it works is to use a mass sink for isolation (the baseboard). What I am doing with the SL-1210 is little different from that, although my oak block board is perhaps too resonant to do the same job (layers of MDF might be better). By the same token, coupling the record player to the mass sink using blu-tak or anything else would probably not work, because you'd then get the fat sluggishness that mass often brings. What I am aiming for is the mass isolation, but as disconnected from the SL-1210 as possible.


Exactly!

---

When I said Blac-Tac, I mean a very thin squidge of it at each corner and possibly one in the middle..

A friend once had an Arcam 170 transport with the matching DAC. he got two 3/4" slate slabs and used just a touch of the stuff to hold them on the rather resonant case like an Arcam sandwich, the 170's feet having been removed. I'm sure the black stuff is stickier than the blue and it certainly did the trick, as the same stuff does for the holey SME S2 headshell.

Before l bought the isonoes, l had me Techie on an Audiophile Base with Soundcare Superspikes, and after taking the former away, then adding the Isonoes, the Isonoes totally destroyed the Audiophile Base/Soundcare combo, and to my eyes looked a lot better too:):cool:

I've tried a few things but the Isonoes win so far.

Yep for me Isonoes rule, *but* the 18 levels of Mana supports the Isonoes sit on (and hence also the 1210) makes, erm, just a little bit of difference to overall isolation! ;)

Marco.

This thread is making me think i should do something about the top shelf of my quadraspire music works rack. The guitar shape perspex shelf which my deck sits on buckles and creaks so much on its little pegs it cant be good support. I think i might look into buying a suniko vent shelf to replace it. I guess it will fix straight on with out much problem.

I have been wondering about the same thing colin
dies anyone have any thoughts about the suitability of wibbly wobbly quadraspire q4 ref with Acrylic shelves suporting a techie?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Yep for me Isonoes rule, *but* the 18 levels of Mana supports the Isonoes sit on (and hence also the 1210) makes, erm, just a little bit of difference to overall isolation! ;)

Marco.

---

Yeah, but if you rap the top glass shelf, does the sound come through the speakers?

No, not in the slightest :)

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DSJR

it loks like spiking the deck (or possibly blac-tacking) to a thick slate slab may be the best way to go.

---

Be careful with the blac-tack stuff. It is very strongly sticky.

I once stood a pair of speakers on a stand with blac-tack in between. When it came to taking the speakers off again, some of the speaker veneer remained behind. :doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

Hi Jerry

The large circle of small screws underneath the Technics provides direct access to the alloy chassis, bypassing the rubber. I removed three of these to allow the Stillpoints to contact the exposed chassis points, and I do prefer the results. Would you try the same with the RDC cones (I realise that they'd have to point the other way)?

Regards etc

---

I finally got around to doing something about this yesterday.

I haven't removed the screws (yet) - simply used the screwheads as the support points for up-ended RDC1 cones ...

Whoah!! Yep - result! A noticeably clearer and better defined sound. :eek: Def worth playing with this.
When I can be bothered to disconnect the tt and turn it over, I'll take 3 screws out so the cones contact the chassis directly.

I recently bought again a Technics turntable with the Kab power supply.
I also got the Mike New massive bearing.

This time I wanted to make sure all the energy from the Technics was properly transmitted. My main goal was to mate the top plinth to the middle piece and the rubber base to a proper base (and not from its original feet like the first time).

All this resonance from the middle heavy plastic, I wanted to cancel it and have a proper transmission of energy.
So, under Mike’s bearing, I put a dab of strip & seal removable silicone, mating the bottom of the bearing to the bottom of the resonant aluminum plinth.

Then I added some regular black silicone to the top of the heavy plastic (whatever it is..), covered it with saran wrap so it would not glue itself to the belly of the aluminium plinth but nevertheless intimately mate with it.

Before I put on the rubber base, I took to adding here and there amounts of peel & strip silicone where the heavy plastic meet the aluminium under side and also around the inside of the OL arm board (for the modded Rega 250 fitted). This peel & strip silicone come off real easy – so its easy to experiment.

Then I finally put on the rubber base. In my mind it created a problem because the feet are not connected or not really mated to the base, but sort of loosely holds in the corners that really have no support. (This I discovered before with the Maplewood heavy brass feet I installed and had to glue the metal inserts to the rubber base) So I took a box knife and shaved flat the corner areas.

So I end up with a flat rubber belly ready to be mated to some kind of support and transmitting the energy.
I then made a wood piece that would mate flatly to the rubber bottom, with the appropriate bottom hollowed out shapes to allow an even surface mated to the rubber bottom.

I then put the wood base on top of a thick granite piece, held by an old Target wall mounted TT support. This was too much energy absorption & flattened somewhat the image, so I put the wood base on 3 small metal cones.

I added 2 of Larry’s copper mats & the Oracle platter matt. The Oracle matt is concave and works well with Larry’s brass center weight.

To make a long story short, I finally get tons & tons of bass from the Technics, along with the details and information the direct drive gives. The air, the decay the depth of field is all there. Possibly the Oracle has a bit more air, but not as much bass and information. More air should come as I experiment with different base types & ideas from others...

I also made another wood base of hard maple, on metal cones - but that I have to listen to ....

That's a pretty way-out set of mods. Your reference Oracle must be quite a performer in the bass, too. I have no complaints at all about bass extension, but in my case it's the arm that has excavated deep bass and the Isonoes that provide isolation.

<<it's the arm that has excavated deep bass and the Isonoes that provide isolation. >>

Do you have the stock arm or some other tonearm ?

In any case I would venture that your deep bass is also related to your Mike New bearing that I also have....

Apart from the fact that you have mean amplification and very nice speakers...that will produce mucho bass

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citation16

Do you have the stock arm or some other tonearm ?

---

I now have the rather excellent Dynavector DV507-II arm installed. I do agree that the MN bearing has also contributed to extended and tight bass.

Quote:

---

Apart from the fact that you have mean amplification and very nice speakers...that will produce mucho bass

---

Oh yes, there is no lack of bass in my system :)