SL-1200 Platters, bearings, mats and PSU's, cartridges, arms, and more...

A post by Dave C on his Timestep site..

No poo stirring, but good words of caution I personally think.

"SL-1200 Platters, bearings, mats and PSU's, cartridges, arms, and more: the definitive thread

Since I pioneered the world's first SL-1200 PSU which overcame all the problems of the internal regulator, the mechanical hum and the electrical hum, the SL-1200 world has been spinning on its head! And here is a breakdown of that world so far:-

Bearings
I think everyone agrees the captive oil bath is the best. This is where the oil is retained in a bath rather than the standard open bearing where the oil can be both "flung" out and simply "dribble" away.

Timestep were the first to design a new bearing and just used the original Technics bearing housing but changed both the spindle and the sleeve, and at the same time made the bearing diameter, and hence the bearing surface, twice as big. A ceramic ball and PTFE thrust pad completed the design. The Timestep bearing does not apply any more stress to the turntable, motor or electronics. The oil can be changed easily and very interesting results have been observed in fine tuning the viscosity of the oil depending on the platter, mat and cartridge used. There are no downsides to the Timestep bearing.

The Mike New bearing is a very large, strong and heavy bearing. However we had so many of them returned to us that we were forced to discontinue them. In hotter countries than the UK they could seize at 45rpm. Also there is no way of checking the amount of oil in the bearing, if any. Reports surfaced of the lack of a proper oil seal and the oil simply dribbling away. Finally it has been found by most users, that it is impossible to change the oil. The additional friction of this bearing causes the motor to use twice as much power. I will have several Mike New bearings on eBay soon at a starting price of 99p, no guarantee/warranty given or implied.

Timestep were going to make a new bearing but have decided that evolution is better than revolution, and in reality the original Timestep bearing does the job quite properly, and especially with tuned oil. The Timestep bearing with standard oil takes no more power from the motor than the original bearing.

PSU
The original Timestep PSU was more than man enough for the standard platter. However, bowing to demand, we introduced the HE version with a measured peak output capacity of 60 amps. The HE is a great PSU, but really only necessary when third party modifications are made to the turntable. It is easy to measure the RMS, Peak and transient power consumption of the DD motor. It never ever exceeds 0.8A and is simply not capable of drawing any more. PSU's the size of breeze blocks provide nothing extra apart from "expectation bias" which quite simply means, if you expect it to sound better, then you will perceive that it does sound better. There is no magic about power supplies, except for their ability to provide power and quickly, no SL-1200 PSU so far seen or heard of can deliver as much instantaneous power as the HE. If you want a softer sound, slower and rounder, don't buy our HE! The HE tells it like it is!

Mat
No one has found a better "top mat" than our Audiophile mat, at least not reported to me. It was especially commissioned by us and now copied by quite a few. The big thing is that it provides damping for the record and it fits inside the rim of the SL-1200 platter. One very good solution shown at the 2010 Whittlebury show, is a copper mat with the audiophile mat on top. The copper giving extra mass and damping the platter and the audiophile damping the record. This works exceptionally well and is a recommended solution.

Then there is the new Japanese Oyaide platter/mat and weight solution. The first thing that strikes you is the extraordinary precision and attention to detail. One wonders where this came from, in an 'out of the blue' way? From nowhere we suddenly have a complete and professional solution. It achieves all the objectives, sounds great and looks a million dollars.

Platter
It was my idea to produce a solid aluminium platter like the ones used on the German Acoustic Solid turntables. I asked Mike New to make a prototype for testing and suggested that it would take until the end of 2010 to fully evaluate it. Having fully evaluated it, my conclusion is that it is not appropriate for the SL-1200 chassis at all, but against my advice is has been marketed, and already some users have experienced the predicted chassis problems. A stop-gap solution was to fit a strengthening plate, but fitting this is way beyond most users' ability and is not the real solution.

The requirement is to have a medium mass platter that does not ring. It has been said that if you take the audiophile mat off a standard platter it rings; of course it does, that's why you use the mat! However if you take the damping ring off a Mike New platter it also rings, but in a quite distressing way, but that's what the damping is for. Mat or ring, who cares?

In my opinion the SL-1200 chassis cannot take a heavy bearing and platter, period. Hence the best solution is the copper mat with the audiophile mat on top, or just the Oyaide mat which in itself is almost a solid aluminium platter. Either of these solutions gives you a completely ring free platter, higher mass and does not require chassis strengthening plates. And can of course be fitted with confidence by any owner.

Motor
Timestep were the first to realise that in standard form, without any additional mass, the motor control circuit was designed for DJ use. Hence our Motor Dynamics Mod. A ground breaking World First that showed our to dedication to the SL-1200, no "me too" games here! It was great at the time, but with the new Japanese Oyaide platter, copper mat and heavier platters, the mod is simply not appropriate at all.

Arm
For the Denon DL-103 and SPU then only the Jelco 750 and Dynavector is going to work properly, no arguments here! But in my opinion, for all other cartridges the SME 309 or SME V is clearly the best. Our best selling arm is the SME 309, we sell more of these than 'all' other arms put together. This is a no brainer! We have a Funk FXR here, and can supply them, we will be trying it soon, and initial expectations are favourable.

Cartridge
The DL-103 series and SPU's are great for that meaty vintage sound. We sell more DL-103's than any other UK dealer, we love them. However on my own system for classical, jazz, rock and 80's electro pop, I prefer the Audio Technica AT-OC9/III as demonstrated at the Whittlebury show and declared by many as the best sound of the show. Although I'm leaning towards the Audio Technica AT33EV right now as there is something even more magical about it.

Final solution
It seems there are two mainstream solutions:-

The Austin Healy 3000 / AC Cobra. DL-103/SPU, Jelco 750/Dynavector arm, very heavy platter, high friction bearing, huge PSU. Without a doubt this type of system seriously rocks, but not my boat.

The Mercedes CLS AMG / BMW M6. AT33EV, SME 309, Oyaide platter, Timestep bearing, Timestep HE PSU. This is my preferred solution for classical, jazz, rock and 80's electro pop and is available as a complete turnkey package.

Conclusion
Of course, we all have different tastes, different budgets and different aspirations, hence I'll build anything for anyone, and you can of course buy any bits from me and do your own thing. That is what is so great about the SL-1200 series, a turntable for everyone............

Regards

Dave "

Hi Dave,

Thanks for that. Most interesting...

I will move this to a separate thread of its own in Analogue Art, where I will (when I get a chance after completing Part 2 of my report on my visit to Martin's place) comment on the points Dave has made, many of which I agree with, but there are some observations, based on my own personal experience to the contrary, which I would certainly challenge.

After all, it's all about opinions! :)

In the meantime, of course, others can comment as they wish. I suspect that Mike New might ;)

Marco.

Hi Dave, a few queries (I know that you have just reposted this thread so I am not directing these questions directly to you but rather to Dave C):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DSJR

Also there is no way of checking the amount of oil in the bearing, if any. Reports surfaced of the lack of a proper oil seal and the oil simply dribbling away.

---

I haven't seen any sign of oil dribbling away. If I can see a meniscus of oil at the top of the bearing, isn't that sufficient sign that the MN bearing is full of oil?

Quote:

---

It is easy to measure the RMS, Peak and transient power consumption of the DD motor. It never ever exceeds 0.8A and is simply not capable of drawing any more.

---

In order to get a handle on this, what is the peak current capability of the standard Timestep PSU?

Quote:

---

PSU's the size of breeze blocks provide nothing extra apart from "expectation bias" which quite simply means, if you expect it to sound better, then you will perceive that it does sound better.

---

This is somewhat disingenuous. Several of us either own or have heard what the Paul Hynes SR5 (I presume this is the PSU you are referring to as a breeze block) can do, with either standard platter, platter+copper mat or MN platter. It is repeatable, i.e. we can hear the downshift when the standard Timestep PSU is returned. I don't think for a minute that we are experiencing 'expectation bias'.

There is also the question of other PSU criteria other than peak current, such as noise output. How do the Timestep, Timestep HE or breeze blocks measure here?

Finally, I have to say for the record that I asked Dave C several times (I have the documented e-mails) for price and availability of a Timestep HE upgrade. I even asked if I could place an order. I got silence and gave up in the end.

Quote:

---

No one has found a better "top mat" than our Audiophile mat, at least not reported to me.

---

No disagreement there, I even bought a slightly larger Herbies mat to better suit the MN platter.

Quote:

---

One very good solution shown at the 2010 Whittlebury show, is a copper mat with the audiophile mat on top. The copper giving extra mass and damping the platter and the audiophile damping the record. This works exceptionally well and is a recommended solution.

---

I ran this solution for a while. It is a good solution and is very easy to install, no disagreement there. However, when I upgraded to the MN platter the result was better tonal neutrality, greater dynamics and better sense of space to the soundstage over the platter+copper solution.

Quote:

---

Having fully evaluated it, my conclusion is that it is not appropriate for the SL-1200 chassis at all, but against my advice is has been marketed, and already some users have experienced the predicted chassis problems.

---

I now have the base plate installed and it is not an easy upgrade, agreed. But what chassis problems have users reported?

Quote:

---

Timestep were the first to realise that in standard form, without any additional mass, the motor control circuit was designed for DJ use. Hence our Motor Dynamics Mod. A ground breaking World First that showed our to dedication to the SL-1200, no "me too" games here! It was great at the time, but with the new Japanese Oyaide platter, copper mat and heavier platters, the mod is simply not appropriate at all.

---

My deck has the motor dynamics mod installed. Please could you tell me in what way it is not appropriate to the MN platter? Would you recommend that I reverse it?

Interesting questions, Martin...

Dave, any views on that before I add my own thoughts later? :)

One quick point I would make is that the Mike New bearing you fitted to my 1210 has given me no problems whatsoever, and (as you and I heard and agreed at your place), sonically, it gives a significant no-brainer improvement over the stock Technics bearing.

I remember exactly what we heard during that fairly lengthy session chez-toi in Dartmouth, not to mention what I've heard in my own system (and many others) since. Therefore based on that, there are some notable inconsistencies in what you've written over on your forum.....

Also, regarding this:

Quote:

---

The Mike New bearing is a very large, strong and heavy bearing. However we had so many of them returned to us that we were forced to discontinue them. In hotter countries than the UK they could seize at 45rpm.

---

Well they're made in Australia, and it doesn't get much hotter anywhere else, so if that were a genuine problem I'm sure the kangaroos and koalas would've told us!! ;)

More seriously, it will be interesting to hear Mike's view on this situation when he no doubt comments later.

Marco.

I wonder if this means that plans for the plinth modifications has been shelved?

It looks that way ' also it appears Dave will not be bringing his uprated bearing and platter to market ? or i am i mistaken.

I always felt it might be a step too far ' if you factor in the extra cost and the possible new plinth ? i have to say i personally would go for a well sorted SP10 mk2 :).

But and i need to add this ' i aplaud Martin for going this extra mile as it were.

Only a genuine passion for music and vinyl replay.

Hello all of you folks who are following this thread.

Poor old Dave Cawley must be feeling very upset, sad and pissed off to find that he now has egg all over his face!!!!!!

You say no POO stirring DSJR, maybe you have not read the contents very carefully as I have or perhaps have not understood them fully.

I tried to explain to Cawley that making a platter for the SL1200 was not as easy as he thinks and that I needed to liaise with the UK manufacturers as per our agreement in order ‘to make it work’.

“But that is not the way he works” I was informed.

The fitting and very accurate alignment of the pulse generator and the fitting of the center pivot boss were probably beyond the capabilities available and at his disposal.

Furthermore, he has obviously had trouble in having a bearing manufactured to the same very high standards as mine, and has given up. He now uses the unbelievable lame excuse that his own original half-baked effort is now much better after all!

Oh boy, Cawley, you really have shot yourself in the foot this time around. That you should publish the derogatory diatribe about my products on your forum (where I have no right of reply) and now repeated here; is a situation which I find to be very sad and at the same time amusing, in a quaint sort of way.

It is obvious to any intelligent observer, that Dave Cawley has discovered that he does not have the capability to manufacture either my Bearing or Platter to the required precision, and accordingly has embarked on the only course left to people like him.

He has commenced to rubbish my own products.

Which at one time he was selling with unabated enthusiasm!!

This unbelievable situation is fantastic for me, because I am now receiving a rush of enquiries for both my High Precision Bearing and Solid Aluminium Platter. Not to mention the stream of emails offering support. Keep up the good work Cawley!!!!

I am very honored however that Cawley still is using an image of my Platter on his web site. That has got to tell you something!!!!

The very sad thing is that some of those discipled people hanging on his every word, have now been left with nothing to grasp except a sudden about turn in the teachings of the wise one. All of a sudden the super duper bearing and platter he was rocking on about, no longer are real.

For my part, it reminds me of the used car salesman, who, after a hectic marriage feast trying to sell used cars to all the guests, when he got to the honeymoon suite, spent all night sitting on the side of the bed telling his new bride how good it was going to be, but never ever managed it!!!

Regarding my Platters, Cawley states that after evaluating it, his conclusion was that it was “not appropriate for the SL1200 chassis”.

For those interested, I can supply copies of email orders for the first batch of ten platters, complete with formal order number, to be followed by ten more, and his plaudits on my approach to the design!! This order fell through when Cawley declined to meet the conditions of our manufacturing agreement, which it is apparent he had no intension of doing when he signed it!!!

On the subject of bearings, Cawley talks of “tuned oil’ this must surely tell you something about the veracity of his statements and advice!!!!!!!!!!!!

As for the remainder of the diatribe, I am not going to personally reduce myself to the same level as Cawley by pursuing a detailed response to his somewhat libelous comments.

As would be obvious to all, I am now the sole supplier of High Precision Bearings and Platters to those SL1200 enthusiasts who really understand the sonic improvements that they offer, and who genuinely want to upgrade their SL1200s to take advantage of this. To wit, go back and read some of the reports by all the happy Cawley customers (and mine).

I have three bearings left from the last batch of 50 and two platters.

Cawley informed me that he had orders for about ten platters, so I will honor all of these orders if you care to contact me, and of course they will be a lot less expensive than previously quoted.

I will make one observation concerning the statement under the heading <MOTOR>, before we split commercially, I emailed Cawley about his so called “Motor Dynamics mod” His reply was and I quote: “The motor dynamics mod reduces the torque to make it sound more like a LP-12, I'll probably take it off soon!” He then goes on to say and I quote: “the maintaining current not being much more even with a heavy platter.”


He needs to make up his mind. Either the maintaining current is not adversely affected a heavy platter, and in which case the use of such a platter is perfectly acceptable, or, and I quote (Cawley): “In my opinion the SL-1200 chassis cannot take a heavy bearing and platter, period".

So which is it?

The level of contradiction here is surely obvious to all!

For those folks who subscribe to the Timestep forum, if you really believe all the stuff that is stated there, and there are obviously some who do; then good luck to you.

For all those lucky people who are attracted to the offer of Cawley, to put my bearings on Ebay for 99p. I will not help him get his money back by bidding against you. You see he purchased them from me for $400 or Stg280 so he will be making the big loss not me!!!

Hi Mike

You make some very good points there ' and to be honest Dave has dug himself a hole .

One thing is blatantly obvious though Mike and that is the 1200 chassis was never designed to cope with a heavy bearing and platter ! that's what the SP10 is for.

You yourself have stated this and introduced the strengthening plate ' which requires some work and ability to fit.

I still feel that despite how good the 1200 can sound with these amazingly well engineered bearing's platter upgrades you offer ' the more one tweeks this deck the more there seem to be hidden pitfall's .

Dave's half baked bearing does actually work well and is cost effective .

Its just if i was to spend this sort of money ' i would consider an SP10mk2 or if i can find one ' a Voyd .5 like i used before is still in my opinion superior to a modded Techie but at a retail price of £4,000 (when new) it should be of course.

Chris,

Your point is well taken, it was never my intension to claim the extreme in regard to the abillities of the SL1200 chassis. What I have genuinely tried to do is to offer the best of both worlds, and to provide a phased upgrade path for those folks who beleive that the Direct Drive system is the way to go.

As has been said on this forum many times, including by Cawley; the SL1200 DD system is by far the superior method of driving a platter in rotary motion, if only it had a better chassis. I have attempted to address this with my upgrades.

I don't expect Dave C will reply, but I think it's important some of his statements/assertions below are challenged, as in some cases I feel what's written is both contradictory and rather misleading.....

Please note, Dave that none of the following is personal, but it's important that I am frank, honest and to the point.

You wrote on the Timestep forum:

Quote:

---

And here is a breakdown of that world so far:-

Bearings
Timestep were the first to design a new bearing and just used the original Technics bearing housing but changed both the spindle and the sleeve, and at the same time made the bearing diameter, and hence the bearing surface, twice as big. A ceramic ball and PTFE thrust pad completed the design.

---

Yes, but as the metal used on the original Technics bearing (the 'donor' unit for the Timestep one) is not of exceptionally high quality (I believe largely chosen by Technics as the material is easy to mold into the necessary shape for mass production), and certainly not of the quality of construction of the bespoke solid brass one of Mike New's, it could be said that what you've done is, no offence intended, akin to polishing a turd.

Quote:

---

The oil can be changed easily and very interesting results have been observed in fine tuning the viscosity of the oil depending on the platter, mat and cartridge used. There are no downsides to the Timestep bearing.

---

Other than of course the very obvious one which is that it's fundamentally (and fatally) flawed from the beginning by the relative poor quality of the 'donor' Technics bearing from which the Timestep one is produced.......!

Furthermore, I am reliably informed that there is no need whatsoever to change the oil in the Mike New bearing to maintain optimum performance, and that's why the unit is sealed.

Mike can of course supply the rationale on this if necessary.

Quote:

---

The Mike New bearing is a very large, strong and heavy bearing.

---

Yes - that's precisely why it works so well!

Quote:

---

However we had so many of them returned to us that we were forced to discontinue them.

---

Why exactly were they returned?

Is there any chance of inviting these people onto AoS, Dave, so people here can have a chat with them and we can be party to what the problems were?

I think it's important that potential customers of the Mike New bearing are made aware of any problematic issues regarding its design, but only from the people who've supposedly experienced these problems.

The bearings that Martin T and I are using seem to be fine - and indeed no-one else I know who uses one has expressed any problems....

Quote:

---

In hotter countries than the UK they could seize at 45rpm.

---

I've tackled this already, but it's worth mentioning again.... If that were really a genuine problem then I'm quite sure Mike would've discovered it, as the bearings are made in Australia, where as you know, the temperature in most months is liable to be a 'tad warm'!

Quote:

---

Also there is no way of checking the amount of oil in the bearing, if any.

---

That's because (due to its specific design) there is no need to check the amount of oil in the bearing, thus once it's been filled from the well at the top of the housing, with the specially selected oil, and it slowly trickles down inside, the bearing remains otherwise sealed to prevent people who don't know what they're doing adversely affecting how it has been designed to function (by using the wrong oil, for example).

Quote:

---

Reports surfaced of the lack of a proper oil seal and the oil simply dribbling away.

---

How could this happen when the unit is most definitely properly sealed - "dribbling away" from where exactly??

Quote:

---

Finally it has been found by most users, that it is impossible to change the oil.

---

That's true, and it's been designed that way because the oil won't require changing in the lifetime of you, me, or anyone else who buys a Mike New bearing.

Quote:

---

The additional friction of this bearing causes the motor to use twice as much power.

---

I have been reliably informed that this is untrue. Could you please supply some measurements that confirm your assertion?

The MN bearing causes the motor to use a little more power, which is well within its handling capabilities, and certainly no more so than does the added extra mass of placing a heavy copper mat on the platter, which is a modification you currently recommend.

Quote:

---

I will have several Mike New bearings on eBay soon at a starting price of 99p, no guarantee/warranty given or implied.

---

I think that's a rather snide and uncalled for remark, Dave. You've now given Mike the green light to respond in a similar vein, should he choose to do so, which I would now have no option but to allow, particularly as he has no right of reply on the Timestep forum, as you have banned him........

However, on a positive note, I would urge anyone wishing to own a truly superb quality bearing, and major upgrade for the SL-1200/1210, to snap one up for 99p!!

One thing you haven't considered is that when the people on the Timestep forum who've indicated, somewhat sheep-like, that they're going to remove the MN bearing and fit a Timestep one to their T/Ts, prompted in my opinion by your unjustified scaremongering, they will subsequently hear a significant deterioration in sound quality because the fact is they will be downgrading to an inferior bearing!

That's, incidentally, no reflection on the way you have modified the stock Technics bearing (you call the 'Timestep'), which I'm sure will improve matters, but rather that all you've done, because it's all you CAN do, is apply a bandage to what, as a result of cost constraints, is a relatively poor bearing. Thus the 'Timestep bearing' can in no way be regarded as a true fix.

It'll therefore be interesting finding out what people say when their bearings are changed, presuming of course that they're not just simply blinkered 'disciples' of your products without the gumption to be honest.....

Quote:

---

Timestep were going to make a new bearing but have decided that evolution is better than revolution, and in reality the original Timestep bearing does the job quite properly, and especially with tuned oil.

---

Given the already mentioned limitations in the design of the 'donor' bearing for the Timestep, I think that assertion is highly unlikely.

Quote:

---

PSU
The original Timestep PSU was more than man enough for the standard platter. However, bowing to demand, we introduced the HE version with a measured peak output capacity of 60 amps. The HE is a great PSU, but really only necessary when third party modifications are made to the turntable.

---

Such as the Mike New platter, the use of which you used to champion to the hilt?

If the HE PSU is only of benefit when third party modifications have been carried out to the SL-1200, then as you're no longer going to be producing a heavy platter, or promoting its use, then what's the point of having the HE?

Aside from that, I would contend that the HE would still outperform the stock Timestep PSU even when the SL-1200 is used with its standard platter, simply because the higher capacity of the HE gives the turntable a 'stiffer' and cleaner power supply. I've heard the sonic effect of this, for example, when comparing the Paul Hynes SR3 to the stock Timestep using the standard platter on my T/T.

Quote:

---

PSU's the size of breeze blocks provide nothing extra apart from "expectation bias" which quite simply means, if you expect it to sound better, then you will perceive that it does sound better.

---

Lol! Is that the best you can come up with, Dave? I presume that by "PSU's the size of breeze blocks" you're referring to the Paul Hynes SR5?

Sorry, all I can do is chuckle at that and content myself with having significant knowledge to the contrary!!

And not that old chestnut again, simply trotted out at a convenient time? Yes, expectation bias exists in some circumstances, but that's most certainly NOT what's happened on this occasion. Such is the huge improvement the SR5 makes to the performance of the SL-1200, one would be able to discern it blindfolded! We should test this sometime.

Quote:

---

There is no magic about power supplies, except for their ability to provide power and quickly, no SL-1200 PSU so far seen or heard of can deliver as much instantaneous power as the HE.

---

I don't doubt the HE is very good, but exactly how many different PSUs for the SL-1200 have you tested it against? And you certainly haven't heard an SR5. I'll bring one down and you can compare it to the HE, and see what you think. It only takes seconds to swap over between them :cool:

Quote:

---

If you want a softer sound, slower and rounder, don't buy our HE! The HE tells it like it is!

---

No doubt, but then in my experience so does the SR5 - it certainly doesn't sound 'slow' or 'round'!

Quote:

---

Mat
No one has found a better "top mat" than our Audiophile mat, at least not reported to me. It was especially commissioned by us and now copied by quite a few.

---

In terms of materials your mat is identical in design to the Herbies one, which has been in production for many years.

Quote:

---

The big thing is that it provides damping for the record and it fits inside the rim of the SL-1200 platter. One very good solution shown at the 2010 Whittlebury show, is a copper mat with the audiophile mat on top. The copper giving extra mass and damping the platter and the audiophile damping the record. This works exceptionally well and is a recommended solution.

---

I agree; this seems like a good solution. It's one I'll be testing out very soon when I obtain a copper mat. I will then compare it to Mike's platter on its own when I receive a specially commissioned version from him in due course, and report the results here on AoS.

Look out for that.....

Quote:

---

Then there is the new Japanese Oyaide platter/mat and weight solution. The first thing that strikes you is the extraordinary precision and attention to detail. One wonders where this came from, in an 'out of the blue' way? From nowhere we suddenly have a complete and professional solution. It achieves all the objectives, sounds great and looks a million dollars.

---

All I can say on that is watch this space! ;)

Quote:

---

Platter
It was my idea to produce a solid aluminium platter like the ones used on the German Acoustic Solid turntables. I asked Mike New to make a prototype for testing and suggested that it would take until the end of 2010 to fully evaluate it. Having fully evaluated it, my conclusion is that it is not appropriate for the SL-1200 chassis at all...

---

Was this before or after, Dave, you discovered you didn't have the wherewithal to design one of your own? Be honest here.

Quote:

---

...but against my advice is has been marketed, and already some users have experienced the predicted chassis problems.

---

I detected no such problems when the Mike New platter was fitted to my own T/T at Martin's, and it doesn't have the base strengthening plate mod done. When I receive my own platter, I will test its use over a significant period of time without the base plate mod and see what happens.

I'm not convinced there is a real problem there, certainly in a sonic sense, as when I was comparing my T/T to Martin's, fitted with the heavy platter, mine didn't sound in any way worse than his, even though the base plate wasn't fitted to my T/T.

But that's a comparison Martin and I can do again later when I have my own MN platter, and if I feel that the base plate offers a significant sonic upgrade then I will have it fitted to my own T/T.

Quote:

---

The requirement is to have a medium mass platter that does not ring. It has been said that if you take the audiophile mat off a standard platter it rings; of course it does, that's why you use the mat!

---

I agree about the medium-mass platter, which is why the one I'm having made by Mike will be significantly lighter, but with still the improved sonic characteristics of his heavy platter design, due to its superior standard of material construction.

Incidentally, the stock platter still rings slightly even with one of your mats on top. It takes the further weight of a thick LP to fully dampen the platter, so in terms of ringing, there is obviously still some room for improvement, which of course is where the use of a copper mat underneath comes in.

However, I suspect (and testing this in due course will tell) that the MN platter I'm having made will still significantly outperform that particular solution.

Quote:

---

However if you take the damping ring off a Mike New platter it also rings, but in a quite distressing way, but that's what the damping is for. Mat or ring, who cares?

---

No way, I've heard it. The Mike New platter doesn't ring anything like as much as the stock Technics platter does without a mat. The former is much heavier and so thus rings at an entirely different frequency!

Quote:

---

In my opinion the SL-1200 chassis cannot take a heavy bearing and platter, period.

---

That's not what you said so vociferously before. You're contradicting what you've written so often in the past when you were in a position to offer a genuine solution through working with Mike. It is also contrary to the results of my own experience. I suggest you revise that statement if you're not to look a little silly.

Quote:

---

Hence the best solution is the copper mat with the audiophile mat on top, or just the Oyaide mat which in itself is almost a solid aluminium platter. Either of these solutions gives you a completely ring free platter, higher mass and does not require chassis strengthening plates. And can of course be fitted with confidence by any owner.

---

When I've fully tested my own (specially commissioned) Mike New platter, which will be significantly lighter and have some other unique design features that at this stage I can't divulge, I will then obtain an Oyaide mat and compare the two solutions and report my findings here. The results of that should be most interesting.

Quote:

---

Motor
Timestep were the first to realise that in standard form, without any additional mass, the motor control circuit was designed for DJ use. Hence our Motor Dynamics Mod. A ground breaking World First that showed our to dedication to the SL-1200, no "me too" games here! It was great at the time, but with the new Japanese Oyaide platter, copper mat and heavier platters, the mod is simply not appropriate at all.

---

I would agree.

Therefore since Martin's had the Motor Dynamics Mod done to his T/T, and now uses a heavier platter, will you reverse it?

Knowing the above, and that he was intending to buy an MN platter, you should've carried out that adjustment when you had his T/T at yours fitting the Dynavector arm........

Quote:

---

Arm
For the Denon DL-103 and SPU then only the Jelco 750 and Dynavector is going to work properly, no arguments here! But in my opinion, for all other cartridges the SME 309 or SME V is clearly the best.

---

What, better than the Dynavector? Otherwise I agree completely with the above. There's no way, however, that an SME 309 is in the same league, sonically, as Martin's Dynavector, no matter what cartridge is used!

It would be a different argument with an SME V, of course, where the playing field would be levelled somewhat.

Quote:

---

Our best selling arm is the SME 309, we sell more of these than 'all' other arms put together. This is a no brainer!

---

The 309 is an excellent arm, but could it also be your best seller because that's the one you push because you get the biggest profit margin on SME tomearms? ;)

Quote:

---

We have a Funk FXR here, and can supply them, we will be trying it soon, and initial expectations are favourable.

---

Great arm - I'm looking forward to testing one myself.

Quote:

---

Cartridge
The DL-103 series and SPU's are great for that meaty vintage sound.

---

"Meaty vintage sound"? Lol! I guess this is entirely subjective, but that's not how I would necessarily describe the sound of my own SPU, through the A23 SUT, using the Jelco 750, in my system or in Martin's...

Martin how would you describe the SPU, now you've heard it at length in your own system?

Quote:

---

Final solution
It seems there are two mainstream solutions:-

The Austin Healy 3000 / AC Cobra. DL-103/SPU, Jelco 750/Dynavector arm, very heavy platter, high friction bearing, huge PSU. Without a doubt this type of system seriously rocks, but not my boat.

---

Well, Dave, you haven't heard the Mike New platter in conjunction with the SR5, nor I suspect how a modern SPU sounds through the purpose-built A23 SPU SUT, so in that respect, your boat hasn't set sail from the harbour!

Quote:

---

Conclusion
Of course, we all have different tastes, different budgets and different aspirations, hence I'll build anything for anyone, and you can of course buy any bits from me and do your own thing. That is what is so great about the SL-1200 series, a turntable for everyone............

---

Indeed, and on that note we agree! :cool:

The bit in bold is good to know, too....

I would invite others now, if they wish, to reply to the comments that have been made.

Marco.

Hi.

I don't post very often, but am following, with great interest, this ongoing argument about bearings.

Having used both (and still owning both) the Timestep bearing and the Mike New bearing in my Technics SL1200 I say that the Mike New bearing is sonically far superior. I swapped the bearings out a couple of days ago and was dismayed at the loss of focus with the Timestep bearing. On refitting the Mike New bearing there is a noticeable improvement in sound quality. As far as I am concerned it is a no brainer. This is with a SME V arm with a Denon 103r.

May I also add that I am now utterly confused as to which path to take with my Technics. Do I go for the MN platter? or stay as I am?

Regards

John:fence:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marco

Martin how would you describe the SPU, now you've heard it at length in your own system?

---

We fitted the SPU to my arm and rebalanced everything for the 4g tracking weight. We used Marco's purpose-built A23 SPU SUT into my Whest PS.30R phono preamp and thence the rest of my system.

The sound was simply staggering. HUGE soundstage width and depth, palpable atmosphere in live recordings and vivid presence in every type of music. Interestingly, despite its reputation as a warm lush device, it was tight, dynamic and had very well extended bass. In no way could I reconcile what I was hearing with a spherical stylus as the treble was sweet and extended and there was no hint of end of side distortion.

We were mesmerised and went on to play lots of music that night with this combo. It was certainly the most magnificent vinyl reproduction I have ever heard.

My AT33PTG is pretty good in the Dynavector, but the SPU was made for it. Very special indeed.

See here for a photo:
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showp...08&postcount=4

Hi John,

Your concern about whether to get one of my platters is exactly what D Cawley is trying to sow. Now that he has found that he can neither understand or reproduce the quality of bearing or platter that I have been able to achieve, he is now hell bent on decrying all who may wish to upgrade their SL1200 with my products or others!!! Paul Hynes, for instance.

At one time he was regarded as the all knowing guru of the SL1200 world, but has now demonstrably shown that the king has no clothes.

The very sad thing about this whole discussion is that I never set out to offer anything more than what I considered to be genuine improvement options to the components currently in use on the SL1200.

In a frantic attempt to justify his utter failure to manufacture either a decent bearing or a platter, he is now demolishing the walls of Rome on which he has stood for so long.

As Marco has pointed out he has repeatedly slagged off my products in particular my bearing for no other reason than that he has failed to produce his own versions and has now desperately tried to justify his failure by claiming that they are now not required!!! And that any attempt to upgrade the SL1200 is an exercise in futility.

As Chris observed, he has not only dug himself into a big hole, he has pulled the rocks in on top of himself!!!!

Mike.

Well now I have made my mind up to go with the MN platter. I won't be making any posts as from Wednesday as I am away for a few weeks.

John ;)

Hi John,

Providing you're using either a Paul Hynes SR5-21 or Timestep HE PSU (either of which is essential), that is a smart move, trust me! ;)

Quote:

---

Having used both (and still owning both) the Timestep bearing and the Mike New bearing in my Technics SL1200 I say that the Mike New bearing is sonically far superior. I swapped the bearings out a couple of days ago and was dismayed at the loss of focus with the Timestep bearing. On refitting the Mike New bearing there is a noticeable improvement in sound quality.

---

And others will discover the very same thing when they try it, which is when certain chickens will come home to roost............

Marco.

Hi folks,

Now that I've had the chance to re-read the self-indulgent diatribe from Dave Cawley, I must say that I am fascinated by his demonstration of complete ignorance of the fundamental principles of engineering physics.

He states that in hotter countries than the UK my bearing could seize at 45 rpm. (So much heat is generated at this speed!!!!) All those loyal users in Australia, New Zealand and Asia are going to find their platters spinning into outer space as their bearings disintegrate!!!

He obviously has no idea that copper based alloys such as brass and bronze (and many others) have a far greater co-efficient of expansion than steel, especially the chrome/nickel alloy tool steel that my bearing spindle is made from. This implies that at increased temperatures the bearing gap tolerance will increase (just for Dave’s sake, this means that the bearing becomes less stiff, old chap).

When I designed the bearing I discussed the mathematical tolerances with the metrology director of the tool making company who manufacture the spindle and hone the bearing sleeve to match. It was decided that a high quality fit should be targeted at approx 20 –25 deg C. It was assumed that even in the northern climes of Scandinavia (where there are some bearings alive and well, I believe) the turntables would not exactly be used outdoors!!! In the California summer the tolerance fit will be a few millionths of a mm larger, if you are using your SL1200 in a non air-conditioned room.

You had better watch out Pete and Mark and all the others, Dave Cawley will be offering to sell your bearings on Ebay!!!

Dave Cawley has had so many bearings returned to him that he has ‘several’ for sale on Ebay. The truth of the matter is that he was unable to have a bearing manufactured at his price, to the same very high quality of my High Precision Bearing. So now after three months of hollow promises he has decided to slag off my bearing.

However, I do like Dave Cawley’s turn of phrase: ‘evolution is better than revolution’, but does he know the difference??? He must be a reformed man. After all, he was all for revolution when he was selling my bearings.

Hi Martin,

Quote:

---

We fitted the SPU to my arm and rebalanced everything for the 4g tracking weight. We used Marco's purpose-built A23 SPU SUT into my Whest PS.30R phono preamp and thence the rest of my system.

The sound was simply staggering. HUGE soundstage width and depth, palpable atmosphere in live recordings and vivid presence in every type of music. Interestingly, despite its reputation as a warm lush device, it was tight, dynamic and had very well extended bass. In no way could I reconcile what I was hearing with a spherical stylus as the treble was sweet and extended and there was no hint of end of side distortion.

We were mesmerised and went on to play lots of music that night with this combo. It was certainly the most magnificent vinyl reproduction I have ever heard.

My AT33PTG is pretty good in the Dynavector, but the SPU was made for it. Very special indeed.

---

Thanks for that. I think your account represents a rather more accurate version of the reality ;)

Marco.

Hi
Can someone explain to me why it is necessary to have power supplies that could be used for welding and bearings better than those in my 1000cc V twin motorbike for playing records,also never heard as much bollocks as bearings seizing at 45 rpm,it beggars belief.In my opinion of course.
Dave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hewitt

Hi
Can someone explain to me why it is necessary to have power supplies that could be used for welding and bearings better than those in my 1000cc V twin motorbike for playing records,also never heard as much bollocks as bearings siezing at 45 rpm,it beggars belief.In my opinion of course.
Dave.

---

I dunno. That's why I use a Roksan; it just plays records!

Hi Dave,

Here's an explanation from Paul Hynes on the subject, which may be of help:

Quote:

---

It’s not just about measuring RMS, Peak and transient power consumption of the DD motor. The electronics used to control the motor will have limited supply interference rejection that will vary with frequency, getting worse as frequency increases.

This means that the power supply should have good supply line interference rejection to reduce mains interference transfer to the load circuitry and it should have very low noise. The power supply should also maintain its output voltage as close to the required voltage as possible under dynamic load current swings, as any voltage error on the power supply output will be seen as noise/interference by the motor control circuitry.

“Off the shelf” mains transformers are built to a price in a very competitive market and corners are cut in material specifications and
construction, giving less than ideal performance.

One of the biggest problems with low cost transformers is rattling laminations, which vibrate in sympathy with the current flowing through the windings, giving rise to high levels of mechanical noise and unstable electrical power transfer. The smaller ones are not too bad in this respect, and the 60 VA Toroidal transformer I use in the lower cost SR3 is the best of the “off the shelf” variety I have found and it is pretty quiet.

Unfortunately the larger transformers in the range, like all the other ranges I have tried, get very noisy, which is unacceptable in an audio system. Another problem that is relevant to transformer electrical performance is that “off the shelf” transformers are built for highest
efficiency, which means they are designed to operate at high Flux densities.

This makes them very susceptible to any DC current flow in the windings, which can be caused by switch-on when the mains voltage
waveform is at a high potential and/or asymmetrical current draw from the transformer by the load, which can cause core saturation at
relatively low levels reducing the available VA rating dramatically.

The solution to this is to have a custom-made transformer that uses high quality materials and is carefully wound for low mechanical noise and for low flux density operation to avoid core saturation, which can cause a lot of interference on the supply line. This requires using a larger core than normal for a given VA rating. The custom transformer in the SR5 is rated at 160 VA and doesn’t suffer from appreciable VA loss due to core saturation. It is also very quiet.

The voltage regulator has the job of maintaining the DC supply rail at the specified DC voltage for any load current change. For this reason the voltage regulator is usually a DC coupled AC amplifier. Important parameters for this regulator in no particular order of merit are :-

1) The transient response and settling time should be fast enough to allow the regulator to track load current changes to maintain the
output voltage at the required level.

2) The output impedance should be as low as possible over the load operating bandwidth so any load current induced output voltage changes are minimised.

3) The regulator noise should be as low as possible so this does not interfere with the load circuitry because of the finite supply line
rejection abilities of the load circuits.

4) The regulator supply line rejection should be as high as possible across as wide a bandwidth as possible to reduce the effect of mains
line interference and rectification (conversion of AC current to pulsed DC current) interference.

The Technics motor requires a clean accurate drive signal to maintain accurate platter rotation. Essentially a clean stable supply will reduce signal corruption in the motor control circuitry leading to more stable platter drive and more accurate platter rotation.

---

A lot of that goes over the top of my head, but I understand the gist of it. You being a more technical chap than me, of course, should be able to make better sense of it :)

The bit in bold, is especially significant for me and confirms what I can hear when comparing Paul's SR5-21 (or SR3) to the stock Timestep PSU, when Mike New's heavy platter is used on the SL-1200/1210, not to mention why overrated/overspecified transformers can work very well in a given circuit, even when certain electrical parameters dictate that they are 'unnecessary'.

Paul has said that if anyone has specific questions they'd like to ask, he will come and answer them here :cool:

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hewitt

Can someone explain to me why it is necessary to have power supplies that could be used for welding and bearings better than those in my 1000cc V twin motorbike for playing records

---

I haven't got a 1200/10 but i hope this might help ;)

It's all about performance, you should know something about this having a 1L V twin :eyebrows: What you have with any PSU is an engine that supplies power, after all it is the power supply. Now you could have a PSU that's just big enough to power your turntable, much like a 50cc moped is good for 30MPH even if it takes it's time getting there :doh: However, the way to "performance" in virtually anything (including hifi & turntables) is to fit a massive PSU even if it's only going to be lightly used.

Witness what a massively overated power supply does for big solid state amps like the earlier Krells & Mark Levinsons, it frees them up to deliver massive dynamics that any lesser amp just couldn't get anywhere near delivering. If you are a sensible motorcycle rider you know you have more than enough performance (with that VT 1L) to do just about anything to get you out of trouble & into it if you care to. I know as i have a 1L sitting in my garage that has seen 170MPH.

It's all about being totally over-rated so as nothing will phase it, the consequence of this is improved fidelity :)

About the bearing :eyebrows: Have you tried spinning a record on your crankshaft? Ok, forgetting it's too fast i doubt very much that the vibration would help make any cartridge make the record sound very nice :rolleyes:

Precision leads to greater fidelity as well. What Mike New says makes perfect sense:-

Quote:

---

He obviously has no idea that copper based alloys such as brass and bronze (and many others) have a far greater co-efficient of expansion than steel, especially the chrome/nickel alloy tool steel that my bearing spindle is made from. This implies that at increased temperatures the bearing gap tolerance will increase (just for Dave’s sake, this means that the bearing becomes less stiff, old chap)

---

Even i know that tool steel expands less than brass, bronze etc as temperature inceases. The bearing will not sieze up unless it's run in a bloody cold freezer (when the brass/bronze will contract more than the tool steel shaft & increase friction) :lol:

I had a little trouble with speed stability on one of my decks last winter (not a Techie). The deck is in the cellar, the room is heated but it gets very cold at night. With night temps down to -12C the room must have been very cold. Bolting a power resistor in a TO220 package and running it at about 12W with a Maplin thermostatic controller sorted it. I'm sure this was a more extreme test than has been the case with the MN bearing and even so it wasn't a big problem. I expect the bearing had been running 20C cooler than intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe

I dunno. That's why I use a Roksan; it just plays records!

---

I used to have a Roksan Xerxes and it played records. Until it stopped. Then Roksan withdrew support for it. I sold it in disgust.

I'm staying out of this one, because I have no knowledge of either party's products. All I will say, though, is that as an impartial observer, the whole sorry state is very sad and I believe not good for the onward development of "race-tuned" products for the SL-12X0...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

I used to have a Roksan Xerxes and it played records. Until it stopped. Then Roksan withdrew support for it. I sold it in disgust.

---

Ah well, you win some, you lose some. My orignal Xerxes ran trouble-free for 20 years, then I traded it in for a Xerxes X.

On the other hand, I had a Nytech 252 amp that was trouble from day one, and which (literally) went up in smoke once out of warranty. Some bloke on ANOther forum has been using one daily without a problem for 25 years!

Well, you now have two main options in the UK. Stay with the original platter and lightly beef up the bearing, going with a "standard" external supply and putting the extra into mats of metal and spongy rubbery stuff, or significantly beefing up the bearing and platter, which call for a more powerful, extremely low noise and "fast" power supply, thus taking the whole motor design away from the one originally optimised for the lighter platter. It's to Technics' credit that the more-or-less standard driving electronics can run with the heavy-duty platter and bearing..

I'd still love to compare a fully beefed up and tricked out Techie with an NAS Heavy-Space plus Wave-Mechanic, which costs around the same. One day maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DSJR

I'd still love to compare a fully beefed up and tricked out Techie with an NAS Heavy-Space plus Wave-Mechanic, which costs around the same. One day maybe.

---

Sometimes I wish that I had kept my Heavied and Waved Spacedeck. A beefed up Technics is a very different beast indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DSJR

thus taking the whole motor design away from the one originally optimised for the lighter platter. It's to Technics' credit that the more-or-less standard driving electronics can run with the heavy-duty platter and bearing.

---

It's over-stating things to assume that a heavy platter creates so much more load on the motor. The friction in the MN bearing is perhaps a little more than the Technics one, and that is all the motor is driving against: friction. The sheer inertia of the platter is hardly of consequence since it is already spinning at the correct speed and just needs tiny corrections. Once the motor is up to speed it is hardly working any harder at all, so all the benefits of the brilliant Technics design remain.

If the motor can take disco antics then the heavier platter won't be of any consequence.

Hi Alex,

Quote:

---

I'm staying out of this one, because I have no knowledge of either party's products. All I will say, though, is that as an impartial observer, the whole sorry state is very sad and I believe not good for the onward development of "race-tuned" products for the SL-12X0...

---

Thanks for your thoughts. I know where you're coming from, and there is undoubtedly some truth in what you say.

Since Dave C's return to AoS, which incidentally I saw as a good thing (and still do), after our disagreement over modified PSUs and platters for the Techie a few month's back, I was of course aware of the fallout between him and Mike, but had tried to remain neutral and deliberately stayed out of it in the public domain, as I believed that both of them had something to offer.

However, when Dave (DSJR) copied and pasted here what Dave C had written on the Timestep forum, basically rubbishing very good products (the sonic benefits of which I know all too well), as I use some of them myself, in order to protect his commercial interests and 'score points' against Mike, I couldn't believe what I was reading, and something had to be done.

You cannot make comments like Dave did and expect them not to be challenged, even from the relatively safe sanctuary of your own forum. The Internet is often a remarkably small place....! Dave has undoubtedly shot himself in the foot with some of his remarks - and with a blunderbuss rather than a shotgun.

I think it's very important to have as much factually correct information as possible written in the public domain about any products, in order that interested parties can use that information to arrive at an informed conclusion of their own, not one fatally influenced by commercial bias - and on AoS we will always strive to achieve that.

I sincerely hope that Dave and Mike can put their differences behind them and constructively move forward in their own separate ways, for the very reasons you mentioned.

As far as AOS is concerned, we will always support any products, whether Technics T/T related or otherwise, that are considered as excellent in a given application, and to that end both Dave and Mike are welcome to contribute to our community and advertise their products where necessary.

Marco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clive

If the motor can take disco antics then the heavier platter won't be of any consequence.

---

Keep in mind that DJ's use slipmats, so the platter can move freely while they manipulate the records. Most DJ's are very lighthanded.
If you look at the strobe dots on the SL-1200Mk2 in a turntablism (scratching) video, you'll see that they hardly move at all.

I don't think you can say fairer than any of that Marco - I am an eternal optimist, but reconciliation seems unlikely (understatement of the day) so let's hope things move on more constructively, as you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virak

Keep in mind that DJ's use slipmats, so the platter can move freely while they manipulate the records. Most DJ's are very lighthanded.
If you look at the strobe dots on the SL-1200Mk2 in a turntablism (scratching) video, you'll see that they hardly move at all.

---

I wasn't inferring they force the motor backwards! Any movement of the dots will require more force than is required to keep a heavy platter running at the correct speed.

One thing that attracted me to the forum as a technics owner was the fact that there was fellow techy users pushing the deck to its potential and having alot of fun doing it. Although their was commercial interests involved the engineering ideas seemed sincere and there was no bullshit.
Its sad that things are getting a bit confused and messy.
I hope further experimentation and testing of the Technics will continue by other forum members , people like Marco and Martin whose opinion i trust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clive

I wasn't inferring they force the motor backwards! Any movement of the dots will require more force than is required to keep a heavy platter running at the correct speed.

---

OK. Most audiophiles seem to have the misconception that DJ's force the platter itself, so I thought it would be appropriate to clarify a little.

More OT, I've been following posts regarding SL-1200Mk2 modifications for a couple of years on various forums, and it's the stuff that this thread is about that made me buy KAB products for my Technics'. I'm not saying KAB's products necessarily are the ultimate, but trusting the manufacturer/vendor is important to me. Enough said.

Hi Alex
Gee you are beautiful! I’m a red wino myself.

What this has done is to create a tsunami of opinions on the subject, which in a way can only be good for the likes of Paul Haynes and myself!! who will continue to offer our upgrades as before. For my part I will continue to research and develop further upgrades in order to facilitate the further sonic quality of the SL1200 range.

As a result of Clive’s observations concerning temperatures, I have just put my reference bearing into the freezer. I will report on the results later.
As I stated earlier it was not in my design calculations for the bearing to be used in the outer reaches of Mongolia in mid winter.
In fact no good quality audio equipment should be subjected to such sever temperature cycling, it does not do the components any good, especially valves!!

Martin is absolutely correct in his observations. In fact when you think about it, the bearing has zero side forces in a properly balanced and level situation.
The only force is downwards by virtue of gravity. The bearing housing and bush is there to stop the platter falling over.

The weight of my alluminium platter I do not think affects in any way, the performance of the DD motor. And with the Paul Haynes PS it becomes even less relevant.

One thought I had, is that even though the SL1200 chassis is carrying much more weight with the MN platter & bearing/plate, I do not believe it is 'overloaded' or that the drive system is overtaxed.
On the contrary, I am hearing the best vinyl playback ever out of this deck, and I would bet that it rivals super high end decks.
I also have the Hynes PR3HD power supply module in a DIY PSU I built (equivalent to the SR5)

I think if there is anything to be gained, the very last smidgen of improvement might be realized with a whole new plinth, which is vastly stiffer than the SL1200 chassis. But this is only speculation on my part.

Hey... someone ought to design one :) Please add provision for both 9" and 12" tonearms as well.

For all those that are still interested in my bearings seizing up.

I placed my reference bearing in my freezer at a temp of -5degC for 1 hour.
on taking it out, it was indeed stiffer to turn. It took about 2½ hours to return to room temp. So you see my calculation was about correct, the bearing will work over the accepted SRT to about plus/minus 20degC although I do not believe anybody would want to play their SL1200 on a snowy winters day in the garden.
The reverse will obviously hold. That the bearing will free up (not seize) when placed in a warmer environment.

On another subject;
For all of you who have purchased one of my bearings would you please email me your name and address. If not your address then the country you live in.
The reason being, is that I would like to have a record of all my bearings sold, so that I can if needs be support all of you in the future.
Thanks Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colinB

I hope further experimentation and testing of the Technics will continue by other forum members , people like Marco and Martin whose opinion i trust.

---

Thanks, Colin. I not only love the sound of my SL-1210 but am happy to help others achieve its potential, too. Also happy to have members around for a listen if you can get to Basingstoke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete

One thought I had, is that even though the SL1200 chassis is carrying much more weight with the MN platter & bearing/plate, I do not believe it is 'overloaded' or that the drive system is overtaxed.
On the contrary, I am hearing the best vinyl playback ever out of this deck, and I would bet that it rivals super high end decks.
I also have the Hynes PR3HD power supply module in a DIY PSU I built (equivalent to the SR5)

I think if there is anything to be gained, the very last smidgen of improvement might be realized with a whole new plinth, which is vastly stiffer than the SL1200 chassis. But this is only speculation on my part.

Hey... someone ought to design one :) Please add provision for both 9" and 12" tonearms as well.

---

So the difference between the SR3 and the SR5 is the internals such as the transformer and not the regulator?
I really must stop being a wusse and order one from Paul. I seem to have lost my confidence with DIY electronics but it does look straight forward.
I think the deck could be improved with a good plinth that supports the chassis and not just the four corners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

The friction in the MN bearing is perhaps a little more than the Technics one, and that is all the motor is driving against: friction.

---

Why does the friction need to be greater? If the fit really is closer then surely a less viscous lubricant could be used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

Thanks, Colin. I not only love the sound of my SL-1210 but am happy to help others achieve its potential, too. Also happy to have members around for a listen if you can get to Basingstoke.

---

I would love to hear your system one day Martin. Could do with the inspiration. I know my deck is only half finished and i would like to take it to the next level.

Pure Sound.
The clearance on my bearings is measured in microns so the oil has to be held in the bearing material. This is done by having a honed cintered bush which is vacuum impregnated with oil. The big secret is to obtain as tight a fit as possible and still allow the spindle to rotate with low viscosity oil of the highest grade. The ideal bearing would be a 6" shaft securely bolted to both the platter and the chassis, but I feel that it might not rotate very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colinB

So the difference between the SR3 and the SR5 is the internals such as the transformer and not the regulator?
I really must stop being a wusse and order one from Paul. I seem to have lost my confidence with DIY electronics but it does look straight forward.
I think the deck could be improved with a good plinth that supports the chassis and not just the four corners.

---

Since I have both the SR3 and SR5, I can tell you that the differences include the transformer and the regulator circuit, both of which are much beefier in the SR5.

Actually, the ideal bearing would have zero friction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOTWx69mghM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shuggie

Since I have both the SR3 and SR5, I can tell you that the differences include the transformer and the regulator circuit, both of which are much beefier in the SR5.

---

With the standard platter do you think the SR3 would be sufficient ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colinB

I would love to hear your system one day Martin. Could do with the inspiration. I know my deck is only half finished and i would like to take it to the next level.

---

Just let me know when :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pure sound

Actually, the ideal bearing would have zero friction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOTWx69mghM

---

Thinking of just the bearing that is true. But as part of a drive system that's not necessarily the case. It can be that some resistance helps with motor control for instance.

Given that a motor control system has already been designed for & fitted to the 1210 it'd seem sensible to keep the mechanical & dynamic characteristics of any retro-fittable parts close to those of the originals ie masses, friction etc.

Is it being asserted that using a bearing with greater friction and adding a heavier platter somehow makes better use of the 1210's motor control system than the original items? It'd be interesting to know if there's any actual measurements to support this. (Please note, I'm not doubting that the new platter & bearing change & possibly improve things, I'm just interested to learn how & why)