+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 41 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 402

Thread: Happy Anniversary - taking a Pink Triangle for a spin

  1. #1
    Join Date: Apr 2013

    Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU

    Posts: 2,831
    I'm Richard.

    Default Happy Anniversary - taking a Pink Triangle for a spin

    This is a thread about my interest in modifying a Pink Triangle - my own early Mk1 PT from when I worked at the company. In part it is to investigate the "belt drive" prejudice, in part to revisit with Arthur the original thoughts behind the Anniversary turntable as the company's attempt at the ultimate refinement of the Pink Triangle ideas, in a "statement" product, and in large part a result of considering following the Pink Triangle modification thread on Vinyl Engine, and discussing what to do and how to do it with Arthur.

    Early on it picked up hostile comment, and complete derailment into other subjects and I deleted the opening post and replaced it with a sulky reference to the thread crapping. I can no longer remember the original post, but have asked Marco to insert this so that the thread makes a bit more sense.
    Last edited by Oldpinkman; 03-08-2015 at 12:09.

  2. #2
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Deleted

    Posts: 6,585
    I'm Deleted.

    Default Happy Anniversary - taking a Pink Triangle for a spin

    I've got a Pink Triangle at home now - the platter and bearing are nicely made (motor pulley is good too) but the rest of it is horribly engineered!
    Account Deleted

  3. #3
    Join Date: May 2012

    Location: Toulouse, France

    Posts: 6,562
    I'm Kevin.

    Default

    Spin is a great TT bearing. Certainly the best that I have used sonically.
    This post reminds me that I need to sell my Mike New Technics bearing.

    I must take some photos of it tomorrow....
    Kevin

    Too busy enjoying the music....

    European loan coordinator for Graham Slee HiFi system components..

  4. #4
    Join Date: Apr 2013

    Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU

    Posts: 2,831
    I'm Richard.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YNWaN View Post
    I've got a Pink Triangle at home now - the platter and bearing are nicely made (motor pulley is good too) but the rest of it is horribly engineered!

    That is of course urban legend. It is true that when you take the lid off a basic PT the appearance is home-built. However, the engineering is fine enough. It perhaps needs to be seen in the context of its time compared with its rival the LP12. Indeed, it was basically designed by Arthur, who at the time was working for Wessex Helicopters, as a response to his disgust at the pile of junk he got when he bought himself an LP12.

    Now, at the time, Arthur rather naievly thought Linn should sell their decks at the cost of the components plus a tenner for their time, and forgot that VAT, dealer margin, distributor margin (pricing is international) and manufacturer overheads mean that as a broad brush guide final price will be 3x component cost. And the original PT's problem was it cost more than twice the cost of an LP12 and tried to sell for the same £300.

    Great engineering includes a rigid, light, non-resonant sub-chassis. OK it was scruffy, but for a normal punter playing a record, why did they need to see it? Aerolam is a git to cut (they were hand cut with a jig-saw originally). In engineering terms far better than the boingy pressed steel LP12 item (LP12 £3 - PT £35 again)

    Even the plinth was a profiled (ok ok I know - "skirting board") design on a PT compared with a plank of wood and a couple of routed grooves on a Linn. Of course, this necessitated the nemesis of Pink Triangle - quite the scruffiest and most unreliable thing on the turntable, the poxy pink lids - which due to the profile of the plinth had to be deeper than standard and so cheap injection moulded options not available. Cost of a smart pretty moulded in volume Linn lid - £3. Scruffy Pink PT lid - £35.

    The suspension, which was easily adjustable from above, was also inherently stable and didn't need to be "guyed down" with the arm cable. Arranging for the centre of mass to be at the centre of suspension, and for the suspension to hang from springs rather than perch on them meant it was stabilised by gravity rather than destabilised by gravity (imagine balancing a weight on a coil spring with the weight on the top - it will want to wobble over, and once it tips won't return to centre. Now hang the weight below the spring and the opposite is true)

    So scruffy - but sound functional engineering - which still performs to a very high standard. If you are using it, I would suggest a new belt and one of the new spin bearings which has transformed mine. If you are not, and thinking of selling it, let me know how much you want for it.


  5. #5
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Deleted

    Posts: 6,585
    I'm Deleted.

    Default Happy Anniversary - taking a Pink Triangle for a spin

    Sorry, but it's not urban legend at all. The chassis on mine looks like it was cut out with blunt nail clippers and the finish of the top plate isn't very good. I'm not enamoured by the mechanism employed to level the suspension either (adjustable from the side). As you say though, the engineering is sound, (the conceptual engineering), it's the build quality which is a bit ropey.

    The plinth isn't any better than on the Linn, both are profiled as you put it and both start off as planks of wood.

    Injection moulding a lid isn't cheap at all - the cost of the mould is enormous. Hand fabricating a lid is much cheaper in small quantities - it's not better though.

    "The old bearing was suffering from a bit of wow and flutter" I very much doubt that. I can think of a ton of things to improve before replacing the bearing!
    Last edited by YNWaN; 30-07-2015 at 12:34.
    Account Deleted

  6. #6
    Join Date: Aug 2013

    Location: London

    Posts: 1,499
    I'm Sam.

    Default

    Maybe it was... with something like a Pink Triangle, you get people taking them apart and modding them (because it's already scruffy which encourages it) and making their own subchassis etc. That might well be the case if it has a complete, PT2 style subchassis which as been made to replace a PT1 version with it's motor hole.

  7. #7
    Join Date: Aug 2013

    Location: London

    Posts: 1,499
    I'm Sam.

    Default

    So is the Spin available already for the PT or just an idea Arthur played with. What is the Spin anyway, back to a non-inverted bearing?

  8. #8
    Join Date: Jan 2009

    Location: Norwich

    Posts: 2,814
    I'm Hugo.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldpinkman View Post
    That is of course urban legend. It is true that when you take the lid off a basic PT the appearance is home-built. However, the engineering is fine enough. It perhaps needs to be seen in the context of its time compared with its rival the LP12. Indeed, it was basically designed by Arthur, who at the time was working for Wessex Helicopters, as a response to his disgust at the pile of junk he got when he bought himself an LP12.

    Now, at the time, Arthur rather naievly thought Linn should sell their decks at the cost of the components plus a tenner for their time, and forgot that VAT, dealer margin, distributor margin (pricing is international) and manufacturer overheads mean that as a broad brush guide final price will be 3x component cost. And the original PT's problem was it cost more than twice the cost of an LP12 and tried to sell for the same £300.

    Great engineering includes a rigid, light, non-resonant sub-chassis. OK it was scruffy, but for a normal punter playing a record, why did they need to see it? Aerolam is a git to cut (they were hand cut with a jig-saw originally). In engineering terms far better than the boingy pressed steel LP12 item (LP12 £3 - PT £35 again)

    Even the plinth was a profiled (ok ok I know - "skirting board") design on a PT compared with a plank of wood and a couple of routed grooves on a Linn. Of course, this necessitated the nemesis of Pink Triangle - quite the scruffiest and most unreliable thing on the turntable, the poxy pink lids - which due to the profile of the plinth had to be deeper than standard and so cheap injection moulded options not available. Cost of a smart pretty moulded in volume Linn lid - £3. Scruffy Pink PT lid - £35.

    The suspension, which was easily adjustable from above, was also inherently stable and didn't need to be "guyed down" with the arm cable. Arranging for the centre of mass to be at the centre of suspension, and for the suspension to hang from springs rather than perch on them meant it was stabilised by gravity rather than destabilised by gravity (imagine balancing a weight on a coil spring with the weight on the top - it will want to wobble over, and once it tips won't return to centre. Now hang the weight below the spring and the opposite is true)

    So scruffy - but sound functional engineering - which still performs to a very high standard. If you are using it, I would suggest a new belt and one of the new spin bearings which has transformed mine. If you are not, and thinking of selling it, let me know how much you want for it.

    Speaking as someone who compared the Pink Triangle to the LP12 and Logic DM101 back in the early 80s, my memory of it was of something that sounded quite good, but it's quality was clearly woeful. Laughable, in fact. My money went on the LP12 and that sounded good too. It's notable that only the LP12 is a genuine survivor from those days of the British super-decks - that's partly because it was (and still is) well made and properly supported by its maker.

  9. #9
    Join Date: Aug 2013

    Location: London

    Posts: 1,499
    I'm Sam.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ammonite Acoustics View Post
    ...that's partly because it was (and still is) well made and properly supported by its maker.
    and mostly due to its marketting, promotion and dealer control back in the day. Once you get a brand established in the media, you really don't have to do much work other than make regular changes 'upgrades' to keep your brand followers hooked and the gear still in the headlines.

    It's true that keeping a product going over decades has massive benefits, especially to lifting a brand's status. Lifting the price also makes the old ones more valuable in comparison, lifting secondhand prices. Higher secondhand prices then in turn generate status and re-writes the history of that product ("if the old ones cost today, then they must have been really great back then!").

    Reading the reviews in old mags, there was always a "this sounds better than the Linn" product popping up every other month, yet get back to today and people will rate the same era decks the other way around contradicting those reviews, often without actually having heard them back to back. And so the brand myth is purpetuated.

    Even the great sounding PT1 got pressured into taking a backward step with the Linn motor of the PT2 due to marketing/magazine/dealer pressure such was the environment back then.

    Really, I think the Linn survives today because of the how the business was run, including the very low cost of manufacture.

    Personally I find Linns so so and prefered the PT 1 I had. Now have an Alphason though.

  10. #10
    Join Date: Apr 2013

    Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU

    Posts: 2,831
    I'm Richard.

    Default

    I never know where to start with forum experts.

    Wow and flutter can be measured and was.

    The UNIT cost of a moulded lid is much lower - and Linns was a standard size manufactured in volume - they even made it available to other manufacturers.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 41 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •