• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Micro Seiki owner's club

Granite does ring so I went with a constrained layer sub plinth on mine. Two sheets of aluminum with a sheet of rubber between. Vibrational energy is converted to heat.

High moment if inertia is good- total weight can be the same in a small thick disc as a large thin one but inertia on the larger one is higher. So “bigger” is better than “heavier” in a flywheel but when space is a premium go heavier in a smaller diameter to obtain the same inertia as a larger diameter.
 
I have a design for an equipment rack with glass shelves (that do not ring) as well. Just no time.

An old tonearm design too (rev 3 on that, still on paper as improvements come to mind). Novel arm tube construction type/method that is light, strong and does not ring (looks cool too). That detail probably needs proper IP in place as I feel it will upset the industry...

Yeah, I make stuff. (and I engineer when my son lets me drive his HO trains)
 
I look forward to seeing that tonearm, when the IP is in place.
My MA-303 might be temporary. I intend to build a magnetically levitated tonearm someday. The internet states it to be impossible, but I intend to prove the internet wrong. But I have many more urgent projects so I might not make it to the tonearm...

One way to damp the glass is to laminate glass with polycarbonate. Another is to mount a tuned-mass damper in the center of the pane. Do you know other tricks?
 
If "the internet" can make a single-point arm work, a mag-lev arm can work. Don't listen to the internet.

The MA-505 is tough to beat and drops in place of the 303. Between the Rega arm and the 505, it's not terribly easy to exceed that performance, though many will disagree with that (and that's fine). The "X" suffix arm uses a fully shielded coaxial cable for the cartridge. The "S" suffix arm has silver wire. The 707 has adjustable effective mass that I initially found attractive, but it is accomplished by sliding a weight up and down the arm tube, essentially creating two higher frequency nodes in place of a single lower one. I wasn't sold on this idea's implementation enough to chase it, but they tend to be less expensive than the 505 if you wanted to test the waters.

The big "thing" with my arm design is the length. It is well known (simple geometry) that tracking distortion drops with length increase. But effective mass goes up with length, and also stiffness goes down with length. Both tend to be bad actors for a "universal" arm- one that is not suited to a single type of cartridge (high or low compliance). No free lunch as the saying goes.

Therefore, the challenge is a long, stiff acoustically inert arm tube that doesn't weigh four pounds. The tensioned cable idea looks interesting, but every length of cable between nodes (attachment points/breakover points) is resonant at a frequency. But it can provide a light and stiff structure. So really, the arm should be designed around the desired cartridge. The technology is so old, and we have the internet to draw upon to see if a desired arm/cartridge pairing had ever been done. Like the Benz-Micro silver on the Rega arm. That's what I ran for a long time, but I had to get there... I don't know it was done before I did it and further, I did not use the Rega alignment, I used Baerwald which has the cartridge "twisted" relative to the head shell. Just the way it is. Then "quality time" with test records to refine it from there for anti-skate force.

Material selection and implementation, and novel design all must come together as one. You must draw on multiple disciplines simultaneously or go through many premeditations to get to the end (which is never "the end"). I don't have time to continue down the path I started; I don't have funding to hire a patent attorney to draw up a disclosure and present it to the patent office, so it will remain "trade secret" until that situation changes, if ever.

On my BL-91 I run the 505X-II arm with the correct "X" head shells and either the V15-III or V15-V cartridge. The V15 line and the 505 are a match (possibly) made for each other. Really quite stunning. I do want to give the B-M Silver a whirl on there and I have a spare head shell available...
 
Have you considered a "provisional" patent? They are easy and cheap (relatively). They are only temporary, but give you a year to do some disclosure and marketing at low risk.
 
No but it still doesn’t create the time to fabricate the embodiment and do some empirical testing. Maybe someday…
 
That is not difficult or the roadblock here. It's creating the embodiment and verifying it performs as expected. Only then would I be prepared to move forward with IP protection.

It would be good if I could partner with someone in the industry I could trust...
 
I sometimes take the opposite approach.
I get the provisional patent for under $1k, and can then take the idea, sketches, proposal, to industry events were I can brainstorm with many of those "in the industry" in a single week and observe their reactions. If it falls flat I cut-bait and move to another idea. If I get lots of excitement I am more comfortable investing and sometimes find that partner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: j!m
Yes I’m sure they did the lead lamination as they did for the -91.

That small lever locks and unlocks to raise and lower the arm assembly… I bet other arms could be adapted to that bore easily as long as their effective length is the same (same spindle to pivot distance). But it would exclude other arms of differing effective length.

I see the platter would be in the way, but my thought was to modify the plinth to take the bases used for the -91L. Of course a unique base with a shape like the -91 motor cover might be cool, and would fit the space.

It appears it could play 16” records, which is kinda neat, albeit limited.
Bit more about model BL-1001W (in German). Micro Seiki BL-1001 W ( German ) - Micro Seiki World
 
  • Like
Reactions: j!m
That is an interesting design.

In the modeling world, we use the term "kit bash" to use parts from other kits to enhance the model we're working on... And that scream "kit bash" to me.

BL-71 control lever, arm and attached controls from another model I can't identify right now, the heavy platter driven by the (looks like anyway) same motor as the BL-91, but a smaller spindle and sub-platter arrangement.

Plinth is most unusual- a shell over a sub plinth, rather than a lamination as I suspected. Very interesting!
 
The BL-1001W is an actual Micro design. They don’t pop up very often, but I do see them on Yahoo Japan every so often. Bit of a unicorn.
 
I'm not saying it isn't. Micro created a product with very few "unique" parts. This is smart business. It is a unique product, but they didn't have to invent a lot of unique pieces to create it.
 
In appearance, BL-1001W shares certain similarities with the Micro Seiki DD-100 (the best direct drive turntable they made). So it would be nice to know when this model (that was only sold for the Japanese markets) was actually produced? Earlier than their more common belt drive turntables like BL-71, BL-91 etc. Or later/same time and it used some older stock parts? I mean, after their top model DD-100, there still were a few newer (and cheaper) direct drive models like the DD-120 and DD-150 etc., before Micro Seiki completely focused on belt drive turntables. If similar technology can be found with other BL turntables, is it possible that they have taken/used the same parts in them later as in here? Would the completion number etc. tell you something about the time of manufacture? I could check that.
 
Last edited:
What models do you work on, j!m?

Also, interesting site, Lexar. Looking at the 1001 it uses the 12" MA-505L arm, which may have silver wire. Also looking at the BL-10X description on the site, he says it came out in 1982, and has the same plinth feet as the 1001, so it's possible they're close in age.

I do like the look of the 1001, and the longer arm. The variable impedance and capacitance might be fun to mess with. If I see one in decent nick for a reasonable price I may well grab it and move on my 71.
 
Last edited:
I mainly work on the BL-91 and up spindles. Clean polish and Re lubricate with a polymer bearing ball. I’ve done a vacuum one as well, but that’s a funky design I’m surprised is what they actually did… but I’ll consider anything.

And the 505L won’t drop in to replace a 505. The longer effective length requires a longer pivot to spindle distance. This is why the BL-91L plinth is different from the regular -91: to accommodate the longer distance.
 
Back
Top Bottom