marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
A TD-150 is on my short list of decks to try because I want to experience the original LP-12 at an affordable price.
Ummm, typing as polite as I can...........the Original LP-12 is called an AR XA
:thmbsp:
Modified Vintage, or High End Modern Technology
- Thread starter ehoove
- Start date
Ummm, typing as polite as I can...........the Original LP-12 is called an AR XA
:thmbsp:
marc mc
Super Member
IMO what these vintage idlers offers is a path to very good sound to a handy person for very little money. With basic modification you can achieve a level that offers increadable value to the dollar. The Raven's and Brinkmans go from $15K up, up and up.
The fact that these tables are mentioned in the same breath as top flight tables should be enough to get the curious. If I ever planned on spending the price of a car on a TT to have a modern Uber table I can think of a few. But as it is with chump change and a bit of elbow grease I'm more than happy.
Marc mc
dnewma04
The Healer
Ummm, typing as polite as I can...........the Original LP-12 is called an AR XA
:thmbsp:
Well, in some ways, of course you are correct. But if showed my wife (or any other non-audio fan) three pictures and said which one of these is not like the other, she'd surely pick the AR-XA.
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
Well, in some ways, of course you are correct. But if showed my wife three pictures and said which one of these is not like the other, she'd surely pick the AR-XA.
Smart woman that wife of yours.....you should listen to her sometimes
Hamish Robertson if he were still alive would argue the case for the Ariston RD11.
Linn stated in their first advert:
"Please note that Castle Precision Engineering(Glasgow) Ltd.,241 Drakemire Drive,Castlemilk,Glasgow,G45 9SZ,wish it to be known that they have designed(Design Copyright),Developed(Patent Pending) the special bearing and bearing housing assembly,and pressed steel chassis incorporated into the transcription deck sold up to December 1972 under the name Ariston RD 11.In order to satisfy consumer demands,we have purchased new premises adjacent to the present factory and formed the company of Linn Products Ltd and are now manufacturing our own unique product,the " Linn-Sondek LP 12" transcription deck."
Linn stated in their first advert:
"Please note that Castle Precision Engineering(Glasgow) Ltd.,241 Drakemire Drive,Castlemilk,Glasgow,G45 9SZ,wish it to be known that they have designed(Design Copyright),Developed(Patent Pending) the special bearing and bearing housing assembly,and pressed steel chassis incorporated into the transcription deck sold up to December 1972 under the name Ariston RD 11.In order to satisfy consumer demands,we have purchased new premises adjacent to the present factory and formed the company of Linn Products Ltd and are now manufacturing our own unique product,the " Linn-Sondek LP 12" transcription deck."
Last edited:
My Ariston would agree, has been infuriated with all of the upstarts. You know what happens to Scots when they get infuriated.....
I have a high quotient of Scots genes as well and was married to one for a decade. Funny that she drank everything but scotch.I am 75% Scot.
More on topic, my RD11s is completely original except the belt, came to me almost unused. Even the cart and stylus were like new. Apart from a fresh set up, lube and a new belt it is as it came from the factory (if the place it was built really qualifies as such). I was just listening to it as you posted about the Ariston and it really sounds amazingly good for all that. So, do I follow the Linn upgrade path with it or not? Some new motor mounts are certainly desirable, but how far to take it? Just enjoy it as it is and do something else for a more precise table? I have always been surprised at how enjoyable it makes my recordings sound in spite of being able to detect its little flaws. A quandary of sorts.
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
In the bearing drain example I gave of how BigBill and I went about this on his SP15, two things are in play here..........What passes through that finds the tension rod and mass damper.
I saw those things hanging under Bills's SP 15's. Then I had an epiphany! Now I know what I can use those scarred brake rotors for....instead of taking them to the scrap yard and cashing them in on a metal run. I bet the rotors from a 89 Dodge Dynasty would make great mass dampers.
Regards
Mister Pig
Good idea, I've never paid a visit. Part of my quandary is that the other project I've got in mind involves an SP-15 that needs a much better plinth than the AT one it came with. Bill's idea with the drain looks like one interesting thing to ponder. Again, how far to go is good enough? Limited budget means giving these things careful thought.
Only you can answer that question. There is a lot of relevant posting on this thread about the angst of upgrading turntables beyond what they were designed for and I think that it is a highly valid point.
My GT 2000 was designed to be a base platform for which relevant options were offered by the manufacturer at the time of its release. It is a vintage Direct Drive Super Deck that provided for within the design of the stock base unit a 40 pound platter, a stand alone power supply that enhances performance, a suspension cradle, a vacuum platter mat, optional arm upgrade, and arm lifter, a dedicated stand.
There might be more that I've overlooked. :yes:
We have one GT 2000 owner here on AK who is a VPI dealer. He is wildly enthusiastic about the sonics of the stock GT 2000 and equally gushes about the quality of the stock arm which he has equated with current arms that cost more than the entire turntable's second-hand price. :yes:
Sometimes it is actually good value to go with a turntable that was designed to provide better than stock performance, than to be endlessly modifying something that was never designed to be better than it is.
Frank Sol
Lunatic Member
Yep. :yes:
I don't use the stock mat either. My method is cork/foam 'spots' stuck to the underside of a Boston Audio carbon/graphite Mat 2. In conjunction atop the record itself I use a HRS Audio Analog Disk record weight.
The lead sinkers damp some of the resonance of the platter(verified by tapping the rim of the platter). I've used the cork/foam spot method to raise a hard platter mat ( Boston Audio) away from the platter on my last two turntables and I have liked what this method does for the sonics in both instances.
The same applies for vertical seismic isolation provided by mag-lev footers. Beneath my Yamaha PX-2 I used the SAP Relaxa 3+ mag-lev stand. With the GT 2000 I have gone a few steps beyond that, using a three tier support of ( from bottom to top) mag-lev/ polymer damping/ ceramic spherical cup and rollerball type coupling horizontal isolation. The top cup and ball set-up is directly beneath and in contact with the underside of the GT 2000.
It has taken a mountain of fine tuning. The most difficult part has been the optimisation of the polymer objects in the middle tier. They need to be optimised both to the number of them plus the exact weight that rests upon them. I am using bricks in conjunction with the 65+ pounds of the GT 2000 to get that right.
There might be a little more that I can wring from this set-up, but it sounds amazing and is finally more than worth all the effort that I have put into it. It took a better pair of speakers (the KRKs) and a better preamp ( The Truth)for me to finally understand what was necessary to get the most out of this complicated support set-up.
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
(cough......Marc's......cough) Bill designed and employed it.
Ah, well done. Credit where credit is due for sure! I don't recall if it said so back in the thread about it, just remember reading it with interest.
I really am in the same sort of position as the OP, only far down the totem pole, earlier in the process and with far less budget. New higher-end tables are not an option here at the moment, but getting the best LP reproduction I can without spending large sums of money is the goal. Some things I can do myself, others not. Deciding where to begin is an issue.
Maybe this should be a whole new thread and I'm hijacking a bit, but here goes.
The raw materials are as follows:
Technics SP-15 drive (in good shape)
Ariston RD11s (in excellent original condition, could maybe use new motor mounts at the least)
Arms:
SME 3009 Improved
ATP12T
Sumiko (forget the model, but S arm with interchangeable heads)
Where to begin?
marcmorin
RIP 1953-2020
On the RD11S ( i used to own one as well) the first major weak point is the coupling of the arm mount plate (not arm board) to the subchassis. The second weak point is the mass distribution across the whole suspended assembly. Third weak point is the motor has to be held rigid. Any movement of the motor changes distance from the pulley to subplatter.
If you can feel the motor vibration while it's running, so does the pulley, belt, subplatter. If you can hear the motor running, so does the top plate and the suspension via the studs. The springs do not filter that noise well due to the free end of the suspension stud. Dump the bottom cover, it only makes the plinth become an echo chamber, or acoustic guitar body.
I can see I need to do some thread hunting once I get the house renos done and get settled again. I remember reading about some of this a year or two back. I spot a major learning curve ahead, but having done some of this sort of thing to my late (lamented) TD-125 I guess it is not an insurmountable task. I don't feel vibration from the motor, but it is just audible and I always figured this to be a bad thing.
The SP-15 is in some ways an easier project for me as I have some woodworking skills and tools. A good plinth and a second arm that is easier to work with than the ATP12T would be nice. Upgrading the drive itself can be done along the way in stages I'd imagine, no?