Numbers behind belt drive and direct drive.

[Pio1980]

flavio81;
"BTW the best Sony direct drive decks used a recorded tone printed on a magnetic tape on the rim of the platter. And that was the frequency generator. Of course, this allows for a much higher frequency generated and thus a much higher resolution."

Sony and Denon, I have an example of each. I've also contended the rim-reading PLL decks have the highest correction resolution. Dunno if the tach freq is sufficient to show any possible correction for modulation stylus drag but that's where I'd look for this form of deviation as well as inherent flutter.

 

[wlmill]

I think better advice would have been to consider the specs but pick the tables who are able to turn those specs into great sound.

All great turntables have good specs. All turntables that have good specs, aren't great turntables.

I agree. If the turntable manufacturer would have given me the same advice you have given, I might have decided to try another one of his turntables. If I am trying to sell a turntable, I would try to do all I could within reason to make a customer happy.

 

[Bob_in_OKC]

I agree. If the turntable manufacturer would have given me the same advice you have given, I might have decided to try another one of his turntables. If I am trying to sell a turntable, I would try to do all I could within reason to make a customer happy.

If you saw that all his turntables have a wow and flutter spec above 0.1% would you have tried another?

 

[illini]

rim-reading PLL decks

My Denon dp7f platter is very light weight. Do you know if they incorporated the rim pll as a substitute for the flywheel effect a heavy platter would provide?

 

[wlmill]

If you saw that all his turntables have a wow and flutter spec above 0.1% would you have tried another?

I would have tried another one. I try to be open minded about things. each turntable sounds different and I would have been curious to see what another one of his tables sounded like. It would be hard for me to overlook a wow and flutter spec of 0.1%, but it would have been interesting to find out. If I knew someone who had one, I would be willing to give it a listen.

I don't know if I will ever purchase a new table, I am having too much fun with vintage decks.

 

[Octaven]

My high school graduation present (1963) was a KLH 11.

I was hoping somebody would say something like that. There were certainly stereo lp's as early as 1962 and maybe earlier.

Possibly it was different in England. The Moody Blues album referred to earlier is 1967 vintage. I recall the the first Procol Harum album in 1967 was only available in mono, or "re-processed stereo", which was fake.

But probably a few million Beatles fans would say otherwise.

 

[Octaven]

...........Flutter measurement done the real way (the DIN way) uses a 3150 Hz tone track on a record. Which is much much much higher resolution than a 50.5 hertz signal, obviously..........

I've always thought of flutter as a rapid +/- fluctuation in speed... but could any turntable platter (if you think of it as a flywheel) be induced to have speed fluctuations of such a rapid (3150 Hz) nature? I would think that anything measurable at that speed would more likely be some sort of (intermodulation?) distortion brought on by platter vibration/ringing.

 

[Multiplex]

...the philips actually uses quite a sophisticated speed control circuit for its time.
Try cleaning the pitch control pots and rotating them a few times in either direction.
(servisol 10 is good stuff for cleaning & servisol 40 for lubricating)

One of these days when I get the time, I'll give that Philips a good clean-up. It's a nice enough table to justify a little time and effort spent. Even though at best it should only achieve it's .1% W & F spec, I doubt it's performing anywhere near that. I haven't written it off yet!

 

[Pio1980]

My Denon dp7f platter is very light weight. Do you know if they incorporated the rim pll as a substitute for the flywheel effect a heavy platter would provide?

Possibly, dunno. It'd make sense to provide a "hysteresis" effect with considering platter momentum vs motor torque to manage response time vs flutter along with the rest of the factors.
The Mitz LT-30 has a suprizingly light platter for it's moderate torque, is not a rim-reading tach but is incredibly listenable. OTOH the later ReVoX Linatracks have a comparatively massive platter with a moderate torque motor, again not a rim-reader and again incredibly listenable. Both are quartz-clocked PLL systems BTW, like my rim-reading Denon and Sony. I also have a Pioneer PL-L1000 with the higher torque multi-pole core 3-phase motor and smaller & coarser tach set-up than the ReVoX and Mitz's 4-pole planar motors with larger tachs and the Pioneer has a relatively massive platter and it sounds fine to me.
This is obviously a systems-approach situation rather than picking one characteristic and zero-ing on that and each mfgr finds (or not) the best approach to the best result. As much as I 'like' rim-reading DD TTs, the proof is in the long-term listening and no specific technological approach seems to dominate overall for sonic excellence. The ReVoX and Mitz are getting my attention at present, the Pioneer is a dedicated strain gauge cartridge rig and gets it's share of time in the system for it's own virtues. The Sony is sidelined for the Mitz and the Denon is in my 'A' system which is not getting much use while I'm fooling with my 'B' experimental nearfield system.

 

[flavio81]

That's the second time you called me a liar. Why?

Dude: look at BOTH the sl5200 and the 1200mk2 specs, they list the JIS figures, which are both 0.025%!

http://www.vinylengine.com/library/technics.shtml

I have not called you a liar so please re-read my post. I just wanted to say that measuring the FG output is not a reliable way to establish flutter figures, and i proved my point objectively. I'm not having anything against Technics DD turntables.

Now, if you want me to elaborate more... JIS weighted RMS figures are not the same as IEC weighted peak-to-peak which are not quite the same than DIN weighted peak-to-peak figures.

Moreover, two turntables can have 0.06% combined wow&flutter but the way this speed instability manifests be different, for example one has the fluctuation at a rate of 3Hz and the other at 6Hz etc.

On other forum we have done real life w&f tests of turntables and two turntables with under 0.1% w&f can behave very different in terms of flutter spectrum.

Finally, as the bruel&kjaer document tells us, flutter measurement can vary with the tonearm and cartridge used due to the tonearm "warp-wow" effect.

 

[flavio81]

I've always thought of flutter as a rapid +/- fluctuation in speed... but could any turntable platter (if you think of it as a flywheel) be induced to have speed fluctuations of such a rapid (3150 Hz) nature? I would think that anything measurable at that speed would more likely be some sort of (intermodulation?) distortion brought on by platter vibration/ringing.

Sorry, i didn't take care to explain.

The 3150Hz is the tone used for measurement. You put a special record with a 3150Hz sine wave and play it back. In theory what should come out of the turntable is a steady 3150Hz tone. In practice the tone deviates up and down, say from 3120 to 3160Hz. That's about 40Hz of deviation, which would mean a 1.26% fluctuation then.

( Of course, i'm oversimplifying !! )

 

[BrocLuno]

I was stating rock and roll performance in stereo . One of the Justin Hayward interviews on You Tube has this. I was almost 4 when the record player broke. Does anyone remember the suitcase record systems from the 1960's?

http://home.usit.net/~collies6/45rpm.htm

Yes, and I'm glad to have moved on

Both of the JVC QL Y66 & 77 F models maintain 0.015% W&F, 0.002% speed stability, and -80dB S/N. Even my QL Y5F will do -78dB S/N and similar speed stability numbers.

Yamaha GT2000 will do better than that - although VinylEngine does not have the numbers for the GT decks

 

[illini]

flavio81; Technics lists both JIS and IEC standards. And we don't need you to eleborate because we can read the standards online ourselves:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow_and_flutter_measurement

 

[jleon92f]

You don't need no stinking numbers...But!

How Does it sound is the most important question I would think! I don't read specs, I just listen to the sound it produces to tell me it's good!


John.

 

[ETI_5000]

flavio81;
"BTW the best Sony direct drive decks used a recorded tone printed on a magnetic tape on the rim of the platter. And that was the frequency generator. Of course, this allows for a much higher frequency generated and thus a much higher resolution."

Sony and Denon, I have an example of each. I've also contended the rim-reading PLL decks have the highest correction resolution. Dunno if the tach freq is sufficient to show any possible correction for modulation stylus drag but that's where I'd look for this form of deviation as well as inherent flutter.

And Sansui also used it - my XR-Q7 also has the tape head inside the platter rim, and has (according to the service manual) magnetic poles “magnetized in a magnetic paint material on the inside of the platter”, which are read by the tape head, and used to control the quartz PLL servo system. Here's the tape head as a spare part http://www.sansui-parts-shop.com/index.php?page=details&prod=2998&cat=252&group=60 ! I'm not sure which other Sansui turntables used it, but there may have been others, like the XP-99 or XR-Q5.

 

[drillher]

How good is the stock tone arm on a SL-1200? Reading the posts here,it seems the drive system is nice,but there are different opinions of the tone arm.

 

[flavio81]

How good is the stock tone arm on a SL-1200? Reading the posts here,it seems the drive system is nice,but there are different opinions of the tone arm.

I think that for the price of the TT it is a good tonearm, even more if you add the fluid damping accesory that KAB sells, and wrap the tonearm tube in a damping material.

As long as you choose a mid or mid-low compliance cartridge, of course!!

 

[Brett a]

All I could find about expensive turntables were reviews and tests that looked more like wine review than a precision machine review.

These are the types of review/reports I find most helpful and informative.

As it has been said here many times already, specs are useful to a point; they can be used to determine what 'tables to consider at a determined price point. But after the reading is done, they must be listened to to determine which one is best. This is a completely subjective step in the process so can ONLY be related using subjective terminology.

I have found subjective terminology quite reliable.--more reliable in fact than measurement when trying to understand how something is actually going to perform and if I might like it. As most people know, equipment that measures the same, rarely (if ever) sounds the same from model to model or manufacturer to manufacturer.

So from this perspective, I'd argue that subjective "wine tasting" type information is much more useful and reliable than only reading measurements when it comes to choosing audio equipment. After all, I buy it to listen to, not to run my test equipment with.

(...) don't pick on specs alone, because they don't tell you how its going to sound. They're good fodder for forum arguments, but (...)

'Ya think?

 

[Dr Tinear]

... As it has been said here many times already, specs are useful to a point; they can be used to determine what 'tables to consider at a determined price point. But after the reading is done, they must be listened to to determine which one is best. ...

I agree with this statement. Objective specs can tell you which turntables not to audition, but they can't tell you which turntable will sound best. Only a subjective audition can do that.

I have found subjective terminology quite reliable.--more reliable in fact than measurement when trying to understand how something is actually going to perform and if I might like it. As most people know, equipment that measures the same, rarely (if ever) sounds the same from model to model or manufacturer to manufacturer.

So from this perspective, I'd argue that subjective "wine tasting" type information is much more useful and reliable than only reading measurements when it comes to choosing audio equipment. After all, I buy it to listen to, not to run my test equipment with. ...

My experience with subjective reviews is less positive than yours, Brett. My ears are more sensitive than average to speed instability (wow and flutter) and speed inaccuracy (pitch error), and the classical music that makes up most of my playlists is better at revealing speed problems than most other musical genres are. I've read far too many subjective turntable reviews in which the reviewer either couldn't hear speed problems or didn't think they were important enough to merit more than a line or two in a multi-page review. Reviews of that sort are worthless to me, and they've convinced me that all subjective turntable reviews need to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[JohnVF]

My experience with subjective reviews is less positive than yours, Brett. My ears are more sensitive than average to speed instability (wow and flutter) and speed inaccuracy (pitch error), and the classical music that makes up most of my playlists is better at revealing speed problems than most other musical genres are. I've read far too many subjective turntable reviews in which the reviewer either couldn't hear speed problems or didn't think they were important enough to merit more than a line or two in a multi-page review. Reviews of that sort are worthless to me, and they've convinced me that all subjective turntable reviews need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I would think, then, that the idea of using specs to weed out what you look into would be the key, though. So you wouldn't look into a subjective review of a lower end Rega, but might look at one of a VPI, as they tend to have very good W&F specs.