Finyl Vinyl
New Member
Apparently brass. But I would imagine that acrylic should be better. What thickness are you looking at. Perhaps I would also like to have one done
Garrard 301 takes off
- Thread starter stevieboy
- Start date
>>>
To digress and addressed to the gurus here to sate my curiosity :
It seems that direct drive provides greater torque and hence there is an immediacy to the music which is apparently lacking in belt drive tts. If that be so and if most audiophiles prefer the direct drive mechanism, why aren't tt makers introducing them? There are quite a few high end tts too, but with the possible exception of the Brinkmann, I don't see direct drive tts. Why?
Regards
issigonis
To digress and addressed to the gurus here to sate my curiosity :
It seems that direct drive provides greater torque and hence there is an immediacy to the music which is apparently lacking in belt drive tts. If that be so and if most audiophiles prefer the direct drive mechanism, why aren't tt makers introducing them? There are quite a few high end tts too, but with the possible exception of the Brinkmann, I don't see direct drive tts. Why?
Regards
issigonis
From what I could find out, there are 2 factors here
1. Technology/Design: it is not so easy to design the Motor and the plinth to ensure stable rotation and at the same time avoid the "Rumble" that the motor can create in the plinth and hence impact the Carts pickup
very few folks have managed to get this right
2. Perception: since in the past PLinths were not so well designed and due to many inferior designs the general perception is that DDs are inferior to a belt..
the same is true for Idlers as well... (although the criticality of the motor is perhaps a little less and the impact of the plinth a Lot more here ?)
1. Technology/Design: it is not so easy to design the Motor and the plinth to ensure stable rotation and at the same time avoid the "Rumble" that the motor can create in the plinth and hence impact the Carts pickup
very few folks have managed to get this right
2. Perception: since in the past PLinths were not so well designed and due to many inferior designs the general perception is that DDs are inferior to a belt..
the same is true for Idlers as well... (although the criticality of the motor is perhaps a little less and the impact of the plinth a Lot more here ?)
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
On the torque issue my basic understanding is as follows. The maximum torque required by the motor should be equal to the rotational friction so that angular velocity dies not fall. The friction will depend on platter weight and speed. Higher platter weight is greater stability but greater all round cost also. any more torque is irrelevant and will impede smoothness. A bit like putting the motors of ten ton trucks on a rolls Royce and introducing needless vibrations. So really the torque is a function of the design cost budget. One of course assumes high quality bearings for minimal friction. Nottingham TTs sound excellent with very low torque motors (plus expansive measures to kill vibrations). But relating torque directly to sound militates against my grasp of basic physics but I havent the equipment to experiment and verify.
Hi Gerry the merry,
From my understanding of what I've read so far, high torque ensures the stylus does not slow down during complex passages in the music. It also feeds a lot of energy to the stylus which injects verve, bounce and a rhythmic drive to the music. Which is why the Sme with its lossy loose bearings has been a classic match with garrards. The torque is also why idler owners joke that at least now holding a carbon fibre brush to the platter won't stall it. It used to happen to me too with my project rpm 9.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
From my understanding of what I've read so far, high torque ensures the stylus does not slow down during complex passages in the music. It also feeds a lot of energy to the stylus which injects verve, bounce and a rhythmic drive to the music. Which is why the Sme with its lossy loose bearings has been a classic match with garrards. The torque is also why idler owners joke that at least now holding a carbon fibre brush to the platter won't stall it. It used to happen to me too with my project rpm 9.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
A good question. From what i figure, its possibly the costs involved to make one today? Estimates to remake a garrard at today's prices comes to some astronomical figure. Belt drives are cheaper get a nice thick heavy platter and you're done. It's relatively easy (compared to the costs of a direct or idler) to then build an isolation mechanism. Technology seems to have moved sideways rather than forward, (ref post no 196 on this thread) different rather than definitely better.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Last edited:
Finyl not looking at making one just picking up one from ebay.
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Gerry_the_Merry
Well-Known Member
Garrard astronomical only if low volumes. If manufactured today at decent volumes cost will be quite reasonable. Can't say about price though. If the Chinese take a fancy we will get duplicates for $100. Consonance droplet 5.0 is a good tt at excellent prices. Many Americans have.
An update: After playing some records for a while over the weekend I think I'm finally getting a handle on how the tonearm wire sounds. The cartridge is the same from the Project, but it's a bit difficult to be entirely sure since the entire table is different and the arm is different, however, putting the drive and energy down to the garrard and assigning the relaxed easy going nature of the sound to the SME arm, what's additional seems to be the tonearm wire contribution, also corelating with other's experience online.
Overall, the Cardas wire seems to be quite musical and lovely. It was a bit bright but that seems to be going down with play, its hardly seen too many hours as yet. The brightness could also be the tonearm baseplate which according to Loricraft makes a diff with ply topboards, but with MDF topboards the baseplate is not so critical. Really don't know what to attribute that too, longer playing will tell if the slight brightness goes away completely or when I change the baseplate. Eliminating the RCAs seems to bring a certain purity to the sound. Can hear notes fading away for much much much longer now to a far more natural end, whereas before they seemed to end or you could not hear them end when a higher volume passage came immediately after the aforesaid notes. Separation seems better. Overall extremely satisfied since it seems more musical than the detailed/articulate/neutral kind that while giving you detail can also be a bit uninvolving. Its no wonder the Incognito Rega rewire gets such rave reviews.
Gonna go all Cardas now with Jeff Day's Dark Matter DIY interconnect made from two lengths of the same phono cable for left and two lengths for right. Or maybe Cardas Crosslink which is also available in affordable DIY lengths. Of course my version of DIY will be to get Colin at BAC on ebay UK to do them up for me. He did a superlative job on on the tonearm wire and is very communicative unlike some other terse answer sellers.
Also tried the Project center weight on the garrard but preferred it without. The bass just got too much and a bit boomy. Without sounded more open and flowing.
Overall, the Cardas wire seems to be quite musical and lovely. It was a bit bright but that seems to be going down with play, its hardly seen too many hours as yet. The brightness could also be the tonearm baseplate which according to Loricraft makes a diff with ply topboards, but with MDF topboards the baseplate is not so critical. Really don't know what to attribute that too, longer playing will tell if the slight brightness goes away completely or when I change the baseplate. Eliminating the RCAs seems to bring a certain purity to the sound. Can hear notes fading away for much much much longer now to a far more natural end, whereas before they seemed to end or you could not hear them end when a higher volume passage came immediately after the aforesaid notes. Separation seems better. Overall extremely satisfied since it seems more musical than the detailed/articulate/neutral kind that while giving you detail can also be a bit uninvolving. Its no wonder the Incognito Rega rewire gets such rave reviews.
Gonna go all Cardas now with Jeff Day's Dark Matter DIY interconnect made from two lengths of the same phono cable for left and two lengths for right. Or maybe Cardas Crosslink which is also available in affordable DIY lengths. Of course my version of DIY will be to get Colin at BAC on ebay UK to do them up for me. He did a superlative job on on the tonearm wire and is very communicative unlike some other terse answer sellers.
Also tried the Project center weight on the garrard but preferred it without. The bass just got too much and a bit boomy. Without sounded more open and flowing.
Ah yes gotta try that for sure! But first have to get the baseplate and screw in the arm properly. Right now the screws are not holding properly in the top plate, hardly any length to screw in. The baseplate has recessed screw space so the screws will finally embed properly in the wood.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
You just need small wood screws, right? A bit longer than the current ones. If current ones were long enough and are just loose, the Prem's tweak of using teflon tape as filler works (tried in mine and I get a nice tight fit, but need to redo each time you remove the arm from baseplate).
Don't drill. Just screw in the longer screw. Friction fit, they call it. Drilling will be necessary only in case the diameter of the new screw is substantially larger (and longer) than the old one.
Hey Joshua, took off the arm, found the issue! The screw holes are not deep enough and that's why the screw was simply rotating round and round but not going in further. Will drill when I get the baseplate now...
kuruvilajacob
Well-Known Member
Steve,
I also had similar problems with my 301. I had to glue the arm plate because I could not drill hole on the cudappah stone.
kuruvilajacob
I also had similar problems with my 301. I had to glue the arm plate because I could not drill hole on the cudappah stone.
kuruvilajacob
Stevieboy,
The suggestion by Joshua is right: don't drill the baseplate. You need to make a small hole, by driving in a tiny nail, and removing it. The baseplate screws should then grind inwards by a friction fit. If your baseplate is not made of ply, try and get one made by a local carpenter. Use the original SME screws if you have them, or get a set off eBay - they're the right length.
Another suggestion: if you have a thin sheet of rubber, cut out 4 circular bits of less than a centimetre diameter, then cut a small hole in the centre of each piece and keep them between your armboard and the baseplate, assuming here that you are screwing down the baseplate from under the chassis. It's a level of additional damping, that has worked fine for me.
regards,
The suggestion by Joshua is right: don't drill the baseplate. You need to make a small hole, by driving in a tiny nail, and removing it. The baseplate screws should then grind inwards by a friction fit. If your baseplate is not made of ply, try and get one made by a local carpenter. Use the original SME screws if you have them, or get a set off eBay - they're the right length.
Another suggestion: if you have a thin sheet of rubber, cut out 4 circular bits of less than a centimetre diameter, then cut a small hole in the centre of each piece and keep them between your armboard and the baseplate, assuming here that you are screwing down the baseplate from under the chassis. It's a level of additional damping, that has worked fine for me.
regards,
Hi G401 fan,
Thanks for chipping in! Am a little confused by the terms now. By baseplate do you mean the ply topboard/motorboard on which the garrard sits right? How would you screw in from under the chassis? Unless the topboard is thin? Mine is about 25mm thick.
There's the motorboard above which sits the 10mm spacer and on top of that the Sme elongated hole bedplate.
How does the nail thing work? Basically you're saying that if I drill then the hole will be larger than the screw while if I make a hole with a thin nail for the appropriate depth the screw will fit in tight. Have i understood right? Wouldn't using a thin drill bit also work? Or there aren't drill bits so thin? Haven't done much carpentry so would like to know.
I've got a set of grommets will try them out, currently hard mounted the plate.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Thanks for chipping in! Am a little confused by the terms now. By baseplate do you mean the ply topboard/motorboard on which the garrard sits right? How would you screw in from under the chassis? Unless the topboard is thin? Mine is about 25mm thick.
There's the motorboard above which sits the 10mm spacer and on top of that the Sme elongated hole bedplate.
How does the nail thing work? Basically you're saying that if I drill then the hole will be larger than the screw while if I make a hole with a thin nail for the appropriate depth the screw will fit in tight. Have i understood right? Wouldn't using a thin drill bit also work? Or there aren't drill bits so thin? Haven't done much carpentry so would like to know.
I've got a set of grommets will try them out, currently hard mounted the plate.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Oops! My mistake. I really meant the spacer, not the baseplate, which had me confused because you'd spoken of removing the arm from the latter. Normally, the arm is attached to its baseplate.
Anyway, I had presumed that your spacer is made of wood, ply perhaps, and that it is attached to the plinth baseboard by four screws fitted from below. (That's the way I've done mine, hence the misunderstanding). You probably have glued yours down, which is fine, but it might still carry through any motor related vibrations, which is where the idea of rubber grommets came in. That said, I might as well mention that motor vibrations, through the baseboard are not so damaging because the six springs on which the motor hangs largely filter them away. Motor vibrations (in case of internal damage that would cause play in the spindle) actually get transmitted thru the spindle on to the idler wheel and then the platter and main bearing, and ultimately the record itself.
The 4 screws that attach the baseplate to the spacer need a snug fit, but not too tight, as the small rubber grommets fitted on to the baseplate are also designed to dampen the assembly. The head of the screw should just about touch the upper portion of the grommet, but not squash it down as that would defeat the damping. The SME manual has pics to show the optimum way of doing it. And, yes, once again, don't use a drill as the hole will become too large and you won't get a proper fit.
regards,
Anyway, I had presumed that your spacer is made of wood, ply perhaps, and that it is attached to the plinth baseboard by four screws fitted from below. (That's the way I've done mine, hence the misunderstanding). You probably have glued yours down, which is fine, but it might still carry through any motor related vibrations, which is where the idea of rubber grommets came in. That said, I might as well mention that motor vibrations, through the baseboard are not so damaging because the six springs on which the motor hangs largely filter them away. Motor vibrations (in case of internal damage that would cause play in the spindle) actually get transmitted thru the spindle on to the idler wheel and then the platter and main bearing, and ultimately the record itself.
The 4 screws that attach the baseplate to the spacer need a snug fit, but not too tight, as the small rubber grommets fitted on to the baseplate are also designed to dampen the assembly. The head of the screw should just about touch the upper portion of the grommet, but not squash it down as that would defeat the damping. The SME manual has pics to show the optimum way of doing it. And, yes, once again, don't use a drill as the hole will become too large and you won't get a proper fit.
regards,
Hi G401fan,
The current spacer is acrylic and the screws go right through smooth holes to the motorboard, 15mm screws. So the spacer is held down not glued or anything. How thick is your motorboard since you have screwed the spacer from below? Am assuming uou did ghat for looks so the screw heads would not show above or present a bumpy surface for the arm baseplate resting on it?
Let's see what improvement a bronze spacer brings... My next Sme will be a free pod mount so I can see the difference between a motorboard mount and a free standing one. Yes the idler causes most of the transmitted vibration. Will be trying out a Martin bastin one sometime year end, it's supposedly heavier and performs better.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
The current spacer is acrylic and the screws go right through smooth holes to the motorboard, 15mm screws. So the spacer is held down not glued or anything. How thick is your motorboard since you have screwed the spacer from below? Am assuming uou did ghat for looks so the screw heads would not show above or present a bumpy surface for the arm baseplate resting on it?
Let's see what improvement a bronze spacer brings... My next Sme will be a free pod mount so I can see the difference between a motorboard mount and a free standing one. Yes the idler causes most of the transmitted vibration. Will be trying out a Martin bastin one sometime year end, it's supposedly heavier and performs better.
Regards
Torque ain't cheap but it sure knocks yer socks off
Join WhatsApp Channel to get HiFiMART.com Offers & Deals delivered to your smartphone!
Similar threads
