Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

Paging JohnnyB, paging JohnnyB,...


gorch

Recommended Posts

The levitating turntable

Whilst scanning a vinyl culture magazine on a sunny Sunday afternoon, I stumble on an article about a crazy turntable concept. And I think this story is just one that our own JohnnyB could have provided.

(Sorry for the German speaking video)

https://www.maglevaudio.com/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Thundersteel said:

FWIW, the turntable is about $3,000!

That's less than the recently priced Hamer Standards actually. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thundersteel said:

FWIW, the turntable is about $3,000!

You say that like it's a lot of money :D  This one's $48,500 plus around $12K for each tonearm (this installation has four of them):

53e1a2e84540e72c3e14b018a028b482-650-80.

 

And here's a Continuum Caliburn, which has a levitating magnetic bearing and a bunch of other cool stuff. It's 115,000 in British Pounds, which translates to $151,374.50 USD:

f7ad81db16e207f65f4ca74df2ca87e0-650-80.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Thundersteel said:

I'd rather have the Hamers!

Well, I have the Hamers...

 

Back to the topic. I think this one has something magic. I like how the turntable wobbles a bit before it synchronizes again. Smart!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gorch said:

Well, I have the Hamers...

 

Back to the topic. I think this one has something magic. I like how the turntable wobbles a bit before it synchronizes again. Smart!

I'm guessing here, but there's probably some sort of servo feedback loop that diminishes the non-linear wobbles until it achieves functional stability. Sort of like the platter speed regulation of a Technics Direct Drive turntable, which has extremely low wow and flutter figures.

 

... and you can bet that there's a sort of magic to a turntable platter that has no bearing friction, and the only drag force is the cartridge stylus in the groove. The frictionless bearing should lower the noise floor significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JohnnyB said:

And here's a Continuum Caliburn, which has a levitating magnetic bearing and a bunch of other cool stuff. It's 115,000 in British Pounds, which translates to $151,374.50 USD:

f7ad81db16e207f65f4ca74df2ca87e0-650-80.

 

Guys, there's no vinyl on earth that justifies that kind of money on a turntable.
Except maybe Kizanski's Yoko Ono discography...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, gtrdaddy said:

I’d have to wonder how it responds to the fluctuation of VTF as the stylus tracks a bad warp? Does the platter teeter as it tracks? I’d love to see it in person and run it through some testing.

I may be looking at the wrong thing, but in my experience, tracking a warped record is more a function of tonearm damping. 

My TT is a Technics SL1210 M5G with stock tonearm. But I added an after-market tonearm damper, which has a screw-on fluid damper and attachable paddle that is suspended in silicone fluid in the damper trough:

td1200a.jpg

 

I found that with the fluid damper in place, my tonearm could track hideously warped records. What were once unplayable records rescued from the bargain bins could offer up excellent sound quality without pitch fluctuation or groove-jumping as long as the tonearm damper was in place. 

I found that filling the trough 1/3 full was just right for motion control and an organic, open sound. Too much fluid killed detail and "alive-ness."

It can easily track records where the outer edge fluctuates as much as 1/2 inch and maybe more, with no damage to pitch control or tracking stability.

The damper brush on the Shure M97xE stylus assembly performs a similar function. Here's a picture of the M97xE with the brush flipped down to the damping position:

shure-m97xe-phono-cartridge-fig-7.jpg 

but with the KAB trough, I get the tracking benefits with any cartridge I choose.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, killerteddybear said:

Guys, there's no vinyl on earth that justifies that kind of money on a turntable.
Except maybe Kizanski's Yoko Ono discography...

There are plenty of people on this earth for whom $150,000 has no impact on their finances whatsoever. And many of them have tens of thousands of LPs with a cumulative expenditure in the same cost neighborhood as this turntable.

These projects create new technology and design principles, and the people who buy the exorbitant products help fund further development including re-engineering for mass production and cost reduction.

Here's an example, one of hundreds:

I started working at a high end stereo store in 1975. One of the high end gems on display was the Sequerra Model 1, the first tuner to have quartz frequencies tuned to each potential FM frequency available:

1dea303ff9c8b4df9648f78eb59c71b0.jpg&f=1

It cost $2500 in 1975; adjusted for today's inflation that's equivalent to $11,716.82. 

In less than a year, Kenwood came out with a high end tuner based on the same quartz-digital technology. It wasn't cheap either, but the asking price was just a little over 25% of the Sequerra--$550.

A year later, Heathkit came out with an entire receiver (amp, preamp, phono stage, and FM tuner, for $599.

Within another year or two, you could buy mid-level receivers with digital quartz tuning for $399 or less, in other words, available to anyone who wanted one.

A similar thing happened with the Technics direct drive turntables. The first ones were broadcast quality somewhere around $10K. Within 5 years the mid-fi models were $350, and a year later I bought the Hitachi knock-off for $250.

One of the things that is magical about a well-recorded, well mastered, and meticulously pressed vinyl record is that it contains all the music that went on in the performance venue and is preserved in an analogue model that has all the nuances of tempo, dynamics, pitch, harmony, etc. Digital recordings chop off parts of the initial transients and the trailing decay of the tones. The better the turntable, the more you experience these nuances--the stage size, the positioning of instruments, the beginnings and endings of notes, the swell as the instruments reach their peaks, etc. These details create a high level of excitement in the playback, similar to the excitement of a live performance. True, you don't have the visuals of a live performance, but you do get the nuances, the physical arrangement, and the details you get from a well-staged live performance rather than just a tune, lyrics, and a rhythm section that you get through an audio system of indifferrent quality.

The people who design these swing-for-the-fences designs and the wealthy early-adopters are our friends who make these fantastic designs available to just about anyone who wants one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am by no means a high-end audio guy, but that's pretty freaking cool...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, gtrdaddy said:

... while the arm tracks up a heavy warp, my curiosity was how the floating platter would respond to the downward force created by the arm’s mass as the record surface rises. I would think there would be some wobble of sorts. 

I was watching the video carefully including what happens when the arm sets down on--or lifted up from--the record. If the opposing magnets were only in and under the spindle, then the platter would tilt significantly when the tonearm/cartridge combination is lowered to the record surface. However (and I could be guessing wrongly here) it appears that there is a wider circle of opposing magnets, some on the underside of the outer edge of the platter, and another circle set into the plinth directly below. This would stabilize the platter and minimize tilt during fluctuations in tracking force. I notice that the platter does oscillate a little as it spins, but it appears to be equivalent to a mild warp, something that is inaudible with my fluid-damped Technics tonearm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, gtrdaddy said:

Only one way to know for sure! 😉

How, learn German? :D

Maybe this online review from Australia might help. It doesn't exactly explain it but it seems to provide some hints about the importance of a solid and level turntable rack to help keep the platter level, and that a little wobble is a non-issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gtrdaddy said:

Buy one silly!

I noticed that the included cartridge is an Ortofon OM 10 Super. Not a bad cartridge at its $72 to 96, but on the low end for a $2500 turntable. I suspect it has something to do with the OM 10's rather light weight of 5g. My cart is 8g, 

OTOH, the Hana SL, a Shibata-tipped low output moving coil cartridge with Alnico magnet also weighs 5 g.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gtrdaddy said:

If it needs to be lightweight high compliance I'm out! It's long been proven that with the correct arms, that heavier medium and low compliance cartridges are superior. I'll have to check this out further! 

The tonearm on the Mag-Lev ML1 is the same carbon fiber arm used on the Pro-Ject Debut Carbon DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, gtrdaddy said:

I'm kinda stoked, it looks awesome really.

That’s what I thought when I saw it fat first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 1925 Victrola works just fine and it uses good ol' hand-crank power (which should excite shrub-cuddlers everywhere). The shellac 78's "levitate" on felt -- woo-hoo! And check out the high-tech volume control; simply open them doors and your grandma will scream and tell you to turn it down.

 

1925_Victrola.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, FGJ said:

My 1925 Victrola works just fine and it uses good ol' hand-crank power (which should excite shrub-cuddlers everywhere). The shellac 78's "levitate" on felt -- woo-hoo! And check out the high-tech volume control; simply open them doors and your grandma will scream and tell you to turn it down.

 

1925_Victrola.png

... and when the needle wears out you can pluck another one from a cactus. During the 78 rpm era, you could buy cactus needles from a store:

hqdefault.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except you have to change the needle (regardless of the type) after every several records. I buy needles by the packs of 100, and you can get "soft/quiet", "medium", and "loud". Yeah, the needle type actually affects the volume. I don't play it as often as I'd like, but it's fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FGJ said:

Except you have to change the needle (regardless of the type) after every several records. I buy needles by the packs of 100, and you can get "soft/quiet", "medium", and "loud". Yeah, the needle type actually affects the volume. I don't play it as often as I'd like, but it's fun.

What's best needle for metal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, FGJ said:

Except you have to change the needle (regardless of the type) after every several records. I buy needles by the packs of 100, and you can get "soft/quiet", "medium", and "loud". Yeah, the needle type actually affects the volume. I don't play it as often as I'd like, but it's fun.

I grew up with a 78 rpm Zenith console until I was 10 years old or so. I remember we always had an envelope of needles. It was a Zenith, and looked like this except is had only the red tonearm. It was 78 rpm only, and all-tube electronics (the design came out in 1948).

48ZenRad.jpg

 

Fortunately we got a 33 rpm stereo console around 1963, just when The Beatles hit. It was similar--but not identical--to this:

Vintage-1960-MAGNIFICENT-MAGNAVOX-CONSOL

2 hours ago, killerteddybear said:

What's best needle for metal?

An important question, as Anthrax is particularly known for their dense output of 78 RPM shellac 10" records. :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 78's made for those electric Victrola's were, I think, thinner or something. From what I understood, my older crank Victrola might damage them. Maybe the shellac wasn't as thick? I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, FGJ said:

The 78's made for those electric Victrola's were, I think, thinner or something. From what I understood, my older crank Victrola might damage them. Maybe the shellac wasn't as thick? I'm not sure.

I grew up with 78s played on electric-powered turntables and tube-driven amplification. The 78s were about the same thickness as first-generation LPs, which were introduced in 1948.

The earlier 78s were noticeably different. They were much thicker, about 1/4" to 3/8" thick, and some had only one playing side. It makes sense that the tracking force of a wind-up Victrola tonearm would be much heavier than one powered and amplified by electricity, as is the case of the Zenith unit I posted earlier.

Wind-up Victrolas were different: Check out the massive and heavy tonearm assembly on this one, which was typical. It stands to reason that the records that had to endure that tracking weight would be thicker and more substantial.

9670500_1.jpg?v=8CCF25F78996110

I remember a couple of occasions spending an afternoon spinning vintage pre-war '78s from the earlier era. They were 1/4" thick and the music groove occupied only on one side. The thrill was listening to original recordings of the Duke Ellington orchestra and others from the '30s and '40s. The combination of artists, music style, and technology level created a special connection to the era and its music, style, and technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, tone arm weight on crank units were definitely heavier as far as I can tell. that's probably why the older 78's were thicker. I still play 78's on my crank unit that were made in the era of electric-powered players and they seem fine...so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...