Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 21615 times.

Wayner

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #20 on: 27 Nov 2008, 05:17 pm »
Thanks Gary.

I have some thread that is like monofilament (that I stole from the wife's sewing room) and I will try riggin that up this afternoon (in between a few brewskis) and perhaps a football game or two. I will try the knot, too.

Wayner

Listens2tubes

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #21 on: 28 Nov 2008, 02:37 am »
John can I ask you why the VPI has no plasticlay? Seems damping the sub structure and the plinth ie:10 lbs worth, would level the field a bit. :dunno:

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #22 on: 28 Nov 2008, 03:06 am »
John can I ask you why the VPI has no plasticlay? Seems damping the sub structure and the plinth ie:10 lbs worth, would level the field a bit. :dunno:

Ha - both have had the 'treatment'.

About 2 lbs on the plinth (underneath) and about 1 lb packed on the wood surround  :wink:

The surround, where the motor is attached, and the platter are only now connected thru the thread (suspension has been removed)....so a massive amount probably wouldn't affect the outcome much.  It also looks ugly if you put a lot on the surround and hard to remove if you do.

I think the deck has been stacked enough in favor of the VPI...I have to say playing with thread tautness has been most illuminating.  I'm listening to good sounds now...albeit a little slow now...but preferable to too fast as it was previously.

John

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #23 on: 28 Nov 2008, 07:49 pm »
It's sounding big, ballsy and bassy this morning here :o ....tho considerably less up-tempo and vivacious/incisive than the JVC DD still.

I woke up with a brain fart this morning...and realized the poor pitch stability experienced the last few days may well have been the new spindle/bearing wearing in :scratch:

So, I've not switched back to the belt yet to see if it sounds different than the floss.....but all the changes I heard may have coincided with the same timeframe as the bearing/spindle mating with one another.

Onward and upward....

John

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #24 on: 9 Dec 2008, 05:39 pm »
Still experimenting here....trying to get the VPI HW-19 Mk. III to my JVC QL-F6 levels of performance.  We're making progress, too, at that  :thumb:

The SDS does indeed work.....I'm still sorting out how well it works and if it can overcome the perceived timing/speed gap I hear between DD and belt drive, however.

The same fellow vinylphool who lent me his SDS,  also lent me his strobe, too so really assess it's affects.

While here, I also intend to see if the SDS positively effects the JVC DD deck...VPI advertises this product to be helpful for any turntable, but particularly so for AC Synchronous ones.

I mentioned earlier that I have a 2lb-or-so outer record clamp (I probably should weigh it, it might actually be heavier :roll:) and I've been playing the VPI with and without it.  Interesting that with it I can literally tap/thump the vinyl surface pretty hard and no feedback is fed back into the system.  Without using it, the same thump results in easily heard thump thru the speakers.

I use the VPI delrin center clamp, as well, with or without outer record clamp.

So, it does indeed well damp the record as advertised.

However, despite it's positive effects in many ways.....I'm not sure the bearing is coping with the extra circumferal weight well and the deck sounds better without it on.  The soundstage is a bit smaller and a little more diffuse....but sounds more exciting and live without it. It may be that overdamping the record with the outer record clamp is killing off the liveliness.

I use a Herbie's mat on top of the VPI platter...I'll have to try with the Herbie's as VPI suggests that any mat on top of the platter will make it worse.  My experience has been that rubber is horrid for vinyl playback - good for damping to be sure, but a terrible interface with teh record itself.

Anyhow...many more experiments on tap! (including changing back to the belt as I suspect the knot in the dental floss is making speed erratic and changing out lithium grease in the bearing for higher grade ones)

John :)

PMAT

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #25 on: 9 Dec 2008, 06:18 pm »
Newbie thought. After reading this whole post is seems to me that belt slippage (string slippage) may be at play here. No fishing line yet? The fly fishing line as I remember, flattens slightly against the platter. Is the platter and the pulley clean as a whistle? :dunno:

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #26 on: 9 Dec 2008, 07:26 pm »
Yup, clean platter & pulley.

I just changed back to the VPI round belt from the dental floss....and it now holds steady speed better (objectively treated via the strobe).  So, I'm back to belt until I can find another tauter method like fishing line (as mentioned).

I'm going to try out some MagnaLube-G PTFE grease in the bearing....so if there is performance advantage over while lithium grease in there  :roll:

Don't concern yourself (and keep 'em coming)with newbie thoughts....they are thoughts less tainted by the ravages of time and expert-ness that comes with it :wink:

John

woodsyi

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 6513
  • Always Look on the Bright Side of Life!
Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #27 on: 9 Dec 2008, 08:00 pm »
What about the Rim drive, John?  8) 8)

Really, I have one.  :thumb:

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #28 on: 9 Dec 2008, 10:53 pm »
What about the Rim drive, John?  8) 8)

Really, I have one.  :thumb:

Yeah Rim - I really do have to have to get a YOU drive  :lol:

I was given an old DUAL 1229 (idler), but it needed a lot of work to get back in playing shape.  I sent it to a DUAL specialist shop in Iowa....and he talked me into buying a fully refurb'ed DUAL 701 (direct drive). 

I still want to try a YOU drive, tho (too many audiophiles worship the ground they lay upon for me not to try one sometime  :wink:)

John

twitch54

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #29 on: 10 Dec 2008, 02:20 am »
I listen to a direct drive turntable and I wear a belt around my waist.

I prefer to listen to my music rather than the tt,  thus I prefer a belt  !! LOL !!

PMAT

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #30 on: 16 Dec 2008, 05:49 pm »
How about Yoda drive, Chairperson? You live close to Skywalker ranch. Turn the platter with your mind young Luke, use the force. Seriously though, hows the comparison going?

lazydays

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1365
Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #31 on: 16 Dec 2008, 07:39 pm »
John, have you tried Kevlar fishing line for a drive belt?

Lin

I tried the Kevlar fly tying thread, and had problems with the knot and it dosn't like a plastic pulley. Then I found this thread made in Germany that was a silk/kevlar combo. This was the ticket! Think I got it at Hobby Lobby
gary

lazydays

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1365
Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #32 on: 16 Dec 2008, 07:40 pm »
Thanks Gary.

I have some thread that is like monofilament (that I stole from the wife's sewing room) and I will try riggin that up this afternoon (in between a few brewskis) and perhaps a football game or two. I will try the knot, too.

Wayner

PM me and I'll send you about ten feet of that silk/kevlar stuff. This the best I've found anywhere.
gary

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #33 on: 16 Dec 2008, 07:46 pm »
Gary/lazydays,

How are you using thread and keeping proper speed with your deck?

When using the dental floss, the deck was so slow that even increasing the SDS unit to 66Hz (it's max) wouldn't make up for the loss in speed due to the thread.

Finally, I had to ditch the thread back to the belt and the SDS (thru the strobe) shows spot-on speed accuracy at 59.95 Hz (nearly perfect 60hz - the normal line frequency in the US)

btw, the VPI sounds terrific now....I think the new inverted bearing needed 30 hours to wear in.  There's a little pitch instability relative to the JVC DD on pianos, but really not anything substantial.  The VPI plays WAAAY bigger and more involving than the JVC ever did...tho I've not tried the SDS out in conjunction with the JVC as yet (VPI advertised the SDS as helpful for any turntable less than 30 watts, but particularly helpful to AC synchronous units)

John  :)

Wayner

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #34 on: 16 Dec 2008, 07:53 pm »
Most dental floss is waxed.

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #35 on: 16 Dec 2008, 11:30 pm »
Most dental floss is waxed.

Actually, this one wasn't (I use non-waxed for my teeth and prefer it).

It was explained to me on another site that the thread will pull the platter slower due to, I think I got this right, less material applied to the platter.  Less potential energy carried from the motor, true, but less pulling power  :(

If you have a strobe and florescent light maybe you'l find the same thing.

Wayner - later this week I'll have my 5th TT in the house....did I tie you yet  :wink:

John

Wayner

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #36 on: 16 Dec 2008, 11:52 pm »
Nope. I'm at 7. I decided to fornicate one of the AR's that was of weak motor (see other thread). I have bought a Rega R200 tonearm for it on ickbay and it should be here tomorrow. I will post pics when I have her done. It will have an AR platter and bearing assembly, a home made VPI SAMA motor assembly and the Rega arm. I know your not the biggest fan of belt drives, but I have this table proto-typed with the F'n stock AR arm (which I dropped the other day, destroying one of my AT440MLa styluses) and the machine can recover ambience like a bastard. I think 'cause the table really has no frame or plinth.

Here is proto:



Here is new to be added Rega R200 tonearm.


My idea is that one way to eliminate plinth resonance is to use plasticlay....or get rid of the plinth! So, no plinth.

Wayner  aa

Vinyl-Addict

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 94
    • Groovetracer - Products for Rega turntables.
Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #37 on: 17 Dec 2008, 12:58 am »
Most dental floss is waxed.



It was explained to me on another site that the thread will pull the platter slower due to, I think I got this right, less material applied to the platter.  Less potential energy carried from the motor, true, but less pulling power  :(

John

If you're using a "V" type groove pulley and it's not cut for the specific diameter cross section belt, the speed will definitely be off because the smaller diameter floss will contact a smaller diameter area of the pulley. Was the diameter of the previous belt larger than the dental floss?

TheChairGuy

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #38 on: 17 Dec 2008, 01:20 am »
Was the diameter of the previous belt larger than the dental floss?

Yes indeedy...the belt is way thicker (larger diameter) than the floss.

John

twitch54

Re: Face-Off II: Belt versus Direct Drive
« Reply #39 on: 17 Dec 2008, 01:56 am »
Nope. I'm at 7.


Wayner, hell I don't even own seven pair of boxer shorts ! Love to hear about all the 'tinkering' though !

FWIW, earlier this year when I added the 'Perf Ring' and 'Super platter' to my Aries III, a fair amount of SDS adj was needed, but again, FWIW my periodic checks with strobe has shown it keeps better stability now more than ever.