30 years on...

So the LP12 isn't hollow? All is clear.

FWIW a 'general format' is a complete waste of time and space. You're talking about a hypothetical turntable that may or may not be worse than another hypothetical turntable for reasons that may or may not have to do with energy transfer. Clear as mud...

I'm comfortable that I understand what I understand about turntables and that the whole pragmatic world of turntable engineering is greater than my understanding. I'm also comfortable that you've no real idea what you're talking about, on pretty much anything, but especially on turntables and junior school physics.

Is a car energy? Penance says yes.

Paul

 

Hi,

Okay, lets stop being politically correct and general.

1) The LP-12 uses a platter that is comparably lightweight and with a fairly modest thickness of material. It rings like a bell when struck, something that necessitates a highly damping record mat, to damp it.

2) The LP-12 uses a subchassis made from thin, flanged sheet metal. This is an economic solution, but hardly one that provides much rigidity and resistance to external vibrations. This subchassis houses the bearing for the platter and arm mounting.

3) This subchassis (one may call it an excellent sound receiver, capable of picking airborne sound and efficiently converting it into mechanical vibration) is suspended by metal springs, which are good at conducting higher frequencies (above a few 100Hz) into said subchassis.

4) The springs hang the subchassis from a top plate, which again is sheet metal, hardly a rigid or vibration resisting structure.

5) The top plate is set into a plinth with a bottom plate, which has distinct resonances based on the actual panels the plinth is formed from and on the various aircolumns trapped in the plinth.

In other words, when compared to a cutting lathe it the polar opposite of how cutting lathes are build. It is instead of a structure providing an innert, hard to excite to mechanical vibration platform for the record and stylus, maintaining a rigid mechanical loop for both, the opposite, a struture that that is easy to excite to mechnical vibration, with extra surfaces past those essential (platter, arm mount) to pick up airborn vibrations .

In an absolute vacuum (such as seems to exist in certain heads) and suspended on a vibration excluding level platform this would of course matter FA (as long as the motor does not spin). However, in the real world we have many sources of vibration.

So, we are back to "The Vinyl Axiom". Look at a cutting lathe and at a turntable you consider, compare the differences and/or commonalities and then you will have a reasonable idea what is required.

L8er T

 

Your post demonstrates that you don't know very much about LP12s. Have you ever actually examined one?

 

Good god man, you do have eyes?

 

The LP 12 has been reviewed in Stereophile a number of times, always favourably. JA uses one as his turntable of choice, although I believe he's listening to digital almost exclusively these days. Michael Fremer was invited by Linn to their factory some time back, I believe, to tie in with the Launch of the Linn in-car system in the Aston Martin DB9. He was not alone, journalists from a number of publications - car and audio - worldwide were invited as part of a press package. This may have predisposed Michael Fremer to view Linn the company in a better light than before.

But direct coruption?

The allegations of corruption get repeated every so often, usually by disgruntled manufacturers who have received a so-so review and need to explain to their dealers why the review they had promised would help the dealers sell their stuff was not really helpful, after all, or whose products have been refused for review because nobody at the mag was sufficiently enthusiastic to give them a go.

If you look at the products reviewed in Stereophile, and the recommendations in Recommended Components, I can see no correlation between advertising and reviews. Products from small companies which have never run an single ad in the mag have been reviewed and recommended. Products from large companies which have run a lot of advertisements have gone unreviewed, or have been found wanting.

Yes, Primedia's advertising sales department will try to sell a manufacturer advertising. That's what they are there for, and that's where the mag has to make most of its money.

But to the best of my knowledge, there is absolutely no quid-pro-quo offer of editorial content for advertising.

There is one exception: companies who exhibit at one of the Stereophile shows expect to have their products mentioned in the show reports, at least the new ones, and that expectation will usually be fulfilled. Being "mentioned" is not the same as an editorial endorsement of the product, however.

I do know that the line between advertising and editorial has been much less clear-cut at other magazines, but I believe that one of the reasons why Stereophile is holding up in a market that generally is in decline is precisely that the magazine works hard to keep its reputation intact. Risking that reputation would be quite unwise, commercially, in my opinion.

That is corruption at the 'managerial' level. Corruption between a manufacturer and an individual reviewer is harder to control. At that point, both the mag and the reader have to go on trust, to a certain extent. What should keep reviewers honest is peer review: if a writer praises a product and that product is panned by other reviews and doesn't do well in dealer demos, the reviewer loses credibility. If he loses too much credibility, he will have to leave the mag because he then becomes a liability.

Then there is the question of industry accomodation prices, long-term loan of products etc. Yes, a manufacturer will be eager to offer a long-term loan of his product to a leading journalist like Michael Fremer, hoping that the product will be mentioned every month in the reviewer's system line-up. Yes, that means that the leading jounralist won't have to pay for the product (but he definitely IS exepected to return it to the manufacturer when he no longer wants to use it). But - a leading journalist will have the option of a long-term loan with just about everybody, so he will still end up using the product that he prefers.


I have been saying the above a number of times. It really gets tiring, and most often I just can't be bothered to repeat it yet again. I won't repeat it for a few months, I think.

 

I sometimes wonder if he has ears

 

:d

 

OK...

I have heard two LP12s I have liked, and 2 that I haven't. Of the ones I liked, one is fully Naimed and hellishly expensive, the other is a (IIRC) 1983 one with Basik arm and OriginLive PSU.

I find the design awkward and finnickity to use, but...

...I'd like to try a pre-Cirkus deck in my system - a mid-80s or ealier please. It won't be neutral, but it could be fun.

I also need a better cartridge on my Rega, but that's by the by.

Almost up to 30 pages guys - keep it up!

 

False.

False.

False.

False.

False.

Score: zero out of five.

 

What is it exactly you find "awkward and finnickity" about the LP12?

 

It couldn't be simpler to use: press 'go', cue record, sit down.

 

Boing - oops there bounces that platter.

Boiing scheeeettttzzzzzzz - there goes the arm over the platter as it bounces.

I find suspended decks a pain in the arse - the Linn (oddly) moreso than Michells, but all of them are a pain for me to use.

Also - no 45 without an expensive PSU puts me off - though I do have a Flutter Buster I can use on one, so that's a non-issue for me.

...but that bouncy subchassis - just didn't get on with it (on Henryt's ex-example anyway).

 

Sounds like you're just plain ham fisted to me! No offense

Since when has quality been cheap?

 

Couldn't have put it better myself. But then Dom is determined not to like the LP12, and when Dom is determined not to like something...

 

Here's another - the ardent LP12 fan club listening to a comparatively priced better sounding turntable..

 

You are clumsy. Care needs to be taken. It's really not at all difficult to cue a record on the LP12, and (even) my girlfriend can cope with the Aro.

 

Same photo, taken from a greater distance:

 

This is demonstrably completely false. Even before you get to the bizarre definition of felt.

Where are these 'external vibrations' coming from? What frequencies? You're as bad as 'This post deliberately has no content' Penance. FWIW the subchassis 'rings' when struck. This is clearly a deliberate design decision. And of course one mans thin is anothers really quite substantial.

You can call it what you like, but you're back into Penitential Physics. See above. And I'd like to see some physical justification for springs being good at 'conducting higher frequencies', as good as a bolt?

It's curved substantial sheet metal held under tension and damped at the edges. Again we get the Penal Dementia of random rigidity and arbitrary vibration.

The bottom cover material has changed. Many find the turntable sounds better with no cover on the bottom. Linn clearly cannot sell without a cover, there's a safety issue even with a Lingo. Anyway it's easy enough to try either way.

So score a bit out of 5.

Paul

 

Where are these 'external vibrations' coming from?.....

Your not serious are you, this is a hifi forum you know ...vibrating air thingy ?

Unless the TT is placed in another room or better still another anechoric chamber, the first source will be air then ground. These will be mixed with those vibrations from the motor and then the bearing [now don't forget the mains 50hz].....unless the lp12 now has 100% silent and rumble free motor and bearing. This complex nodal / antinodal enviroment then impinges on the stylus grouve interface via the platter/sub chassis .

The LP12 IMO was a good deck 30 years ago, but has been sufficiently superceed by a great number of more modern designs. That does not take away its sonic strengths and merits that some people still find to their liking. As said, to me it's dull dull dull, even 30 years ago there were three or four similar priced units that I would have given house room to before the LP12 ...which was a shame as I really wanted to like it.

It's alway a suprise to me that TT sound so good..................

 

The point of this thread is to counter this incorrect view. Read the Stereophile review.