My Upcoming Anologue front end

Sorry to go on.Are you goning to fix cones into the bottom of you arm mount?This will ix the mount to the table below.Basically this is the same as joining the arm mount to the deck.
To stop the brass mount from wobbling(no matter how heavy it is)the bottom surface would have to be completely flat and so would the surface it rests on, other wize there will be micro rocking between points set of by the motor bearing and record vibrating.To have those surfaces flat is effectivly a join.
see what i'm getting at?

I would bolt the deck (platter bearing and schassis to either athick MDF board or similair ,and bolt your arm mount to that.Put the cones uder that and rest it on your shelf.
This will certainly give far better results.

Let me know what the theory behind your design is.:cool:
 
Oh God I can't shut up.
Have you taken into account the fact the surface you rest it on will move?The relationship between arm and platter will change especially when resting on anything wooden.The weight will make this worse as it will slowly distort the surface.
You'll need a very solid board and for the weight to be taken exactly under the bearing and arm mount .If you have a support under the motor as well you can form a triangle.This would work best if all three weight the same.
hey all this has got me in the mood to make a deck.
 
A tonearm does need a solid connection to the bearing you do not want things vibrating all over the place.
Click to expand...

RS Labs make an arm that's designed to simply plonk down on its own base, and it works very well, by all accounts. Haven't heard it myself, however.

-- Ian
 
Originally posted by sideshowbob
RS Labs make an arm that's designed to simply plonk down on its own base, and it works very well, by all accounts. Haven't heard it myself, however.

-- Ian
Click to expand...

I believe many do, Titians deck uses the same principal i think.
 
"and it works very well, by all accounts"

But does it work as well as it would joined to the deck????
 
I assume they tried that approach and then decided on something different.

All of these questions are trade-offs, ultimately. There's no single "right" way to do something, after all.

-- Ian
 
Originally posted by penance

Mr Ants

im thinking of a tool like this --

Code: 
    )------(

So the circular profile at one end would be a fit for the bearing base and at the other end would fit the arm stand, if the diameters of the cutouts are measured with the spindle/arm distance used than it would set them apart correctly. Hope that explained it well.
Click to expand...

Yup makes perfect sense - If the motor and arm pods have the same profile, you could use it for getting the motor to plinth seperation right as well, which'd be handy.

As to the fix it to the base/leave it free standing debate, I guess it'll be a case of experiment and suck it and see. That's what appeals about having a go myself - If you are the designer - you can try several things out.

PS. Thanks for the Scheu info.
 
The platter to motor dimension is really dictated by how long i make the belt. Well not really a belt, more a piece of very fine nylon type thread, Scheu supplies a complete real of it so you can try different lengths.
 
Originally posted by penance
The platter to motor dimension is really dictated by how long i make the belt. Well not really a belt, more a piece of very fine nylon type thread, Scheu supplies a complete real of it so you can try different lengths.
Click to expand...

Aha. Heehee - you'll have to let us know what the effects are of using different types of knot :rolleyes:

"Initially I used a simple granny knot, but on moving to a reef knot and finally a carrick bend, the soundstage opened up and .... yadayadayada" ;)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top