I guess Steve I don't know where to begin.
First we're talking about the sound of a "modern" vs "vintage" table.
Yes there was something to the basic design of a few of these products; but the execution is much different today. Platters are replaced, plinths are replaced, motors are replaced, bearings are replaced. Go measure the noise of an old bearing and compare it to a modern table. There's no comparison. Let's not even talk about the subject of vibration isolation and energy disappation paths in the tables or speed stabilty. If you don't think speed stabilty has something to do with it, then one needs to listen to a direct drive or an idler wheel drive table with precision speed controls and high mass platters.
About the only thing that remains the same for some tables is the concept of the idler drive or in the case of Technics SP10, direct drive. But Mike has already mentioned the differences between his Dobbins modded and Rockport table. As far as cartridges, there's simply no comparison. Not to mention todays arms are totally new designs that don't treat arm resonance in the same manner. Newer materials make the arm's less resonant eg. instead of having one huge peak, the resonance is reduced to far smaller, spread out resonances. Bearings are totally different. Linear arms are totally different. Wiring is different. The impact of the arm's support system is better. Adjustments allow for much better cartridge geometry. In fact, Bob Graham's cartridge alignment jig is a work of genius. It takes all of five minutes (and I've mounted many cartridges in the arm when I had it) to mount a new cartridge in his tonearms.
And everything that has been said about cartridges is a pile of crap. It totally flies in the face of reality. If Raul believes these old cartridges sound good, then there's something really wrong somewhere.
It's really a waste of time arguing this point because if there's more than handful of people in Raul's camp, I'd be surprised. In fact, if there were more than two excluding Raul's family, I'd be surprised. Maybe people like the colorations of these old vintage analog components. But they aren't right and don't sound like real music; if only music sounded that way.
Dear Myles: Ignorance always provoke wrong answers or wrong assumptions like yours. Please let me be specific about:
+++++ " Platters are replaced, plinths are replaced, motors are replaced, bearings are replaced. " +++++,
so what? replace is a synonimous of " better "? who says that those " replace " gives a quality performance improvement against the vintage ones. A TT is nor a rocket to the moon but a very simple audio item. How can you prove that those " replace " made improvements that help to beat the quality performance of vintage TTs?
+++++ " Go measure the noise of an old bearing and compare it to a modern table. There's no comparison. " +++++,
do you already measured? yes? then what do you found? which TTs were under measure? . You did not?, then you can't talk/argue about.
+++++ " Let's not even talk about the subject of vibration isolation and energy disappation paths in the tables or speed stabilty. " +++++,
do you already heard in your system the BD TT Micro Seiki SZ-1TVS+SZ-1M with is vibration isolotaion plattform or a Denonn DP-100?
yes?: what do you think against the TT you own?. No?: then how can you argue nothing about?
Speed accuracy and speed stability, choose any of these vintage TTs: Pioneer Exclusive P3a, Yamaha GT2000X, Denon DP 100 or Kenwood L-07D and test/measure its spedd accuracy/stability and you can find that all of them even or beats any today top commercial ( everyday ) TT.
+++++ " As far as cartridges, there's simply no comparison. " +++++
your ignorance has no limit. Please let us know: in the last six months which ones of these MM/MI vintage cartridges ( with the precise set up needs that the MM/MI cartridges ask for. ) do you heard in your system in a test against today cartridges like Ortofon A-90, Koetsu Coralstone, Air Tight Supreme, Allaerts Formula One: Technics EPC-P100CMK4, AKG P100LE, Audio Technica AT20SS or Sonus Dimension Five?
None? then how you dare to post: +++++ " everything that has been said about cartridges is a pile of crap. " +++++
Showing your Ignorance means that: ignorance.
IMHO your IGNORANCE in all and each one subjects is just: pathetic!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.
Btw: +++++ " because if there's more than handful of people in Raul's camp, I'd be surprised. In fact, if there were more than two excluding Raul's family, I'd be surprised. " +++++
there is a thread in other forum with around 2,600 posts/replies and thousands and thousands of " views " ( only in one thread! ) and counting where many people analize in deep what you ignore on vintage cartridges: MM/MI. All of them " loves " those " colorations " " that does not sounds like " real music " but what is in the recording!.
Btw, again, do you know that the Graham tonearm comes/copy from a vintage Audiocraft tonearm design ? or that the JMW tonearm was inspired on SAEC/Audiocraft vintages tonearm designs? or that the Moërch one comes from the vintage japanese Highphonic one?
+++++ " Not to mention todays arms are totally new designs that don't treat arm resonance in the same manner. Newer materials make the arm's less resonant eg. instead of having one huge peak, the resonance is reduced to far smaller, spread out resonances. Bearings are totally different. " +++++
newer materials? which ones?, vintage tonearms used: aluminum, steel, boron, titanium, wood, ceramic, magnesium, different blends, etc. So what are you talking about?. As I said your ignorance has no limits on those subjects.
resonances?, do you know about the unique Technics " Variable Dynamic Damping " where today tonearm designs only can " dream " with? or the Lustre GST-801 dynamically balanced tonearm design where the VTF and antiskate set up comes through its unique full magnetic mechanism? do you know that Audio Technica tonearm design has different antiskate for different stylus shape? which today tonearm even take in count this subject?
bearings?, yes I agree that are totally different, some of the old bearing designs are better. do you know the Micro Seiki Gyroscope tonearm unique bearing design? or the gymball ruby Technics bearing with a less than 5 mcgrs on vertical/horizontal bearing friction that almost any similar bearing on today tonearm designs can't approach at that low bearing friction value?
and I can go on and on. Btw, I don't read or take other persons experiences/information on the subject audio products named here: I own or owned/experieced any single of those products.
Myles, IMHO you spread your ignorance on all and each those subjects in the same way I'm an ignorant in Arameo language. The main difference between your ignorance and mine is that I ca'nt show it even if I want it.
IMHO I think that we have to have more care on what each one of us post/posted in an open forum where so many people read it and where so many of them are " newbie " on so many audio subjects.
I think we have a very important responsability that in plain and simple words is: help to the people with right and precise information that does not makes any kind of mix-up.
I almost never post on a subject where I don't have first hand experiences, I prefer learn from others.
Raul.