Because you can't roll a joint on a download?
That would be a red herring?
Direct drive turntable under $20k - GPA Parabolica
- Thread starter tima
- Start date
That would be a red herring?
Yes. It will be interesting to see how a high performance 'table is accepted when it comes t a price much lower than what may be its sonic peers.
Indeed.
But what I'm also v interested in is what essentially you get in the 2.0 that fully differentiates it from the Parabolica (and hence 1.5 as well).
Are we primarily talking about the motor and the pressure sensitive clamp?
But what I'm also v interested in is what essentially you get in the 2.0 that fully differentiates it from the Parabolica (and hence 1.5 as well).
Are we primarily talking about the motor and the pressure sensitive clamp?
+1
The parabolic sounds very intriguing
I acquired my Monaco very cheaply
So not about to expend more on what was a bargain
I have never adjusted the speed on it or my Sony
Interestingly u can turn the lock off on the Sony when u adjust speed
The Monaco motor is low torque to keep down on vibration
The Sony is high torque
With the heavy carts I find the Sony better
For mid weight carts the Monaco is better imho
However their respective arms are best for these also
The funny thing about it...it looks so diminutive compared to my other tts ...until u go to move it
Since it's carbon fibre that's one serious motor unit
I am fascinated to know whether housing the motor control unit internally is a great idea
My external one was an issue to effectively isolate noise ground wise
Thus the inability to isolate that by making it internal may be a good or bad thing
As it's a dc motor it must have a control unit as well as ps, maybe with the improved response of control circuit they were forced to place closer to stop group delay ?
So if one is high torque and one is lower, does it in anyway change the bass and dynamics? Which has more air, soundstage, and musicality? Which do you prefer listening orchestral and arias on?
Also, when you say Sony prefers heavy carts, and the GPA prefers midweight ones, I assume you are accounting for arm synergies
Have you heard Technics SP10s?
Also, when you say Sony prefers heavy carts, and the GPA prefers midweight ones, I assume you are accounting for arm synergies
Have you heard Technics SP10s?
Ked, I really do believe that heft and bass extension you heard on the PTP Solid 12 is primarily a function of its uber high torque.
What you might lose is some air, and pinpoint imaging/soundstaging, due to inherently more noise from the motor/idler wheel.
If P Reinders has mainly sorted this w his twin stainless steel PTPs, then there is the mouthwatering prospect of drive and bass heft married to more than reasonable microdynamics, transparency and low level detail.
For me, low torque in any tt design seems such a contradiction.
What you might lose is some air, and pinpoint imaging/soundstaging, due to inherently more noise from the motor/idler wheel.
If P Reinders has mainly sorted this w his twin stainless steel PTPs, then there is the mouthwatering prospect of drive and bass heft married to more than reasonable microdynamics, transparency and low level detail.
For me, low torque in any tt design seems such a contradiction.
So awsmone should be getting more heft and bass on his Sony. Just wanting to see if he confirms that.
I can hear my motor controller to if it's to close to the TT. I think the 1.5 improved on this with better cable and diff electronics. I suspect they've found a way to shield it more...or maybe that fat cable was acting like a antenna and it was the culprit. I've also found, like most TT's, it appreciates good electrical conditioning. I have my Monaco plugged into a Shunyata DPC-6v2, to block most radiated noise from going into the power lines. After all, that motor controller is CPU based computer...
Ked, you had an ideal comparison of low v high torque.
Yr Scottish demo of NA v PTP.
It may be slightly unfair to draw a hard and fast conclusion w such different front ends, but I believe the character contrasts aptly sum up high torque PTP and low torque NA.
Yr Scottish demo of NA v PTP.
It may be slightly unfair to draw a hard and fast conclusion w such different front ends, but I believe the character contrasts aptly sum up high torque PTP and low torque NA.
TW high, Nottingham low. The Notts are of the extreme low torque philosophy. They rely on the mass/inertia of the platters. You actually have to give them a push to get started. The upshot is that they are very quiet.
Well Ked, that NA is VERY low torque, the platter needs a push to get it even started, as does the Palmer 2.5 that derived from Tom's NA design.
My old Michell was pretty low torque too.
The Kuzmas are all high torque, esp the Stabi M that gets up to full speed in 2 revolutions.
I have no idea how high or low torque the SMEs, TWs, Brinkmanns, Kronos', AFs are.
All idlers and rim drives are pretty much high to v high torque, its a function of their uber powerful motors mated directly to platter via drive wheel. So this includes my rim drive Trans Fi Salvation you heard in my flat and at Vic's, all Garrard 301s and 401s, the Saskia, the Schick 14, and of course the Lenco rebuilds like the PTP.
DDs are mainly high to v high torque, eg the SP10s, 1970s Sonys, Yamahas, Luxmans, and modern equivalents like the Kodo Beat, Mike's NVS, his old Rockport Sirius.
But there are quite a few DD designs that are deliberately medium or low torque, the Brinkmann Bardo, Primary Control Kinea, the old GPA Monaco 1.0 and 1.5, and new Parabolica.
I do find it telling that the Monaco 2.0 breaks with this tradition and has gone high torque, and I'm suspecting strongly this is where its performance upstick over the older 1.0 and 1.5 and Parabolica mainly comes from.
Ked, if I ever go back to belt drive, it will only be to the Kuzma Stabi M w its uber high torque.
My old Michell was pretty low torque too.
The Kuzmas are all high torque, esp the Stabi M that gets up to full speed in 2 revolutions.
I have no idea how high or low torque the SMEs, TWs, Brinkmanns, Kronos', AFs are.
All idlers and rim drives are pretty much high to v high torque, its a function of their uber powerful motors mated directly to platter via drive wheel. So this includes my rim drive Trans Fi Salvation you heard in my flat and at Vic's, all Garrard 301s and 401s, the Saskia, the Schick 14, and of course the Lenco rebuilds like the PTP.
DDs are mainly high to v high torque, eg the SP10s, 1970s Sonys, Yamahas, Luxmans, and modern equivalents like the Kodo Beat, Mike's NVS, his old Rockport Sirius.
But there are quite a few DD designs that are deliberately medium or low torque, the Brinkmann Bardo, Primary Control Kinea, the old GPA Monaco 1.0 and 1.5, and new Parabolica.
I do find it telling that the Monaco 2.0 breaks with this tradition and has gone high torque, and I'm suspecting strongly this is where its performance upstick over the older 1.0 and 1.5 and Parabolica mainly comes from.
Ked, if I ever go back to belt drive, it will only be to the Kuzma Stabi M w its uber high torque.
Hmm, I see a new thread developing, torque and its essential part in realistic vinyl replay.
However its hard enough getting accurate s/n ratio, rumble figures, honest speed stability data, from manufacturers, there's nothing in any spec list re torque, just broad brushstroke comparisons based on conjecture.
All we can be sure of is that the SP10 is uber torquey, NA has no torque to speak of. Everything else in between, idlers closer to SP10.
However its hard enough getting accurate s/n ratio, rumble figures, honest speed stability data, from manufacturers, there's nothing in any spec list re torque, just broad brushstroke comparisons based on conjecture.
All we can be sure of is that the SP10 is uber torquey, NA has no torque to speak of. Everything else in between, idlers closer to SP10.
So what is high torque and what is low torque? What is uber torque? Can you say measurement ranges and how to measure? Thanks.
That's the problem Tima, there are absolutely no specs on this.
It's purely based on here say, and personal experience of actions.
The Nottingham Analogs that require a push to get the platter going and can be slowed down by simple manual pressure at one end of the spectrum. The SP10s and 301s etc that get up to speed in less than two full turns of the lp, and can't be stopped by manual pressure for love or money at the other end. I know which end I believe a tt should be at.
It's purely based on here say, and personal experience of actions.
The Nottingham Analogs that require a push to get the platter going and can be slowed down by simple manual pressure at one end of the spectrum. The SP10s and 301s etc that get up to speed in less than two full turns of the lp, and can't be stopped by manual pressure for love or money at the other end. I know which end I believe a tt should be at.
No, there are a few turntables that specify torque - I remember that the SP10's are some of them.
But if you valuate turntable torque so much you should also study stylus drag - you can have great variations according to tip shape!
Micro, stylus drag is the very reason I believe torque is so critical.
They're both interrelated, torque a solution to minimising stylus drag.
They're both interrelated, torque a solution to minimising stylus drag.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |