Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Paul Costa wrote:

Aparently the new powersupply for the motor makes it sound even better, but I have not heard it or the three motor.  I would like to hear the three motor but really do not have any interest in owning it.  Much debate on the synchronization of the three motor tables, some folks say it deos more harm than good.  But TW uses only one belt and the belt has minimal surface contact with the platter perimeter.  How it makes any sense I do not know.  They say it has a bigger sound and better pitch stability and more torque with less belt contact.

Paul, I have a lot of attitude toward it and I believe that 3 motors, 5 motors, 543 motors is very idiotic direction. Why a minimal surface contact with the platter shell be better? A belt applies moment to platter only in the area of initial attack of platter. The rest of the belt juts lay on plate with no effect at all. Why we need more torque in belt moment? We need opposite - as soon the platter hit it;s cruise speed we need less torque. I also do not know how all that PS paranoia for TT motors makes any sense. You see: those types of the tables, with platter of over 10kg have absolutely enough stability from a passive, regulated low-torque motor. They are stable and do not worry about the stability. Then the designers introduce the sophisticated systems of the motor management, with servo, with sensors, with feedbacks… you name it… all those extra intelligence in motor make a bad damage to sound of TT. When a single belt drives a relatively heavy platter with low BUT CONSTANT torque then the micro-beating in the bearing is stressed on one side and the TT is in a perfect dynamic equilibrium. As soon the torque begin to fluctuate then the TT’s bearing jumps out cruise beating and all hell get loose. The CONSTANT torque in a way biases the platter bearing. So, I see all conversations about better PS in TT as marketing BS the has absolutely no relation to actual sound

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site