| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Analog Playback» Copper Mat on a Micro Seiki Gun Metal Platter (123 posts, 7 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 4 of 7 (123 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The Foolishness of Analog People..  Late to the discussion but cannot resist...  Analog Playback Forum     56  584763  01-30-2006
  »  New  Micro RX 5000..  Alternative method...  Analog Playback Forum     9  69859  11-09-2008
  »  New  Micro RX5000: is that bearing spins normally?..  How many turns do the good bearing......  Analog Playback Forum     7  42846  02-03-2014
  »  New  Fetish of Micro's?..  Size of ceramic ball...  Analog Playback Forum     122  413982  10-29-2017
10-10-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 61
Post ID: 24476
Reply to: 24474
Power supply regulator
I was asked for more information on my power supply regulator, which allows the original 100V power line (Japan) to be plugged directly into a 120V line (US), while greatly smoothing the ripple going to the motor.
I must have drawn my schematic on a piece of paper and it is now somewhere in a box. Usually I put my designs into digital format, but I must not have here. If I can locate the papers, I will provide more information later. For now, I can show two images. One shows how I mounted an LM317T onto the underside of the chassis for heatsinking. I used an existing stand-off stud which supports the PCBs. Note that I insulated the LM317T's tab from the chassis. The other shot shows the tiny added prototype board that holds the associated components. This board is about 1.5" by 1.5". It mounts on that same stud, between two existing PCBs. You can see the red heatshrink tubing coming from below the little added board, through a Molex type connector. This connector allows me to be able to remove the PCBs for service without having to dismount the LM317T. The circuit is simple if you know the venerable LM317. The upper resistor is 249 ohms (1%) and the lower resistor is 5.49K (1%). I added two safety diodes and two small caps, per the usual LM317 design. The resistor ratio gives about 29 V out. Note the large dark blue main cap above the added board. I increased the PS capacitance dramatically to make sure that the LM317 is always getting enough input voltage to stay in regulation. I don't recall the value but it is probably about twice the original value. All other electrolytic caps were replaced with the same values.
Hope this helps. A technically-oriented person can figure it out from this.

______________
Brian
10-10-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jam
Auburn
Posts 21
Joined on 10-10-2017
Post #: 62
Post ID: 24478
Reply to: 22028
Contact
Wellington,
I would like to get into contact with you regarding the supply.You can e-mail me at jsomasundram@hotmail.com.
Thanks.
Regards.
Jam
10-10-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 63
Post ID: 24479
Reply to: 24478
Forum
I prefer to discuss these things out in the open on forums so that everyone can participate unless you have something truly personal to duscuss. Thanks 

______________
Brian
10-10-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jam
Auburn
Posts 21
Joined on 10-10-2017
Post #: 64
Post ID: 24480
Reply to: 24479
Response
Wellington,
In fact I do. That being said on another note I would like to plan a circuit board project for a power supply for any interested members.
Thanks.
Regards,
Jam
10-10-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 65
Post ID: 24481
Reply to: 24480
OK
Very well. I will email you tonight or tomorrow. Thanks 

______________
Brian
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 235
Joined on 01-15-2009
Post #: 66
Post ID: 24495
Reply to: 24480
HS-80, Speed ...
Well.....after reading this all, I can say, most is definitely phenomenal waste of time.
I own HS-80 for many years and in my System I can easily hear the difference with or without it.
Also is my speed stable, I check it from time to time with Timeline Strobe from Sutherland (by far the most accurate device) while playing
Resonances from metal platter is widely known (the main reason why the 8000II sounds so bad) but to avoid this with an addition metal platter?
Give me a break.


Micro Seiki RX 5000-HS-80.jpg




Kind Regards
Stitch
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 67
Post ID: 24497
Reply to: 24495
No breaks
I cannot give you a break just because you want one, sorry. Two metal objects with dissimilar resonance properties which are in intimate contact can indeed squelch each other’s resonances. The proof is in the pudding. It’s physics. It works.

______________
Brian
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 68
Post ID: 24498
Reply to: 24495
The site quiz
It is a very interesting subject, not that I feel it has any practical matter. I you believe in HS-80 and have the Micro-5000+ like turntable then what would be the best configuration to locate motor, platter,  HS-80 and one Vibroplane? Please justify your choice: 
 
1)      Motor is outside of Vibroplane, platter is on Vibroplane and HS-80 is outside of Vibroplane
2)      Motor is on Vibroplane, platter is on Vibroplane and HS-80 is outside of Vibroplane
3)      Motor, platter and HS-80 are on Vibroplane
4)      Motor is outside of Vibroplane, platter and HS-80 are on Vibroplane

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 69
Post ID: 24499
Reply to: 24498
No wiggles
None of the above.

I know you weren’t asking me, but you missed that option. The best solution, in my opinion of course, is no vibraplane or anything soft at all beneath the 5000, which, thankfully, has no suspension to begin with. Why change that philosophy by adding a compliant suspension?

The best solution is to mechanically GROUND the 5000 to Mother Earth. You don’t want any wiggles at all. My 5000 sits on 160 pounds of granite slab which rests on a massive equipment rack which rests on a ceramic tile floor (no carpet in between) which is installed directly over a concrete slab. The only time a compliant base such as the vibraplane might make sense is when the listening room has flouncy-bouncy wood-framed floors. In that case the motor and the plinth/platter must both be on the same base. You don’t want the motor going left when the platter goes right. You want them to both go right in the exact same relative positions to one another.

______________
Brian
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jam
Auburn
Posts 21
Joined on 10-10-2017
Post #: 70
Post ID: 24501
Reply to: 24499
Mass is King!
I have to agree with Wellington. To be fair we both use stainless steel platters (heavier than stock) and use CU-180 mats to damp the platter which ensures an almost dead platter, way better than any acrylic, hard rubber and felt mat I have tried. Stainless steel platters sound much better than the stock platters, Micro Seiki realized this and offered it as a higher cost option (rare). This is a pretty simple experiment as Wellington has stated. For the most part the use of the HS-80 is cosmetic and I have not been able to hear any difference in my setup. (maybe another RX-5000 as a flywheel might work?) If not set up correctly(which can be a pain) it can cause problems. 
In my opinion the best improvements to a RX-5000 are the use of a stainless steel platter with a copper mat, rebuilding the bearing and rebuilding the motor with the possibility of a new power supply. I have two RX-5000's ad one remained stock while the other was rebuilt (same tonearm and cartridge) when I was satisfied that the changes made an improvement I rebuilt the other one.
10-28-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 235
Joined on 01-15-2009
Post #: 71
Post ID: 24502
Reply to: 24501
Correct Tonal Reproduction is King
Well, I know these endless discussions about Seiki but after a while we all have to make a decision. 
Tuning? Better? Better than what? What is "I like it!"?
When doing something - serious - it is mandatory to know what a correct tonal reproduction is. From my experience, 95% of all "Audiophiles" have absolutely no clue about it or what that is. They do "something" and when it sounds different, they are happy about their result.
Had the same discussion about that with a Seiki Dealer, when I told him what his beloved 8000II (he still sells them) is doing wrong... he attacked me badly .... and of course he has no clue except knowing the price tag from his "treasures"....

Anyway....MY files about Seiki are complete and I know very well which combination sounds best....but each his own. And I also know the Seiki 5000 with steel platter ... 

a few pics about that time frame......


MS RX-5000 (3).jpg


MS RX-5000 (7).jpg



Micro Seiki RX 5000-20.jpg




Micro Seiki RX 5000-HS-80-1.jpg




MS RX-5000 (4).jpg




Anyway, I think these TechDas table are done quite well and last year I was seriously thinking about buying a AF-1. I listened to it extensively multiple times ... and did nothing until today....



Kind Regards
Stitch
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jam
Auburn
Posts 21
Joined on 10-10-2017
Post #: 72
Post ID: 24504
Reply to: 24502
AF-1
I would agree that the RX-5000 has some advantage to the SX-8000 and I put the differences down to mainly the air bearing and construction of the platter which will cause softness and a lack of focus (some people may like this). To understand the use of a metal mat you have to understand a constrained layer damping which is a common engineering practice.
But in my humble opinion  both these tables are superior to the AF-1. The AF-1 suffers from several problems a) a motor system that has insufficient torque, b) a suspension system that is incomplete  c) an inefficient  arm mounting system which has been corrected in the AF-3 and as as someone else put it it too much 'bling' for it's own good. Look at the updates that have gone into the AF-1. Problems that they will try to fix in the upcoming AF-0.
Technically the AF-1 might look good on paper but in my opinion it removes the soul of the music being played. A classic case of a product being released before all the bugs were ironed out. A lot of modern products have taken a step back because of desire to introduce new features that are questionable at best and discard tried and true engineering practice. 
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 73
Post ID: 24506
Reply to: 24504
About Micro, AF-1 and the rest...
 jam wrote:
(maybe another RX-5000 as a flywheel might work?) If not set up correctly(which can be a pain) it can cause problems. 

In my case use the RX-5000 as a flywheel did not work. I mean it “worked” well from mechanical perspective but I did not detect any sensible sonic difference.

 jam wrote:
In my opinion the best improvements to a RX-5000 are the use of a stainless steel platter with a copper mat…

I personally do not feel that using ether stainless or copper is better. The Micro designer told in 2000 when I unfortunately met him that stainless platter were made for setups that run tube electronic and copper platters for setup that run SS electronics. It is a cleaver thinking but I am not sure if is practically honest. I personally do not like sound from Micro of a record lays directly on metal platter, would it be copper or stainless. I always put a hard rubber mat over any platter. BTW, Micro people knew it and this is why they had a very thin felt mat over the vacuum hold down version. I personally feel that stainless is much better platter but only because it I much heavier. The American Sound turntable has stainless platter that is 3 time higher and many times heavier, it is even better. The heavier platter goes in this topology the less the other things matter.
 jam wrote:
But in my humble opinion  both these tables are superior to the AF-1. The AF-1 suffers from several problems a) a motor system that has insufficient torque, b) a suspension system that is incomplete  c) an inefficient  arm mounting system which has been corrected in the AF-3 and as as someone else put it it too much 'bling' for it's own good. Look at the updates that have gone into the AF-1. Problems that they will try to fix in the upcoming AF-0. Technically the AF-1 might look good on paper but in my opinion it removes the soul of the music being played. A classic case of a product being released before all the bugs were ironed out. A lot of modern products have taken a step back because of desire to introduce new features that are questionable at best and discard tried and true engineering practice. 

Jam, I very much agree with you observations. Warn you that I never had AF-1 and my familiarity with it derives only from a friend of mine who does have, who tested it very well and who characterized it with word “absolute shit”. I am not personally not familiar with design and the reasons why it is good or bad, so I will keep mouth shut. I do not like the large parley to western world that TechDAS opened with. As the western audio media and distribution framework embrace a product they unavoidable kill it. The idiots- reviewers and media are lowering the standard and demands and the product begin to target to lower common denominators. I did not see any product in audio what did not follow this pattern. Very few of manufacturers do maintain integrity but not of them become popular hi-end products. So, considering that each “famous” audio writing retard nowadays in a queue to get his TechDAS turntable and to exchange for for a pile of irrelevant written gibberish I do not think that TechDAS has any reasons to make better turntables. It is juts my opinion. I do not know that the TechDAS products but I am an expert to observe and to criticize the brain damage that happens with a person/company which also itself to be taken by the hi-end audio sewerage system.  

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 74
Post ID: 24507
Reply to: 24506
Hero worship
Romy, I share your skepticism of the audio media (ALL media, really.), although maybe with a bit less “attitude” than you Smile. Audio reviewers are predisposed to like the newest thing, especially if they didn’t experience something better from years ago. In the Positive Feedback review of the Air Force One, the reviewer states: “Its quality is guaranteed by the authority of Mr. Nishikawa”. Guaranteed? Really? This is hero worship. Hideaki Nishikawa, designer of the TechDas line, had a much-ballyhooed stint at Micro Seiki where he was responsible for the final 8000 MkII. The earlier history of Micro Seiki is less clear, but I am led to believe that Nishikawa-San came to MS long after the 5000 was already developed. The TechDas Air Force indeed appears to be the logical successor to the 8000 II more than it does to the 5000.
Nishikawa-San is probably a very fine engineer and I wish TechDas well as it improves its product, but let’s not fall for marketing hyperbole. 


______________
Brian
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 75
Post ID: 24508
Reply to: 24507
Heavy metal
Heavy metal, and no acrylic in sight. Disk-cutting lathes from Scully and Neumann.


______________
Brian
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 76
Post ID: 24511
Reply to: 24507
Do you want more attitude?
 Wellington wrote:
Romy, I share your skepticism of the audio media (ALL media, really.), although maybe with a bit less “attitude” than you . Audio reviewers are predisposed to like the newest thing, especially if they didn’t experience something better from years ago. In the Positive Feedback review of the Air Force One, the reviewer states: “Its quality is guaranteed by the authority of Mr. Nishikawa”. Guaranteed? Really? This is hero worship. Hideaki Nishikawa, designer of the TechDas line, had a much-ballyhooed stint at Micro Seiki where he was responsible for the final 8000 MkII. The earlier history of Micro Seiki is less clear, but I am led to believe that Nishikawa-San came to MS long after the 5000 was already developed. The TechDas Air Force indeed appears to be the logical successor to the 8000 II more than it does to the 5000.
Nishikawa-San is probably a very fine engineer and I wish TechDas well as it improves its product, but let’s not fall for marketing hyperbole. 

Everyone have less attitude then me but this is not the point. The point is not even about integrity of Nishikawa, I have no busses to discuss it. What I am trying to say is that a manufacture, any manufacture do whatever they do and this is fine. The definition of success and the assessment of the manufacture is the quality of product, right? Now. Do we have an infrastructure for proper assessment the quality of a turntables that cost over $100K? Nope we do not. The distribution network are a joke, mostly idiots and the will sell with the same integrity a fully functional perpetual motion engine, a dead rat on a stick of Hitler underwear. A few marketing executives, puffy doctors and .com nouveau riche folks who buy a TT and then proudly post online the picture of the new items are not really objective evaluators. The proper evaluation should be done by consumer advocacy – the audio reviewing but having what reviewing we unfortunately have we condemned the manufacture to produce crap. I can name dozens of turntables where very good intentions were killed by absolutely brainless reviewing. So, in my mind, considering that TechDas at very early stage very deeply entrenched itself with audio establishment I feel that it should be crap. But this is my personal feeling, I do not claim any specific knowledge on the subject. I could tell a LOT of stores about many other TT manufactures and how and why specific they fuck themselves up by dealing with high-end audio industry but I do not have any dirt about TechDas. So, take it purely my attitude. However, I also know that anything that I have seen in high-end audio that was worthy (at least Western high-end audio) was done by outcasts 

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 77
Post ID: 24512
Reply to: 22028
The pics.... simple...
Wellington, would you consider to use a different method to inject picture to the posts?  Mostly it is what people use.

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1120


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Stitch


Behind The Sun
Posts 235
Joined on 01-15-2009
Post #: 78
Post ID: 24514
Reply to: 24504
AF-1 & so on ....
 jam wrote:
I would agree that the RX-5000 has some advantage to the SX-8000 and I put the differences down to mainly the air bearing and construction of the platter which will cause softness and a lack of focus (some people may like this). To understand the use of a metal mat you have to understand a constrained layer damping which is a common engineering practice.
But in my humble opinion  both these tables are superior to the AF-1. The AF-1 suffers from several problems a) a motor system that has insufficient torque, b) a suspension system that is incomplete  c) an inefficient  arm mounting system which has been corrected in the AF-3 and as as someone else put it it too much 'bling' for it's own good. Look at the updates that have gone into the AF-1. Problems that they will try to fix in the upcoming AF-0.
Technically the AF-1 might look good on paper but in my opinion it removes the soul of the music being played. A classic case of a product being released before all the bugs were ironed out. A lot of modern products have taken a step back because of desire to introduce new features that are questionable at best and discard tried and true engineering practice. 


Yes, same say, AF-1 is dead sounding, no emotion .... I agree, it disturbed me a little bit, first I thought it has to do with preamps but now I think, it is - mainly - based on their vacuum System ( but not so bad like 8000 II) ....and I also heard from technical problems...some told me to stay away...
There is a Forum where the owners own the best of the best of the very best and there are also the distributors to give help. But such "problems" are totally unknown there. It is more the usual game. You can't hear the superiority... when you complain something about AF3, all will tell you to go for AF2 because it is so much better, when you complain something about AF2, all will tell you to go for AF-1.....and so on ...
I was ready to go for AF-1 but not using the vacuum System at home and also using a different platter. And when I am honest, I was not able to hear a big difference between AF-2 and AF-1. I was also seriously thinking about AF-2... first price of AF-1 was 28k ready to go .... then 56K .... then a touch below 80K and how much is it right now?  A lot of money difference for nothing but "Air" in the Distributor chain

Romy's friend calls them absolute BS....hm, is it possible to get it more precise? Why? Based on what? What does other Tables better? Which ones?
I listened to a lot of Turntables and there were the very most expensive ones..... and I also have a personal BS-List (Simon Yorke, Clearaudio, Transrotor, Goldmund Reference, VPI, Garrard, EMT's, Feickert, Rockport, Kuzma, TW Acoustics ... for various reasons, speed drift, internal vibrations, no brain, cheap parts, done wrong...) but I would not lift the TechDas into that - my - listing ... but maybe someone knows more....

Kind Regards
Stitch
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Wellington


South Florida
Posts 38
Joined on 10-03-2011
Post #: 79
Post ID: 24515
Reply to: 24512
Thanks
 Romy the Cat wrote:
Wellington, would you consider to use a different method to inject picture to the posts?  Mostly it is what people use.

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1120

Thanks for that, Romy. I think the problem is that your forum is not fully compatible with the iPhone (iOS 11) that I am using this morning. That yellow icon is not visible, and it seems that there are other missing icons as well in the upper right “control panel” area. Maybe I will fire up the Windows PC later and try again.

______________
Brian
10-29-2017 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,156
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 80
Post ID: 24516
Reply to: 24515
No AF, no Mac, no ways...
 Stitch wrote:
Romy's friend calls them absolute BS....hm, is it possible to get it more precise? Why? Based on what? What does other Tables better? Which ones?I listened to a lot of Turntables and there were the very most expensive ones..... and I also have a personal BS-List (Simon Yorke, Clearaudio, Transrotor, Goldmund Reference, VPI, Garrard, EMT's, Feickert, Rockport, Kuzma, TW Acoustics ... for various reasons, speed drift, internal vibrations, no brain, cheap parts, done wrong...) but I would not lift the TechDas into that - my - listing ... but maybe someone knows more....
   
Stitch, the friend of my owned pretty much all of the tables you ever hear of and some that you did not. I am not kidding, he is kind went on his TT insanity, which is a bit Moronic but who of us did not go this road? My fife still does not get why I need 12 different pressings of a specific recordings that I like. Anyhow, if you just curios them let it be but if you would like to buy AF and would like to hear  an opinion who used it for a while then I can get you in touch privately with the friend of mine. I do not insist that his opinion matter but the good thing about him that he does not mine to call “crap” the things that he owns or sells.    
 Wellington wrote:
I think the problem is that your forum is not fully compatible with the iPhone (iOS 11) that I am using this morning. That yellow icon is not visible, and it seems that there are other missing icons as well in the upper right “control panel” area. Maybe I will fire up the Windows PC later and try again.

 
Well, Wellington, as the person who religiously hates Apple products you understand that your pain feels like a pleasure to me. :-) Sorry, I do not do any accommodations to Apple browsers, I never had one and do not even know how to use it.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 4 of 7 (123 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The Foolishness of Analog People..  Late to the discussion but cannot resist...  Analog Playback Forum     56  584763  01-30-2006
  »  New  Micro RX 5000..  Alternative method...  Analog Playback Forum     9  69859  11-09-2008
  »  New  Micro RX5000: is that bearing spins normally?..  How many turns do the good bearing......  Analog Playback Forum     7  42846  02-03-2014
  »  New  Fetish of Micro's?..  Size of ceramic ball...  Analog Playback Forum     122  413982  10-29-2017
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts