ssportclay
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2003
- Posts
- 1,335
- Likes
- 13
Quote:
This really doesn't make sense that the tonearm would be better isolated from the motor on the top plate than on the plinth. 70 Lbs. of plinth can absorb a lot of motor vibration especially if the top plate is glass bedded to it for maximum contact but this is just theory on my part from much observed evidence.Thanks for the comments and keep us informed.Not much information is available on ROKs as compared with Garrards and heavy Lencos.
Originally Posted by derekbmn /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nope... not with the ROKs.They differ from the Garrards and Thorens in that the top plate is (strangely) the better spot to mount the tonearm.I can't explain it nor has anyone else been able to , but they have a rather weird trait about them in that the top plate is pretty vibration free and yet still manages to tranfer it to the plinth.(and in turn is NOT vibration and noise free) I know it sounds rather strange but it is true and I have confirmed it through some experiments for myself. At this point I have a new idea up my sleeve for it as far as plinths go and will post pics when it comes to fruition.The table will have an Audioquest PT-9 mounted on it. |
This really doesn't make sense that the tonearm would be better isolated from the motor on the top plate than on the plinth. 70 Lbs. of plinth can absorb a lot of motor vibration especially if the top plate is glass bedded to it for maximum contact but this is just theory on my part from much observed evidence.Thanks for the comments and keep us informed.Not much information is available on ROKs as compared with Garrards and heavy Lencos.