|
Vinyl Asylum Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ. |
|
|
|
Vinyl Asylum Welcome Licorice Pizza (LP) lovers! Setup guides and Vinyl FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: removing Studietto springs posted by nsgarch on April 18, 2007 at 13:32:43:
Hello,
My Studio still works perfectly in fact; about 2 years ago I had the opportunity to buy an ex-demonstration SME 30 at a very good price (even by UK standards). I have not sold the Studio, as I foresee a period in which I will be living in two places; I would not wish to spend long periods in any place without the possibility to play records.I suppose in the end the choice (that you have made) of damping the top plate is the correct one. The more I think about the role of the springs in the original design, the more I see that their function was really to isolate the top plate from the rest, rather than to drain resonances from it. After all, the springs were not directly coupled to the threaded rods that screw into the conical feet; in between were the (somewhat loose) plastic platforms on which the springs rested (incidentally, I don't really understand what happens to these in your modification). And Goldmund even provided thin felt pads to put between the springs and the surface of the plastic platform. If the intention had been to provide a coherently realised resonance draining channel, one would not have expected to see such a lossy concatenation of elements.
I don't doubt that your modification goes a long way to solving the problem of the resonances in the top plate. But the bottom line with the Studio/Studietto design is that the motor and the arm are bolted to the same board. However good the motor and however good the damping, this cannot (in my opinion) be an optimal solution. This is perhaps why the local dealer here, who stocked both the Goldmund tables and the Lurne' ones (J1, J4), ultimately preferred the latter. These were designs that owed a lot to the Goldmund tables (Lurne' is said to have designed the Studietto) but crucially decoupled the motor (by using belt drive and placing the motor directly on the support)and optimised the resonance draining channel through the springs.
Of course I agree that the Studio sounds very good (that is why I am hanging onto mine). It has huge dynamics, very good spatial reconstruction, and generally provides a highly articulate sound. Its weak point (if you ask me) is instrumental timbre: with a string quartet (for instance) I do not find the timbre of the instruments to be sufficiently well differentiated. They are all just very slightly 'grey' or 'grainy'(reproducing the sound of a string quartet is perhaps the hardest task for a turntable). No doubt your modification alleviates this.
Other modifications used here on the Studio: (i) line the interior of the plinth (bottom, sides) with lead sheet; (ii) build a heavy-duty custom power supply (big improvement).
The lead turntable mat was exactly that: a slab of lead (produced by an Italian firm, if I remember rightly). It was a recommended add-on for both Goldmund and Lurne' tables. In combination with a clamp (Goldmund, Lurne' or Sota) it helped provide a more articulate sound (but today there are much more sophisticated mats around).
Talking of lead, I see that Pierre Lurne' uses some of it in his new tonearm design (http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/belladonna3_e.html), a sort of unipivot SME V!
Best wishes.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: removing Studietto springs - ptaylor 01:22:10 04/19/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
