advertisement


Fidelity designs LP12 subchassis

guydarryl

pfm Member
Any one have any experiences of this subchassis?

http://www.fidelitydesignsltd.co.uk/ultimatesub/ultimatesub.html
the above is a new product with integrated arm board, there is an earlier version:
http://www.fidelitydesignsltd.co.uk/subchassis.html

Low mass and low price seem to make this an interesting option, although I would guess that the low mass would make setting up very different to the "norm"?

EDIT: I currently use a pre Cirkus bearing in a glued steel "coffin lid" sub, all the talk about Karousel in another thread has made me think about options for updating, although I do still enjoy my current deck.
 
No experience of that particular model but have swapped a few different sub-chassis and it's definitely one of the areas where there are big gains to be had.

Been said a million times before but all the upgrades take the deck in a more "accurate" direction and not everyone prefers that. IMO it's worth hearing a new LP12 first to see if you like the more updated sound.
 
No experience of that particular model but have swapped a few different sub-chassis and it's definitely one of the areas where there are big gains to be had.

Been said a million times before but all the upgrades take the deck in a more "accurate" direction and not everyone prefers that. IMO it's worth hearing a new LP12 first to see if you like the more updated sound.

I like what you are advising. It makes sense but do all subchassis not made of steel take the sound in the same "more accurate direction"?
Not looking for argument, genuinely interested if that is the case.
 
It's more that the older, thin, pressed steel sub-chassis, with it's screwed connection into an mdf armboard is "lossy", whilst replacement versions are usually much stiffer and address the "closed loop" (the whole assembly moves as one) idea.
 
This look really good and the prices are very reasonable.

They are very similar to the Funk Firm units I use, which are excellent.

The top plate looks like a well thought out design and it looks like you can specify what you require.

Well worth contacting them.
 
No experience of that particular model but have swapped a few different sub-chassis and it's definitely one of the areas where there are big gains to be had.

Been said a million times before but all the upgrades take the deck in a more "accurate" direction and not everyone prefers that. IMO it's worth hearing a new LP12 first to see if you like the more updated sound.

So I wonder, are Linn now saying their original "sound" was wrong and their new "sound" is right, for the time being?
 
I think Linn say their original subchassis was good and their newer ones are better.


If you don’t want to spend lots I’d look at the majik subchassis.

From experience carbon fibre isn’t a good match.
 
"Their original subchassis was good"

Oh come on, that's fantasy!

Was this one good? http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/43/p10805181.jpg. Flatness eluded it. It was shockingly bad & very poorly made because very thin steel was employed in its manufacture, it was far too flexible to be even considered anywhere near "good"

Or perhaps the attempt to spot weld an additional strengthening channel along the length which resulted in warping.

I think they had several attempts at getting it to remain flat, thankfully they eventually reached a reasonable result when they epoxy glued the channel in.

But then Linn's chosen mantra for the poor design was a lossy connection between chassis and arm board, of course this contradicted "Linn tight" everywhere else on the TT. But now of course Karousel has arrived they have rigidity between chassis and arm board Linn tight they have clamped connection for the bearing to chassis. I remember some including Linn castigated Rega for the clamped fixing of the RB300, Linn once advocated three point fixings everywhere so it seems they are still unsure.

You may think I'm just knocking Linn, I'm not I like the LP12. I'm just not a Linn fanatic anymore. Though I do still have two, one standard rosewood mid 80''s with Cirkus, Ittok LVIII/b, Lingo & another of same period, fluted afro, pre Cirkus, Valhalla, Alpahson HR100S. They are nice turntables. I also have others which are just as good if not better performing to me including Voyd, Rega, Technics and Lenco, each one provides beautiful music.

It's now clear they are taking their devotees on a wealth transfer journey.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the LP12 now has to be thought of as a family of turntables which happen to look similar. Yes, there is a familiar sonic thread that runs through them be newer ones sound quite different from older ones and personality, I'm not sure which I prefer. I've just set up an old Thorens TD 160 B MkII with a Basik Plus arm in it and there is something about the lucid quality of its sound that's great. I'm going to build a second LP12 which will have a pre-Cirkus bearing and I'll probably be swapping bits between the two decks to try and figure out what bit contributes what.

Bottom line is that gaining something on a turntable often involves sacrificing something else.
 
After many years of using different TT's, I can only agree with your sentiments Mr Pig.
 
Linns original decks and early speakers sonic ethos was free flowing musicality.

They now value detail and perceived Tune Dem accuracy, to me it sounds wrong - it seems to constrain musical flow and the human quality in music, especially the latest digital Sondek. A lot of Linn electronics also now sound very dry - especially compared to say a Klout.

They have been making LP12s easier to set-up and sound more like a digital streamer with every upgrade.
 
Centering the mass closer to the centre of rotation is good, I wonder if lightening it all round improves this, or if the arm now becomes a great proportion of the mass?

Maybe a small counterweight off the none arm side would help equalise the weight distribution and put the centre of mass closer to the centre point between the springs. And maybe bring the whole spring mass closer the weight that the springs ate tuned for.

You can go too light for sure.

Don't Vida have a counterweight on their chassis?
 
Cheers, Simon.

I was about to ask about advantages / disadvantages for the suspension system of lowering the mass. Wouldn't lowering the mass of the chassis raise the (resonant?) frequency of the system (bad thing?).
 
Centering the mass closer to the centre of rotation is good, I wonder if lightening it all round improves this, or if the arm now becomes a great proportion of the mass?

Maybe a small counterweight off the none arm side would help equalise the weight distribution and put the centre of mass closer to the centre point between the springs. And maybe bring the whole spring mass closer the weight that the springs ate tuned for.

You can go too light for sure.

Don't Vida have a counterweight on their chassis?
This is what Dunlop did with Systemdek on their first designs; Transcription Turntable (later dubbed Systemdek III) and Systemdek II (aka 'The Biscuit Tin'). Lateral (rotational really) stability was very good on these, despite them having a round sub-chassis that was no larger in diameter than their platters (i.e. the three suspension springs are inboard of the platter circumference). An obvious side benefit of placing counterweights opposite the tonearm side of the chassis is a lowering of the vertical centre of gravity of the whole.

medium
 
Daryl, yeh exactly that. If you know the reduction in mass vs the original total mass you can get pretty close to working out the change. I suspect that for 100-200g it's basically the square root of sod all, half a hz or so.

Getting the centre of rotation bang on at the main bearing spindle might be a worthwile mod.
 
A bit like Manticore's Mantra chassis and much softer springing, also Systemdek's counterweight opposite the arm and use of tension springs, a'la Systemdek's, Voyd and Pink Triangle's philosophy.
 
A bit like Manticore's Mantra chassis and much softer springing, also Systemdek's counterweight opposite the arm and use of tension springs, a'la Systemdek's, Voyd and Pink Triangle's philosophy.
The Systemdek hanging suspension design is quite elegant, really, especially so at the budget price of IIX. Note the simple bracket that moves straight up/down with the turning of the always accessible machine bolt from above. There is a fixed post positioned opposite the spring which keeps the bracket from rotating out of alignment.

1019621513-tp.jpg
 
That's certainly an elegant system! When levelling the platter spring load remains the same on all three; whereas on the Voyd, spring tension is increased or decreased to level out the chassis/platter/arm assembly.
 


advertisement


Back
Top