advertisement


Linn LP12s – Fire away!

I use a Mose Hercules II, I thought it a step up from Valhalla, though it is I believe a clone of the Valhalla circuit, modified to provide 45 rpm and I think to reduce the drive to the motor a little, a bit like I understand the Lingo 1 does, to reduce motor noise.

Hard to know for me if it was moving the Valhalla out of the plinth or the small modifications to the Valhalla design in the Hercules, but the addition of 45 rpm is undeniable. Peter Swain likes the Hercules too. I think it is the bargain of the PSU options. On David's scoring, 24.9%, probably, though of course as a Naim user I shouldn't ever dare to Tune score anything :D
Yes the Mose Hercules II you have is supposed to be a bit of an improvement over be standard Internal Hercules II I’ve got. I’ve compared the internal Hercules I’ve got to the Valhalla and I’d say the tonality is v similar. The bass is a little more punchy on the Hercules and it’s maybe slightly less warm in the top end, but nothing like as much as the Lingo. The Hercules is a nice compromise and it’s good to get 45 RPM replay with an almost identical sound to the Valhalla without having the resort to the dreaded 45 RPM adaptor! I remember talking to Peter Swain on the phone once and he does indeed rate it.

I’d say the older Valhalla without the Zener upgrade is nearly the same but has a bit less focus than the Zener version. It however is a bit more musical and slightly softer. That’s nice with some records.

I’ve also got a couple of original big red button Basik PSUs. Put one of those in and the sound loses quite a lot of detail compared to the Valhalla and the midbass is bigger. Sound is even warmer and less defined. It’s a bit bloated and quite off the pace compared to other options these days but it’s very musical though!

I really like the Valhalla and Hercules. They’ve kind of got a tonality and musicality in between the Basik and Lingo variants. Nice compromise. Anything drier and leaner sounding is no use for my 1980s thinner sounding LPs. The PSU choice does depend to some extent on what era of vinyl you are listening to. With more modern records I sometimes wish I had a Lingo or cirkus upgrade.
 
Anything drier and leaner sounding is no use for my 1980s thinner sounding LPs.

The idea that some lps sound better than others On certain flavours of lp12 is a concept I have experienced often in my history of lp12 ownership. It is also a recurring theme on forums such as this. There is one lp I remember sounding absolutely sh*te on any lp12 I tried it on right from the 1980s till now. It was Peter Gabriel’s first album. Since I’ve gone L4/Karousel/Kore I’ve gone back over pretty much all of those lps I placed In this category and without fail, they all sound great now. I’ve just this minute interrupted my nightly listen to put on PG1 just to prove this to myself again. Modern love is now a gem. Excuse me actually sounds like a song. Humdrum now sounds like Fundrum. What the heck was going on?
 
Warning: more heresy follows.

Tony touched on it earlier, truth is, Linn/Naim of the earlier era definitely have a house sound that works with a lot of relativity simple music but can fall apart with the most complex and perhaps discordant stuff. A house sound that works really well to make stuff swing, boogie, bounce along, have drive, etc but in reality it can be quite lo-fi.

RSL has shown that (horror!) a decent modern opamp that measures better than a simple transistor circuit offers lower noise, better PSRR, but with care and maintaining elements of Naim characteristics (tants in signal path, similar gain and feedback) maintains the traits of a Naim preamp but giving you more detail, soundstage, and perhaps most importantly clarity in complex music.

Similarly the third party LP12 folk showed a dc motor with speed control improved on a noisier ac motor, that a stiffer more solid or indeed bonded sub chassis/arm board combo beats a bent metal sub chassis with several sticking plaster braces but still three small screws in to MDF, similar for top plate, the Tranquility showed there was noise in that bearing, taking the baseboard off demonstrates the fruit box can be a boom box and so on. All these things can reduce sources of noise, damp or direct vibrations giving an improvement in retrieval and allowing you to make more sense of those complex/discordant recordings.

I think it is possible that is why people enjoying, say, a bolt down/CB/Olive Naim and an early LP12 may struggle with some pieces and find they have records that sound great and records that are much less listenable. People talk about terrible recordings and the system having such insight that it is revealing the bad recordings. Perhaps, but perhaps also it is doing a bad job of making the most of complex stuff! Get a more even handed setup and you can enjoy a wider range of recordings. But will that even handed system sound as great on the recordings that sounded fab on pre-cirkus early Naim? Probably not, it has lost the "magic" tuned in to that package developed together as a system. Choose your poison.
 
I can't quite recall the expression you use when people call you out on some of your more pointed opinion but it goes something like: it is just my opinion, other opinions are equally valid. What it isn't is hearsay: information received from other people which cannot be substantiated; rumour. I would accept much of it is opinion, but hey, that is what we share here.
 
Warning: more heresy follows.

Tony touched on it earlier, truth is, Linn/Naim of the earlier era definitely have a house sound that works with a lot of relativity simple music but can fall apart with the most complex and perhaps discordant stuff. A house sound that works really well to make stuff swing, boogie, bounce along, have drive, etc but in reality it can be quite lo-fi.

RSL has shown that (horror!) a decent modern opamp that measures better than a simple transistor circuit offers lower noise, better PSRR, but with care and maintaining elements of Naim characteristics (tants in signal path, similar gain and feedback) maintains the traits of a Naim preamp but giving you more detail, soundstage, and perhaps most importantly clarity in complex music.

Similarly the third party LP12 folk showed a dc motor with speed control improved on a noisier ac motor, that a stiffer more solid or indeed bonded sub chassis/arm board combo beats a bent metal sub chassis with several sticking plaster braces but still three small screws in to MDF, similar for top plate, the Tranquility showed there was noise in that bearing, taking the baseboard off demonstrates the fruit box can be a boom box and so on. All these things can reduce sources of noise, damp or direct vibrations giving an improvement in retrieval and allowing you to make more sense of those complex/discordant recordings.

I think it is possible that is why people enjoying, say, a bolt down/CB/Olive Naim and an early LP12 may struggle with some pieces and find they have records that sound great and records that are much less listenable. People talk about terrible recordings and the system having such insight that it is revealing the bad recordings. Perhaps, but perhaps also it is doing a bad job of making the most of complex stuff! Get a more even handed setup and you can enjoy a wider range of recordings. But will that even handed system sound as great on the recordings that sounded fab on pre-cirkus early Naim? Probably not, it has lost the "magic" tuned in to that package developed together as a system. Choose your poison.

I agree to some degree but I never got above an 82/180 Olive. Heard the 52/135s with Linn and Kef and found it had similar limitations. It was a great combination with smaller scale music but often hard on female voices and definitely some constriction on larger scale orchestral or choral. Definitely not an all rounder combo. I do have a soft spot for it though as it was my first venture into what was then seen as proper hifi and I did enjoy it very much with some specific music. With solo guitar it was enthralling. But definitely limited IMO.
 
I use a Mose Hercules II, I thought it a step up from Valhalla, though it is I believe a clone of the Valhalla circuit, modified to provide 45 rpm and I think to reduce the drive to the motor a little, a bit like I understand the Lingo 1 does, to reduce motor noise.

Hard to know for me if it was moving the Valhalla out of the plinth or the small modifications to the Valhalla design in the Hercules, but the addition of 45 rpm is undeniable. Peter Swain likes the Hercules too. I think it is the bargain of the PSU options. On David's scoring, 24.9%, probably, though of course as a Naim user I shouldn't ever dare to Tune score anything :D

Yes I agree, the Mose/Hercules is a great combination at a fair price. I had one for circa 10 years before changing it to an External Zeus which includes speed monitoring and fine tuning on each revolution in the same way as a Lingo 4 does. By connecting it up to a laptop it can be fine-tuned even further and includes a few extras such as stylus wear counter which records the hours that the platter spins for.
 
I do wonder these days whether Linn would have bothered with springs knowing what they do now about what makes turntables sound good. Back in the day it was all about the arm and cartridge. Now it’s all about the power supply and sub-chassis. Even a well known dealer said to me “Who would have known then?”. Regardless, at least the Lp12 seems to sound good with or without springs and in terms of looks, I wouldn’t want anything else. Although Vertere are making some lovely looking turntables DG1/MG1. But I digress.
That’s the bit I don’t get, that folk sort of ‘didn’t know then’. We’re not talking advances in microprocessor design but very basic mechanical engineering principles which Linn indeed touted as their particular métier. In particular that all important mechanical link between the stylus and the main bearing where nothing should be vibrating but the cantilever of the cartridge as the tip traced the groove.

The only reason I can imagine the karousel, keel, better motor control etc weren’t delivered 30 years ago is that a voyage of discovery by the design team would have meant a voyage of expenditure that the director of finance wouldn’t have signed up to.
 
Last edited:
Yes I agree, the Mose/Hercules is a great combination at a fair price. I had one for circa 10 years before changing it to an External Zeus which includes speed monitoring and fine tuning on each revolution in the same way as a Lingo 4 does. By connecting it up to a laptop it can be fine-tuned even further and includes a few extras such as stylus wear counter which records the hours that the platter spins for.
I wasn't aware of the Zeus, thanks for the introduction. I know folk have tuned the old basic PSU circuit for phase angle to get the least vibration out of the AC motor and adding that ability makes a lot of sense. As does the speed control so you don't need to fanny about as much tilting the motor which is a faff what with taking the outer platter on and off to check the speed. Presumably you need to get it close-ish on the tilt or the belt will ride wrong?
 
Tony touched on it earlier, truth is, Linn/Naim of the earlier era definitely have a house sound that works with a lot of relativity simple music but can fall apart with the most complex and perhaps discordant stuff.

I think this statement is true but it helps to understand where exactly the blame lies.

It's not the speakers, especially Saras and Isobariks. Kans are hard to get working properly but are very good with complex music. Saras are difficult for totally different reasons but are ridiculously musical and forgiving once working. Naim amps, yeah a bit. They had a bit of a glaze to them and got shouty when pushed but they are not tripped up by complex music.

When looking at the LP12 you need to break it down as the deck itself is coloured but very forgiving. Its warmth is rarely an unpleasant addition. Early incarnations can sound rather soggy and lose the plot, especially at the bottom end, but it's very easily fixed with a few updates. Sub-chassis is the fist thing I'd hit as it's a biggie. The old bearing is fine with a good sub-chassis but generally the deck is good at any type of music. Just needs a little stiffening up.

By far the biggest issue, and one that few people identify, is the Linn arms. Yes, once you update the rest of the deck they are better but they are not neutral devices. Swap in just about anything else, an Aro or a Rega, and suddenly you can play all your records. Sure, they sound impressive with the right recordings but it isn't worth it. Personally I wouldn't go as far south as an Aro but a good Rega is a nice sweet spot that gives you nice fluidity and musicality while retaining just enough of the Linn fireworks to not be boring on Rock.

So this was a genuine problem but it's easily fixed and it's worth keeping the LP12 while doing it. Much better to retain the sweet yet involving Linn in the game rather than get a dull Giro or clinical Pink or Roxsan.
 
Last edited:
I really like the Valhalla and Hercules. They’ve kind of got a tonality and musicality in between the Basik and Lingo variants. Nice compromise. Anything drier and leaner sounding is no use for my 1980s thinner sounding LPs. The PSU choice does depend to some extent on what era of vinyl you are listening to. With more modern records I sometimes wish I had a Lingo or cirkus upgrade.
Not heard the Herc but agree ref Valhalla. And my Lingo deck does seem to help more with digital recordings as you say. Although there are so many variables it's hard to be certain what's doing what. Same black liner bearing though.
 
That’s the bit I don’t get, that folk sort of ‘didn’t know then’. We’re not talking advances in microprocessor design but very basic mechanical engineering principles which Linn indeed touted as their particular métier. In particular that all important mechanical link between the stylus and the main bearing where nothing should be vibrating but the cantilever of the cartridge as the tip traced the groove.

The only reason I can imagine the karousel, keel, better motor control etc weren’t delivered 30 years ago is that a voyage of discovery by the design team would have meant a voyage of expenditure that the director of finance wouldn’t have signed up to.

Some tech in electronics and materials was unavailable or expensive in the early 70s -try anything digital - but there is some truth to this.

Imagine if they had really known how to make a 2022 Klimax LP12 in the 1970s…

In any event, the main issue here is surely cost. Early Lp12s were not trying to be what we now think of as a high-end turntable. A 2022 Klimax LP12 costs vastly more, even inflation-adjusted, and performs differently, so it is not a surprise that so many parts have been changed in the last 50 years.
 
Some tech in electronics and materials was unavailable or expensive in the early 70s..

This is only partly true. What would be more accurate would be to say it was unavailable to Linn!

Most of the upgrades to the LP12 have simply involved physically stiffening the deck up. The engineering to build a current spec LP12 has existed for a long time, with the exception of some of the electronics, Linn just didn't have the capability. Not many people in the UK did, or rather couldn't access it cheaply enough, but it could have been built. There is nothing special about the Karousel bearing, other people have been making stuff like that for decades.

It's worth pointing out that Technics launched the 1200 in 1972. It was massively more complex and better built than the LP12 and at that time no one in the UK could've made it. Not cheaply enough anyway. Linn didn't build a tonearm until the late eighties, is that right, and still can't make them as cheaply as the far East.

Ironically, the LP12 and similar decks sound the way they do because they are simple but it's a mistake to think they represent the pinnacle of technology or ever have. It's just all the UK Hi-Fi industry could make.
 
This is only partly true. What would be more accurate would be to say it was unavailable to Linn!

Most of the upgrades to the LP12 have simply involved physically stiffening the deck up. The engineering to build a current spec LP12 has existed for a long time, with the exception of some of the electronics, Linn just didn't have the capability. Not many people in the UK did, or rather couldn't access it cheaply enough, but it could have been built. There is nothing special about the Karousel bearing, other people have been making stuff like that for decades.

It's worth pointing out that Technics launched the 1200 in 1972. It was massively more complex and better built than the LP12 and at that time no one in the UK could've made it. Not cheaply enough anyway. Linn didn't build a tonearm until the late eighties, is that right, and still can't make them as cheaply as the far East.

Ironically, the LP12 and similar decks sound the way they do because they are simple but it's a mistake to think they represent the pinnacle of technology or ever have. It's just all the UK Hi-Fi industry could make.

As I said and you (I think) confirm, digital electronics were wholly unavailable. I am also not sure that the actual alloy in a Karousel was commercially available to anyone (poss exception military aerospace) - perhaps a metallurgist can comment?

In addition, looking at just about anything made by (say) SME does suggest that your comments on the technical limitations of UK hifi companies may be less than generous.

If you were trying to make a turntable for what an LP12 cost 50 years ago, how much would you spend on developing and/or using cutting edge electronics anyway?
 
I wasn't aware of the Zeus, thanks for the introduction. I know folk have tuned the old basic PSU circuit for phase angle to get the least vibration out of the AC motor and adding that ability makes a lot of sense. As does the speed control so you don't need to fanny about as much tilting the motor which is a faff what with taking the outer platter on and off to check the speed. Presumably you need to get it close-ish on the tilt or the belt will ride wrong?

Hi
Yes the tilt angle needs to be about right for the belt to ride correctly in the first place. The Zeus allows fine tuning of the phase angle via onboard software. The speed control adjusts the speed on every revolution to compensate for belt wear, stylus drag etc. Comes in both internal and external options. Personally, I like it and it offers excellent vfm.
 
Yes, of course, we/I did speak with Alex M. about many this years ago among many other things. What do you 'Specifically" know about it? -And remember, the sprung suspension wasn't Linns idea, it was "Borrowed" from a well over 50 years old concept.

And this direct from Linn for "dealers" back in the day which -as you can clearly see- sure didn't mention pretty much Anything about the sprung "suspension", notice the 10 words under the heading "Chassis". Lets just keep that part a mystery, shall we?! This was the difference between a "review/hype sheet" from the Marketing Dept. meant for the customer/end user, and the "fact sheet" the dealer gets.
s-l1600.jpg

One of the early upgrades that was quite affordable but required a full rebuild of the turntable was the Nirvana kit. It addressed the suspension and the motor’s interaction with the top plate.

Nirvana mechanical components. This consisted of 1 new spring kit (3 springs and 6 grommets), 3 large locknuts, 6 small locknuts, 5 black chassis bolts, 2 motor mounting screws, domes, and nuts allowing it to be positioned with better accuracy. 1 motor thrust bearing kit (endcap, spring, ball bearing). 1 new drive belt. The springs changed from zinc coloured to black.
 
Yes, of course, we/I did speak with Alex M. about many this years ago among many other things. What do you 'Specifically" know about it? -And remember, the sprung suspension wasn't Linns idea, it was "Borrowed" from a well over 50 years old concept.

And this direct from Linn for "dealers" back in the day which -as you can clearly see- sure didn't mention pretty much Anything about the sprung "suspension", notice the 10 words under the heading "Chassis". Lets just keep that part a mystery, shall we?! This was the difference between a "review/hype sheet" from the Marketing Dept. meant for the customer/end user, and the "fact sheet" the dealer gets.
s-l1600.jpg
See under 'motor'. I wasn't aware the suspension was ever damped though.

I think the purpose of the suspension on a belt drive has always been primarily to isolate the platter/arm from the motor. I'm not sure that need has changed.
 
See under 'motor'. I wasn't aware the suspension was ever damped though.

I think the purpose of the suspension on a belt drive has always been primarily to isolate the platter/arm from the motor. I'm not sure that need has changed.

Linns answer to us at the shop was always along the lines of -The suspension helps to isolate the platter from outside vibrations. The Nirvana upgrade kit, introduced in 1981, was designed to improve the suspension and motor mounting of the LP12. Nirvana was before my time but I'm sure if it was better it was more about the motor mounting isolation improvements upon the confines of the sprung system they had to work with, I do recall later on though when Linn slipped in the new reverse wound springs on us with no prior announcement, those were a revelation LOL....

Warning: more heresy follows.

RSL has shown that (horror!) a decent modern opamp that measures better than a simple transistor circuit offers lower noise, better PSRR, but with care and maintaining elements of Naim characteristics (tants in signal path, similar gain and feedback) maintains the traits of a Naim preamp but giving you more detail, soundstage, and perhaps most importantly clarity in complex music.

You can mark me down as the one guy that has found ALL aftermarket 321, 324, 729 boards and HI-Cap regulators that I have tried to be less in tune that the originals supplied by Naim and designed by JV, some were just off Prat wise while others were outright terrible the way they would distort and dislocate the Tune IMO no matter how much burn in I offered them, and I have tried several, I'm will not name names of all the ones I have tried so don't ask. Better measurements don't always equate to more or even equal overall Tunefulness. And always remember, only make one change to your system at a time, if you do several of these so called "improvements" at once -which I've read many here seem to do- you can go down a deep rabbit hole which may be difficult to reemerge from..

You want to truly improve your Chrome Bumper/Olive Naim system? ...Properly maintain it and set it up properly, then improve your front end, simple, as nothing down the line can improve upon any shortcomings of your sources component, or said another way, if your source component isn't playing/reproducing the Tune then neither can the rest of your system no matter how much Tuneful potential it has. Personally, If I had to spend $10,000 on a new system I'd spend $7000 on the turntable/phonostage and $3000 on everything else.
 
I agree to some degree but I never got above an 82/180 Olive. Heard the 52/135s with Linn and Kef and found it had similar limitations. It was a great combination with smaller scale music but often hard on female voices and definitely some constriction on larger scale orchestral or choral. Definitely not an all rounder combo. I do have a soft spot for it though as it was my first venture into what was then seen as proper hifi and I did enjoy it very much with some specific music. With solo guitar it was enthralling. But definitely limited IMO.
What KEf model was it? I assume it was a Ui Q type driver. The hardness on the female vocals might have been partly due to the fact that the KEF uni Q driver gives the tweeter some horn loading. This can introduce some peakiness. It can give a hard sound in some of the upper midrange. They improved it for the latest models though I believe.
 
Last edited:


advertisement


Back
Top