advertisement


Nottingham Analogue optimisation…

I never tried one of the 'Tracer' range of MM's , whilst I really enjoyed my Hyperspace and like the Dais I have now I've always preferred other tonearms to the Mentor tonearm that I tried, whether equipped with a MM or MC. I think the turntables were NA's finest work.
 
Thanks for all the suggestions. Looks like the glass plate it sits on is the first experiment. I’ve a 30mm thick piece of marble that will give an alternate support. It needs an extra inch to marry easily with the arm height so the partially inflated inner tube looks a promising candidate. I’d consider the HD kit but only s/h. Playing direct onto the platter is an interesting idea if a bit scary for someone with no obsessional tendencies. No mention of record clamps I notice.
My OP wasn’t that clear so have included a pic. Mods are complicated by the arm being separate from the deck.
pic uploader
 
madscientist said:
I tried a number of turntable mats and record clamps on my NAS and always preferred playback without any of them.
Click to expand...

You may be wrong but I do like opinions that save me money :) More seriously, I do appreciate peeps that have done the swaps and admit it was a blind alley. Thanks.
 
This is a very interesting thread for me, as I have spent the last year & a bit looking for the right turntable for me, which ended just before Christmas when I purchased a NA Ace Spacedeck, & partnered it with a Analog Instruments Siggwan 12 inch wooden arm & a Koetsu Urushi Vermillion. So I am on the lookout for any tips which could optimise the sound I am getting, although I can't imagine it getting any better really.
I have pondered the heavy kit, & I have a nice piece of polished marble to try in place of the standard base board, I will also check the torque of the bolts & try it without a mat, if I can stop obsessing about whether it will damage my records with no interface between. Have I imagined sometime in the distant past a thin paper sheet was considered de rigueur by some?
 
MUTTY1 said:
Thanks for all the suggestions. Looks like the glass plate it sits on is the first experiment. I’ve a 30mm thick piece of marble that will give an alternate support.
Click to expand...

Best to use the stone that Tom used originally. I think it was Derbyshire stone and it was about 2-3 inches thick. Alternatively, I would use a piece of slate or granite. I would not recommend the use of marble.
 
Three references in the replies to the improvement if deck is sans mat. Tried it this evening as it takes ten secs to compensate the arm height on my setup when removing/replacing mat. A pleasing sharping to the sound. Looking like first tamper has produced an improvement with no outlay!
I only used a ruler to make the height change so this result could be I have just approximated and accidentally got a better VTA. I’ll do it properly with stops to get an accurate result, but it looking quite promising I have to say. The foam mat was a bitch with static and looked tacky too.
G T Audio said:
I would not recommend the use of marble.
Click to expand...
Is this because it has the same sort of density as glass? I’m in granite Cornwall so something of a more stone type density would be relatively easy to source.
Thanks all
 
madscientist said:
I tried a number of turntable mats and record clamps on my NAS and always preferred playback without any of them.
Click to expand...

Me too and over a number of turntables as well. That was until I found the only mat I found that worked and didn't have a negative effect on the sonic performance of the turntable was the mat designed and made by Yamada-san in Japan.
 
Why would one want a mat, esp. for a t/t which was designed not to have one? I had a t/t with a mat once (LP12?) apart from the rubber Goldrings and Thorens decks and it was a p.i.t.a. Kept lifting with the record (static, probably). Given the choice of t/t designed for a mat and one without, it would be a no-brainer. Re. clamps, though, the one with my Orbe was not only essential but such a beautifully designed, simple and easy to use one. Not sure of the efficacy of a clamp on a t/t with doesn't need one though, as the Orbe one was my only experience as far as I remember.
 
Mike Reed said:
Why would one want a mat, esp. for a t/t which was designed not to have one? I had a t/t with a mat once (LP12?) apart from the rubber Goldrings and Thorens decks and it was a p.i.t.a. Kept lifting with the record (static, probably). Given the choice of t/t designed for a mat and one without, it would be a no-brainer. Re. clamps, though, the one with my Orbe was not only essential but such a beautifully designed, simple and easy to use one. Not sure of the efficacy of a clamp on a t/t with doesn't need one though, as the Orbe one was my only experience as far as I remember.
Click to expand...

It's not quite as simple as that, as the sound of a turntable is dependant on a number of factors, one of the most important is the materials the turntable is made from, in particular the platter.

Generally without a mat the sound can be big and dynamic and images of instruments and vocals larger than life. With a good mat this is reduced and the sound can be a lot more realistic. Images are not as big and the sound is more controlled. This is noticed more on classical music when a mat is introduced, the performance can appear to be a more realistic listening experience and more like if you were in a concert hall. The real proof, as with a clamp, is whether you prefer the sound in your system, with or without, because it is very system dependant...
 
G T Audio said:
Generally without a mat the sound can be big and dynamic and images of instruments and vocals larger than life. With a good mat this is reduced......
Click to expand...

Interesting, as that's the way I like it, possibly not having attended a concert for the best part of an awfully long time. Incidentally, your first sentence above describes exactly the difference I experienced when changing from Na 552 to EAR 912 (same 509 mono's but synergy only goes so far.....). This effect has been covered in (an) American review(s) of the 912 way back when.
 
Mike Reed said:
Why would one want a mat, esp. for a t/t which was designed not to have one? I had a t/t with a mat once (LP12?) apart from the rubber Goldrings and Thorens decks and it was a p.i.t.a. Kept lifting with the record (static, probably). Given the choice of t/t designed for a mat and one without, it would be a no-brainer. Re. clamps, though, the one with my Orbe was not only essential but such a beautifully designed, simple and easy to use one. Not sure of the efficacy of a clamp on a t/t with doesn't need one though, as the Orbe one was my only experience as far as I remember.
Click to expand...

I won a Ringmat support system in the very late 90's or early noughties, I preferred it too the felt or rubber mats provided with the STD 305m and the Thorens TD160B mk2, I don't remember trying it on the Gyrodec or the Voyd but started to use it with the Hyperspace, it made records easier to flip without stopping the platter and the difference in SQ was marginal, perhaps as GT says a little less dynamic but perhaps a little more natural sounding, I do have a couple of Ringmats (bought recently) but as yet I haven't been bothered to try them on the Dais, having less listening time nowadays I prefer to just listen to music rather than mess around with 'adjustments', I've never tried a clamp or weight since I owned the Gyro (20+ years ago)
 
hifi_dave said:
Remove the foam mat and adjust the arm height to suit. It will sound a lot livelier and is the way it is meant to be used, the foam only used for bright systems.
Click to expand...

I never know that.
I presumed the fact that my Ace Spacedeck came with a mat the turntable was designed to be used with it.

I now have the Dais which I use without a mat, as designed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top