Sonically? I have no idea. I was a bit concerned by the fact that Solidair uses string in their suspension. What kind of strain is placed on the string suspension when using the standard Gyro record clamp? I don't know. What happens if you break one of the strings? The O-ring suspension on the Pete's Pylons have a little give, and stretches slightly when putting the clamp on. If I should break an O-ring on Pete's Pylons, I can easily replace that myself. Pete is using the same type of suspension as the SME tables on a smaller scale.
Just reading up on the fitting issues with the Pete's pylons. Assuming the hole variations refer to the cast subchassis I can't believe the variations quoted. Simply because the Michell spring parts would not fit every TT. Now if we are talking TTs from different time periods of production that is a different matter. I would expect recent to current models to be within a mm or two. Maybe @gwernaffield could enlighten me on this one. Also from experience the ball bearings get welded into the posts with grease and are darn near impossible to remove.
Ugh,,,Im surprised that you use that mat on your Gyro...it really isn’t necessary. Do you think it has any benefits?
Oh no, of course it is not necessary but it really does have benefits. That is the original Ringmat and it has benefits in all departments, you really should try one some time. You do, obviously, have to be a little careful not to overtighten the screw down Orbe clamp.
Yes, it all seems a bit wierd. But what you describe in terms of the timeline is much the same as @gwernaffield does, it just does not make sense that it does not affect the Solidair system or Michell's own upgrades but it does for Pete's Pylons. And nor could I believe the variations quoted!
I certainly had no problems removing the steel balls from the upper posts on my Gyrodec; if you can't remove them I would expect that the damping material which you apply to the upper portion of the bottom post has more of an effect on sound than the actual material of the ball (I experimented with a few different materials, mainly stuff from Herbie's Audiolab.) That is certainly not the case with the steel ball in the main bearing of the table, though, but that is another story. The "fitting issues" with Pete's suspension are exaggerated for a couple of reasons 1) the fact that Pete is pretty much a perfectionist and wants his design to work exactly as intended and 2) the general anal retentiveness of large portions of the audiophile community . Fitting problems come down to two issues: 1) the size of the lower support portion of the pylon vs. the recess holes in the chassis which they fit into and 2) the fact that many Gyros and Orbes are drilled slightly off center in terms of the spacing between the 3 support posts. Pete has always gone for a perfect fit of the pylons into the hole recesses of the Michell chassis; as the hole sizes can be different it's resulted in him taking back and re-doing the lower portion of the pylon for some customers when they could simply take a piece of sandpaper or file to the lower supporters and have them fitting reasonably in a few minutes. Mine were originally a very tight fit, and I didn't have to sand, but I never would have thought of sending them back. The second issue is a bit more complex and, once again, Pete has gone to great lengths with a number of customers to correct the problem, which arises when the spacing of the supports is off slightly. The design of the support pylons features a central bushing or sleeve, which slides over and surrounds the Michell support posts (which can also vary slightly in thickness depending on how heavily-or not-they have been plated. If the spacing is off, because of the precision Pete's design, it can cause one or two of the pylons to catch or bind on the main support posts, which is problematic. There are two solutions to this, one very complicated, and one which is very simple, and I believe Pete should have encouraged from the start but did not, mainly in his effort to deliver the "perfect product". The very complicated solution involves measuring and re-measuring, and redoing the pylons, possibly a number of times, which I know that Pete actually has done for a few customers. The simple, common sense solution to this problem (and one that I implemented as the spacing is a bit off on my table-Pete did actually suggest this) is simply to remove one of the sleeves/bushings in one of the pylons. Those sleeves/bushings are a couple of mm in diameter: by removing one it eliminates all binding/catching and allows that one pylon enough room to hang and essentially "self center". I think that Pete has tried to avoid doing this to have the product perform fully as designed; in reality his suspension is quite a bit stiffer in both the vertical and horizontal plane than the Michell springs and I seriously doubt that anyone could hear the difference between a set of his Pylons which had been modified and customized extensively to perfectly fit a slightly off center drill on a Gyro/Orbe vs. the very simple and elegant solution of simply removing one of the bushings to let that Pylon hang vertically in a position that will not result in binding. Anyone with a piece of sandpaper or file and the ability to slide out/remove one of the bushings (took me about 20 seconds) from one of the pylons will have absolutely zero "fitting issues" as I see it. The only exception to that rule would be a table that was drilled grossly out of spec for the support posts (ie. probably more than 2-3 mm out).
Unfortunately it overrides the design parameters of the deck. Close coupling to a platter of vinyl like material for which I regard clamping essential. Of course it may give a different flavour that you like better. Try going back after a while and see if there is a perceived further 'improvement'. When I first saw the ringmat used many years ago it was at vintage and valve shows (Chesterfield) were I assumed it was aimed at the likes of Goldring or Garrard classic TTs.
The Ringmat was aimed originally at the entire turntable market. I originally had the Ringmat on my Rega Planar 3 that pre-dated the Gyro Dec. It was certainly not aimed solely at the vintage market and that arena was not the only one in which it was successful. Indeed I had forgotten this from the Ringmat website "... the [original] Ringmat was designed for the acrylic platter of the DNM ROTA turntable, initially using a Linn LP12." I have gone back and forth with and without the Ringmat on the Gyro Dec over the years and always go back to it - the whole sound is just that bit more musical. I even tried removing it after I fitted the Orbe clamp upgrade and still went back to it, despite the pain of having to adjust the arm height every time.
All of which simply supports my own conclusions; the design and execution of Pete's Pylons is very poor. Good design is simple and works first time for 99.99%-plus of cases, as do the Solidair (apparently) and Michell (definitely) options. It seems to me that Pete's Pylons are missing the all-important production design stage that irons out wrinkles like these and produces a product that works simply and first time rather than requiring iterative fitting, which not everybody will be comfortable with. I appreciate that you are comfortable with this approach, and as a Chartered Engineer (equivalent to PE and PEng in USA and Canada, respectively) I could do it too but really cannot be bothered.
Further ... I will do my usual when the new DC motor/housing, SME armboard isolation and HR PSU are up and running and start without the Ringmat. Evaluate, fit the Ringmat and adjust the arm height and re-evaluate. I will then go back to no Ringmat and make a decision on what I have heard and feel, regardless of the platter design philosophy. I will, of course, report back in due course (I do not as yet have a date for the fitting of the new bits).
I have the full Ringmat system with base, ringmat with gold point, spacers, antistat mats and top mat. Ringmat recommend to use the top mat (kind of inverse mini ringmat) and no record clamp. I bought the system for my Thorens TD 321, which has a metal platter. The Thorens was very sensitive to VTA variation caused by different record thicknesses. Sensitivity was as high as 0.15 mm! So, I have many records measured and noted their thickness in order to put on the right spacer. This worked very well! Some records transformed from mediocre to very good. All records benefitted. However, it is a bit cumbersome. Then, I changed to the Gyro with Orbe clamp. The VTA sensitivity was gone, which surprised me as I thought that it was linked to the stylus shape. No more spacers required! Then, I tried many times with and without ringmat, but could not really hear any worthwhile to note difference. Interesting that in your set up the ringmat seems to do slightly better. A further benefit of the Orbe clamp is for me that records that are slightly warped, 1 mm is enough to cause a vertical wobble, get completely flattened. And it this does make a difference, resulting in a more stable and relaxed sound. The third difference with the Thorens was that tics and pops are much more suppressed now to the extent that some records that I marked for more cleaning, I don’t bother anymore to wash them. And this without the antistat mats. Again adding an antistat mat did not make any difference. The Ringmat relies on the principle of dissipating stylus generated energy and static into the air below the ring-mat. With the Orbe clamp you get excellent contact with the special platter, which absorbs energy and dissipates through the brass columns below the platter. Both work, but flattening records is difficult with the ringmat. I sometimes use a cork-composite mix mat which has a large cut-out in the center. This allows to flatten the record. The mat does effect sound slightly, making the sound a bit less “hot” on some pop records (mainly early digital recordings). However, on the vast majority of records I do not use the mat.
I think there was a guy on YouTube who used it with a clear audio table and preferred it without the mat. Again, saying that he felt it defeated the object of the clearAudio design in coupling the record to a platter of the same type of properties.
As I recall you have the DC motor and HR PSU? We will see what the rRingmat does, or not, when my upgrades are complete. For now I use the Ringmat and the Orbe clamp very lightly tightened and that, on my system as it stands, is the best option for me.
Oh right, some bloke on YouTube didn't like it on a different turntable. I'll go take the Ringmat off immediately!
I too had to remove a bushing. Not a big job, but this makes it impossible for Michell to include pylons in the design! They cannot sell a product, where it is likely that you would have to do some fiddling after unpacking (due to large tolerances on the borehole positions). The springs are forgiving, as they easily bend a little, which is also their weakness, as the belt puts some force on them. This is actually the reason that Thorens has put a pre-tensioned wire on the sub-platter to cancel the belt tension in the opposite direction on their new TD 1601. Sounds great apparently, much better than the older models.
Exactly, I certainly don't see it as any flaw in the "design and execution" of Pete's product. As in most things in life, you work with the hand that is dealt to you.
I think the tolerance variations have been overstated. Pete could solve the problem another way by providing alternative smaller bushes that leave a little slack. The mounting discs for the suspension like Michell don't have to be the full diameter of the hole either. I've not encountered an obvious need to tilt springs to line up on the 2 Michell decks I have owned over last 25 years.
As opposed to some bloke on here that likes it? You’ve experienced what is known as the placebo effect...
