What about the noise of the Studer tape deck motor? I have 3 fully refurbished Pabst motors for my Studer A80 and none of them are dead silent.
The necessity for absolute tt speed control
- Thread starter spiritofmusic
- Start date
Not a problem for me, i sit about 6 m away from the motor and can not hear it. but it is definitely noisier than regular small motors. Savvas would not approve
Have you changed the Bellville thrust spacers, low friction washer and rotor securing clip ? Noise goes down with that, i also added a extra Bellvlle thrust spacer to the mix as it seems to make the motor more synchronous. I have not even made attempts to dampen or isolate it besides rubber strips and grommets on the bracket. But the sound is just amazing, improvements in every parameter of playback.
Last edited:
One of the motors was sent to Audio House and got fully overhauled. The two other ones got refurbished by my tech who is a Studer specialist. We selected the less noisy of the three for the tape deck. Though I am sitting 5 meters away from the deck, I am like Savvas.
Last edited:
I am not bothered by a little tube rush either, if it gets me closer to the music. I am not a classical lover, long passages of silence during playback is rare during my music sessions
My source equipment is somewhat shielded from listening position by a half wall too, this time of year the rush of water in the radiators is louder than the Studer motorTo be honest Brad, i am not a engineer and anything i say is speculation based on the experience i have made focusing on my own TT, maybe there is always some micro fluctuations going on when electrical power is converted to rotational force in a motor ? Maybe the flywheel smoothes this power transfer, maybe it is purely for torque enhancement on the Brinkmann ? It seems to be well engineered with just the right controller for just the right custom built motor, that includes a flywheel. The Voids, and later the early Audio Note ( they bought the rights) use 3 of the smaller Pabst synchronous AC motors that look a lot like the the large ones. When i was trying to locate the large Pabst i could not find any for sale and resorted to studying pictures of the internals of R2R recorders from the 60's and 70's. Tandberg, Grundig, Telefunken, Revox,Studer and weird and rare Eastern European, French and Belgian machines. Thousand of picture, inside a Danish Bang & Olufsen machine i found something that looked right
Interestingly, Brinkmann used the Papst capstan motors for their belt drive TTs for more than 2 decades!
brinkmann audio
brinkmann - fine audioproducts from Germany | feine audioprodukte aus deutschland
Interestingly, the rotor of the motor is also a flywheel as it has 500g mass. They claim that this plus the coreless design gives no cogging and silent rotation.
They obviously felt this bettered the old Papst motors that they knew well and used extensively in very successful designs. Not saying you should change but maybe it could better the Papst...worth a try perhaps?
Brinkmann chose a coreless, brushless, slotless motor not only to deal with cogging but also because this motor with flywheel is eliminating the torque ripple, the brush wear and the eventual brush-related rumble
I wonder if anyone has tried the approach used on a Neumann lathe...kind of a primitive direct drive with a grease coupler... The Lyrec motor on that one is so massive it's tough to move solo...
Interestingly, Brinkmann used the Papst capstan motors for their belt drive TTs for more than 2 decades!
brinkmann audio
brinkmann - fine audioproducts from Germany | feine audioprodukte aus deutschlandwww.brinkmann-audio.de
Interestingly, the rotor of the motor is also a flywheel as it has 500g mass. They claim that this plus the coreless design gives no cogging and silent rotation.
They obviously felt this bettered the old Papst motors that they knew well and used extensively in very successful designs. Not saying you should change but maybe it could better the Papst...worth a try perhaps?
Brinkmann make a lot of claims but do not substantiate them, why should someone change his designs and projects just based on marketing literature?
IMHO in this hobby we should consider parts in an whole system - in engineering we have global optimization and individual optimization - individual optimization does not assure better results per se. Also again, silent platter and silent motor are different entities.
BTW, the flywheel of the Forsell is a winner in many aspects - around 4 kg, 1000 rpm, air bearing and dynamically balanced.
LOL....the last time i measured the Forsell Reference of my friend the measured wow and flutter was 0.35%
I have the utmost respect for the Brinkmann TT and motor/ controller and i am absolutely certain it is much more quiet than what i use, it is probably designed specifically for the platter mass and setup of the Brinkmann, my platter weighs over twice as much. If the old capstan motors with improved controllers are good enough for David and TechDas, they are definitely good enough for my humble mongrel project.Interestingly, Brinkmann used the Papst capstan motors for their belt drive TTs for more than 2 decades!
brinkmann audio
brinkmann - fine audioproducts from Germany | feine audioprodukte aus deutschland
Interestingly, the rotor of the motor is also a flywheel as it has 500g mass. They claim that this plus the coreless design gives no cogging and silent rotation.
They obviously felt this bettered the old Papst motors that they knew well and used extensively in very successful designs. Not saying you should change but maybe it could better the Papst...worth a try perhaps?
I have never even heard a Balanced, so it is hard for me to quantify the sound differences , but people whose ears i trust, love it, i am sure it is excellentThe Forsell was one of the top TT's for many years, i am sure the measurements are severely hindered by a sub-par motor/ controller made when the technology we have today was not available. Do you like the sound of it Savvas ? I owned a Forsell arm many years, and always felt it's low flow high tolerance design was not the ultimate in bass reproduction, but it had a wonderful airiness and midrange though, but it went in the trash when i regretfully got rid of my Nakamichi turntable.
My friend was at my place to audition my Brinkmann. During listening he complained about his sound and referred specifically to the lack of the three dimensionality and bass he was experiencing with my system. I offered myself to have a look at his cartridge alignment thinking that this was the issue. I later saw that he had multiple issues generating from the turntable itself...he ordered a Balnce too.The Forsell was one of the top TT's for many years, i am sure the measurements are severely hindered by a sub-par motor/ controller made when the technology we have today was not available. Do you like the sound of it Savvas ? I owned a Forsell arm many years, and always felt it's low flow high tolerance design was not the ultimate in bass reproduction, but it had a wonderful airiness and midrange though, but it went in the trash when i regretfully got rid of my Nakamichi turntable.
Last edited:
Interestingly, Brinkmann used the Papst capstan motors for their belt drive TTs for more than 2 decades!
brinkmann audio
brinkmann - fine audioproducts from Germany | feine audioprodukte aus deutschland
Interestingly, the rotor of the motor is also a flywheel as it has 500g mass. They claim that this plus the coreless design gives no cogging and silent rotation.
They obviously felt this bettered the old Papst motors that they knew well and used extensively in very successful designs. Not saying you should change but maybe it could better the Papst...worth a try perhaps?
I have heard both Brinkmann motors though never compared. The one in my shootout in Italy on my blog had the older Papst.
I like the newer one too as a TT and is a final TT for me.
To be fair, we can't say which motor is better because Papst was anyway not available so brinkmann would have to come up with a new motor. Very few would have lived through both, and the Balance second coming is supposed to be quite better than the older one thus not keeping things equal.
A dealer who has been with brinkmann for 20 years did tell me he preferred the newer motor and knew both intimately.
If you talk to Helmut, he says the the Pabst was very good. Of course newer is better
I just said to give it a try. After all, if Brinkmann, who used the lauded (and rightly so) Papst for decades, found a better solution (in his opinion) why shouldn’t Papst users give it a try?? What would be considered substantiation of the claim in your view?
I find it absolutely impressive that they had the know how and tooling to actually build their own motors as the Pabst motors no longer where being producedIf you talk to Helmut, he says the the Pabst was very good. Of course newer is better
Sorry, but now you are not serious. The motor/controller technology in much older TTs than the Forsell was superior than what was in the Forsell by far. Brinkmann is just recreating motor tech that was developed in the 1970s (if not earlier)...my Yamaha GT-2000 from 1982 has the same basic 4 phase coreless motor design (and one of the best rumble figures ever at -85db) and exceptional stability thanks to a 6kg platter and bi-directional servo quartz PLL (This is an analog solution not PWM). Pioneer Exclusive TTs had an ever better linear induction motor. He might not have liked the sound of a higher tech solution but they most definitely existed at the time he designed his TTs.The Forsell was one of the top TT's for many years, i am sure the measurements are severely hindered by a sub-par motor/ controller made when the technology we have today was not available. Do you like the sound of it Savvas ? I owned a Forsell arm many years, and always felt it's low flow high tolerance design was not the ultimate in bass reproduction, but it had a wonderful airiness and midrange though, but it went in the trash when i regretfully got rid of my Nakamichi turntable.
3 phase controllers with capabilities and features unheard of in 1982 have come along, computing has come a long way since too. When you combine that with older well manufactured motors you can potentially make the old girls sing again. The Forsell controller/ motor combo with its notorious instability was what i was addressing, not your Yamaha turntable, i am sure it is excellent,regretfully not many TT producers have seen it feasible to improve on that DD technology. Forsell liked belt drive air-bearing TT's for their excellent sound, a 4 phase coreless DD motor with bi-directional servo was never inside his design parameters.
He was a dentist or surgeon originally, not a engineer, it is amazing how many well designed products he came up with.
Last edited:
Tell your friend he has a Forsell Reference with a faulty air bearing - unfortunately it is very common now a day, and it is hard to service.
BTW, I was only addressing the flywheel it self, not the motor or turntable.
Any objective data and details on its performance and way of drive. For example, I can't take seriously the use of tubes in a motor controller unless there is a technical explanation for it.
We know everything about the Papst controllers (theory and implementation) and just soundbytes about the Brinkmann. For me it makes the difference.
Similar threads
