You can use shims. My arm is 2mm higher because of my fat dynavector cart.I just can't abide a TT that costs what the Planar 10 costs and doesn't allow for cartridge azimuth adjustment.
You can use shims. My arm is 2mm higher because of my fat dynavector cart.I just can't abide a TT that costs what the Planar 10 costs and doesn't allow for cartridge azimuth adjustment.
In case anyone doesn't know about this TT, gawp at this <https://www.michell-engineering.co.uk/michell-gyro-se-turntable>! Like the LP12, it's still being developed.I bought a vintage Michell Gyro SE for about $900 (it's made of metal!), then spent more updating it to current specs and adding an SME M2-9R.
As you said, the Michell looks great.
And despite the fiddling of getting the suspension bounce right, it's pretty solidly built with cast metal parts.
Interesting. I've never heard an SME TT. What was the problem?Mine looks like a very simple device, and it is, and I could have bought a second hand SME deck from a friend at the time for basically the same money, a deck I'd listened to a lot, the only thing I had to consider was how to say no politely.
Are we talking azimuth or VTA?You can use shims. My arm is 2mm higher because of my fat dynavector cart.
IMO they could double their prices and they wouldn't look out of line with the market.Mitchell look like one of the few companies that have not been jacking the price up over the years.
It sounded flat and boring, but not in a good way, the CD player had a lot more life. You do get a lot of metal and engineering for the money though.Interesting. I've never heard an SME TT. What was the problem?
VTA.Are we talking azimuth or VTA?
It looked like this his deck.It sounded flat and boring, but not in a good way, the CD player had a lot more life. You do get a lot of metal and engineering for the money though.
Isn't there something wrong with a device costing that sort of money that needs such adjustment? ;-)
You can use shims. My arm is 2mm higher because of my fat dynavector cart.
Like the LP12 it needed it .In case anyone doesn't know about this TT, gawp at this <https://www.michell-engineering.co.uk/michell-gyro-se-turntable>! Like the LP12, it's still being developed.
In case anyone doesn't know about this TT, gawp at this <https://www.michell-engineering.co.uk/michell-gyro-se-turntable>! Like the LP12, it's still being developed.
Sorry didn't read that correctly. Do any fixed headshell decks allow this.Shims don't fix azimuth.
Sorry didn't read that correctly. Do any fixed headshell decks allow this.
Detachable shell tonearms have a major weakness at the headshell joint. I suspect though, that careful headshell choice and a solid MC cartridge (which seem less inclined to transmit vibrations into the arm) may mitigate the real issue there.
Way off topic, but the Gyro SE doesn't sound as stable as the *current* LP12 let alone other 'oil rig' types out there.
That's what some reviewers said when the first one came out. I particularly remember Martin Colloms saying something like that, but he was one of the many who used an LP12 as their long term reference so it wasn't clear whether it was just a preference for the "tuneful" Linn. FWIW some said the same about the SME V vs other "super" arms, i.e. the SME sounded flat and boring.It sounded flat and boring, but not in a good way, the CD player had a lot more life. You do get a lot of metal and engineering for the money though.
Should that be acceptable for a "precision" device costing into the thousands of €/£/$? I mean, aren't they supposed to be resolving movements of the order of wavelengths of light (I leave aside the absurdity of lack of geometric standards).If cartridges were perfect devices with no variances in how the stylus and motor are lined up, nobody would need such a thing.
But they're not, so there you are.
They can, if you use use small ones (washers or spacers) between cartridge and headshell on one side.Shims don't fix azimuth.