Yes - in-wall routing. The other option is having the wall shelf just above the top of any racks/furniture underneath it.
Well there’s always the Bluetooth record player option 
Given that so many wall-shelf users add isolation platforms or thick wood layers or cups-&-balls, experiment looked sensible. Like other people, that meant tweaking what I have - I wasn’t about to put several broadly similar shelves on the wall to compare. Listening to the results has taken days, and I brought in 2 musicians (not hifi nerds like me) to get different views, and to deal with the ‘Am I imagining that?’ second-guessing.
I have written at length (sorry about that) about the result on the isolation platform thread, but the summary from these 3 listeners in my living room was absolutely consistent over many hours: it works, dammit!
Having started all this because of the LP12, I should explain here what we found on tweaking turntable supports.
-
Swapping laminated glass in to replace the standard MDF board gave an impression of detail but was harsh and unmusical.
-
Using a granite slab in place of MDF was expected to be awful, but clearly worked best of all materials tried - as long as you adjust spikes really carefully to get perfect contact.
-
Adding cups and balls on top of granite, and then glass and then LP12, was genuinely better for detail - but also a bit bright and, well, glassy.
-
Replacing the cups and balls with HRS Nimbus feet (clever plastic and aluminium sandwiches) gave the best detail and the best balance. It had no disadvantages versus any of the options tried, which included various different orderings of the above.
-
The glass used was not ideal. The final result will probably use 10mm laminated glass, or even Acoustic Laminated Glass if that turns out to be better, though we couldn’t get even this glass sheet to misbehave as long as we used the HRS feet.
-
Adding granite to a ‘light and rigid’ shelf looks like Linn heresy, but worse was to follow. HRS also offers a rubbery record ‘clamp’, which aims at vibration rather than clamping or weighing down the record.
I have heard LP12s with clamps and the results were always awful, but not this time. Everything that we like in a modern-spec. LP12 was present. To varying degrees, we also had more space, better-controlled bass, more air and less sibilance on female vocals, clearer and more consistent stereo image, cleaner starting and stopping of notes, quieter background, no looseness at high volume and better tonal neutrality.
None of classed it as a bigger improvement than (say) adding Lingo 4 (from Lingo 1) and Karousel to the LP12, and the effect was much more noticeable at high volume. However, it was still an acoustically obvious improvement to all 3 listeners. Having been rude about clamps on suspended decks in general and LP12s in particular, I am having to eat my words.
I will keep listening for a few days, but am pretty confident that I will end up with HRS feet and clamp, and glass and granite for my LP12 - and no change to the cheap Targett metalwork itself. It’s an inelegant solution visually, and when turning over a record, and will doubtless seem ridiculous or heretical to most LP12 owners. However, we decide with our ears (and wallets), not our eyes, don’t we?
At high-ish volume, my LP12 with this the above changes sounded more enjoyable than higher spec LP12s (directly on Fraim or Quadraspire) heard at dealers. That’s not easy thing to be precise and sure about, but the broad improvements versus my existing (perfectly satisfactory) shelf were easy to spot, and sometimes hard to ignore.
In your rooms and your systems, at your preferred volume and using your ears, some people trying this will doubtless get different answers. In particular, our results might easily not apply to (say) a Rega 10 on its dedicated shelf. However, from what we heard (not guessed or were told or theorised) in this case, I’d try some experimentation even on an unsuspended deck, almost irrespective of what supports it now. And dealers will send a trial pack of HRS kit for your system, with no obligation (except that you send it back later), and glass and granite are cheap, so what have you got to lose?
Finally, if anyone does try this sort of things but uses different products (Isolation platforms, wood blocks, support-feet from firms other than HRS, Vertere’s own Isopaws on their decks etc.), can you let me know what your results are?
3 Likes
This is a very bad idea: Adding additional 14kg with a Pro-Ject Ground-it Deluxe platform. The soundstage shrinks, dynamics are gone, fine information is lost. In real life this platform does a very good job under my tubeamp.
Thanks @Veltliner
That’s probably what we’d expect, but it is good to have it confirmed with ears and not a physics text book only.
There seems to be a consensus beginning to appear that good isolation for an un-suspended turntable is good isolation for electronics, but suspended decks often do better with something different or additional.
In addition, having two bits of isolation in TT suspension and platform (or feet) aiming to protect against the same sort of vibrations and linked together may well introduce additional complications.
Finally, we don’t need to ignore Linn’s guidance. We got our best test results by having something ‘light and rigid’ directly under the LP12’s feet ( in our case laminated glass, but we will be trying acoustic laminated glass too ). What goes under the ‘light and rigid’ thing can be just a stone floor, but for those of us who happen not to have one of those, some other options work well.
Whatever is picked, it seems important to avoid having two bits of what is effectively a combined suspension having similar resonant frequencies ( or probably similar modes of resonance if my ageing memory of theory still works) or trying to do the same job.
That sort of thinking suggests that the otherwise excellent platforms from Pro-jekt are not designed for an LP12 or Thorens or SME or Michell and will probably struggle. Perhaps we should try platforms designed for the job from Michell or Thorens or Stack.
3 Likes
Also, for those who don’t want lots of faff and do want a walk shelf, the number of people who have tried other options and now have Solidsteel under an LP 12 is pretty noticeable.
4 Likes
Worth pointing out that the HRS record damper isn’t compatible with an Aro, they collide at the end of the side. Fortunately my 17D3 wasn’t damaged in the encounter.
Thanks @Yeti
I use an Ekos and hadn’t considered non-Linn arms and the issues involved, but I see the problem. Aros may not be the only atm affected in this way.
I stand by the view that this thing makes my LP12 sound better and not worse, contrary to expectations. However, I am also sure that Naim or Linn badges products, designed to work with Aro/ Aro2 as well as Linn arms and with big cartridges, would sell a lot more than any of the niche manufacturers can hope to sell, even if their products are compatible with every arm used on an LP12
1 Like
I’ve tried the HRS damper on my Artemis/Schröder too but it rather over damps on that, it will be rather dependant on the platter and mat whether it’s of benefit. I have some records of piano music where that’s not a bad thing but generally it stays in its box unless I’m setting TT speed with the RPM app when it makes a very good platform for an iphone.
That’s where I used the Aro, mostly without the trough. The Decca though was on its best behaviour when the trough and outrigger were in use, maybe a bit too well behaved so I tried an extra 8g at the headshell instead but there was still the odd mistrack just using mass to tame it. The Decca doesn’t quite line up between the paddle and pivot with my existing arm board.
I haven’t set the Rock up since moving but it remains in reserve.
I thought it was interesting as an engineering exercise, and Max T himself seems to have been something of a character.
The over-damped thing is interesting too, because the HRS device is probably the first that to me doesn’t make an LP12 sound ‘sat on’, but of course it’s a rather different table.
2 Likes
May have seen from my post over in system pics, but a matching wall shelf turned up today from Custom Design.
They certainly bear a resemblance to some of the others mentioned here and they’re very nicely made too…best bit is they’re still available, unlike those that it resembles. Sensible money too @£250.
3 Likes
Should just mention that they come with a glass shelf, but I’m not using that (aesthetic reasons only).
I have an unused “Audiotech” wall shelf up in the loft.
I have been tempted to utilise it so I can gain a shelf to get my NAT05 back in the system after it made way for the SCDR I put on the Superline.
I recall it had some “special” fixings that decoupled it from the wall (Fischer I think). Anyone know what they’re called by any chance? @Cymbiosis maybe?
Regards,
SteveO.
1 Like
That’s right. I think it’s mentioned up-thread.
They were Fischer, but that is just the brand name. I don’t know the specifications of the actual bolts. I recall mine were quite thin, they didn’t work too well with my slightly crumbly solid wall. I have replaced them with an alternative (anchor bolt and rawl plug). It works for me.
The 4 wall bolt plugs supplied with the TP shelf are made by Fischer:
(The masonry drill bit size needed is 12mm)
Expansion plug with double screw SB 12/5
Fixing length 45mm
Hole 12mm
Maximum fixable thickness / maximum nut position 30mm
Minimum hole depth 55mm
Projection bar 40mm
thread M 5
Washer diameter 26mm
<<>>
4 Likes
That looks very similar to my original fixings apart from the plastic plug. Originally mine had a metal sleeve which didn’t work well for me.
I might seek these out when I redecorate the room later this year.
Brilliant, thanks Debs.
1 Like