Not really. but it would serve the job, I am thinking of putting the servo on a wooden board, then have it tied to the marble. The servo needs about 15kg of mass to stabilize !!
Something about the PUCK.
------
Hi,
http://www.audiostereo.pl/zalaczniki/1067737_1.jpgCD tracks are 1.6 micron apart, that's 625 tracks in each mm, CD transports use a lens with focussing comparable to a good microscope, both the focussing and tracking need to be extremely accurate (1 micron / 0.16 micron or better, a hair is about 100 micron, you'll get the point...)
If guess it's difficult for a magnetic puck not influence the tiny coils controlling the lens. (And even if the magnetic field was perfectly symmetric: the lens is constantly moving in that field because of servo corrections, CD eccentricity, I think that could still influence the coils.)
I almost don't dare to say this here: even a static field of a non-magnetic puck has an influence. If we demagnetize (remove static fields) screw-on type pucks, we can hear an improvement (can be heard easily in a very good system). Of course you won't hear a difference if your CD or other parts are static/magnetic too.
Observed differences are similar (higher resolution, more variety in timbres, more micro and macro dynamics, more quiet, silent background). It's time for some serious jitter measurements...
Btw. we distribute the Shigaraki transport in two versions with magnetic and screw type puck, screw type is always preferred in A/B comparisons. However some find the difference small and choose for the convenience of the magnetic puck (and lower price).
But there are more reasons why the non-magnetic puck sounds different. For our research (we're trying to make the best possible CD player
we've created and tested a large range of pucks and spindles (all screw-on type), and everything in the design seems to matter, not only weight, weight distribution and pressure, but also the contact points/surfaces with the CD, materials, etc. It all influences the vibrations (and so the jitter pattern and the sound).
On the other hand, I don't want to exaggerate the problem of a magnetic puck, there are good transports with magnetic pucks. Usually there are bigger problems in CD-transports (also the expensive ones). The puck is not the weakest link.
And all of this wouldn't be a problem if we could get rid of the jitter at the DAC, but I haven't heard that in practice yet. It would be very cool if we don't need ridiculously expensive transports anymore to get the best from CD.
source
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread....ht=#post1330555
Added on October 27, 2008, 7:39 amhere is what it says about CDPRO
--
Here are my experiences with the CD PRO (with a few other persons we evaluated different mechanisms for developing a transport):
The mechanism of de CD PRO is very good, altough not as perfect as the VRDS NEO, but you can't buy these for a sensible price (and the electronics of the VRDS probably limits it's capabilities).
The laser is ok, but unfortunately not balanced, which means that focus- and tracking corrections influence each other more than neccesary. The corrections introduce jitter that can't be removed. A cheap Sanyo laser does this better.
The weakest link is the circuit board, and I guess it's almost impossible to modify properly. The clock can be improved but there are far worse problems on this board: the 4-layer layout and it's components.
Btw: I notice many people focus on the clock, but usually there's more to gain elsewhere (solving hf problems, power supply, layout etc.). Besides that: most clocks we've evaluated introduced new hf-problems, new jitter in other parts of the spectrum. I think "Plug-and-play" clocks are a gamble, proper implementation is critical.
source
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread....832#post1173832
Oct 19 2008, 09:16 PM
Quote
0.0201sec
0.33
7 queries
GZIP Disabled