Interesting > The Gramovox vertical turntable

You would have to think that the LP would attract less dust in a vertical position.

I've seen this before....and I still have the same question....WHY??

MontanaWay wrote:I've seen this before....and I still have the same question....WHY??

Because for the target audience, image...appearance, looking cool...is all-important. It's COOL to play vinyl records now, and they value COOLNESS above all else. So not only do they have to play vinyl records (that's OK, I do, too), they have to LOOK COOL while they are doing it.

They'll probably not even be LISTENING all that intently. Just looking COOL. Sizzle, not steak.

The concept is sound, though. Dynamically balanced tonearm, first appeared in the late 1950s.

GP49 wrote:

MontanaWay wrote:I've seen this before....and I still have the same question....WHY??

Because for the target audience, image...appearance, looking cool...is all-important.  It's COOL to play vinyl records now, and they value COOLNESS above all else.  So not only do they have to play vinyl records (that's OK, I do, too), they have to LOOK COOL while they are doing it.

They'll probably not even be LISTENING all that intently.  Just looking COOL.  Sizzle, not steak.

The concept is sound, though.  Dynamically balanced tonearm, first appeared in the late 1950s.

meh!...just another gadget, no doubt though, it will probably sell well because its different.

One imagines that even the slightest warpage would wreak havoc. "Why bother?"

Same thing, only different.



The old Mitsu vertical tables did all the same tricks, albeit with more of a standard look ... for a linear tracker anyway. Most do develop issues with the arm, but can be restored with a bit of TLC and head scratching. Built like tanks otherwise.

PS ... a vertical table actually makes sense. Required tracking force is relatively low as the stylus isn't fighting gravity, and you end up with much faster response and more delicate nuances - IF you use a cartridge that won't get confused with the different dynamics involved.

I'll leave the pros and cons of a linear tracker out of it, as that's one of THOSE debates. In this case though, I'd think a true linear arm would be more logical.

I worked on a lot of those Mitsubishis (we were a Mitsu dealer). The belts would turn to goo and the tonearm servo and end-of-side sensor depended on grain-of-wheat light bulbs and optical sensors...of course the light bulbs would burn out. Pretty simple work, other than cleaning the goo, and I'd use a better belt and replace ALL THE LIGHT BULBS AT ONCE. They worked quite well.

Funny you should mention that ... the belts on my DP-EC10 turned to goo, and the lights burned out on the sensor mechanism ...

Also had a fun time getting everything to time out properly with the new bulbs. Different color temp and apparently threw the light sensors off. All's well that ends well though, right?



Couple other problems ... a mounting screw for the composite base cracked out - nothing a bit of PlastiFix couldn't cure. Also, the power switch built into the arm lock went south - couldn't find an exact replacement, so I added a switch to the side of the cabinet.



Other than that, excellent table and a strong performer. Bought it new back in 1980, and ready to go another 35 years now!

i wonder if they offer a right-handed model... I would likely ruin a record/cantilever or two trying to cue using my left hand! As I recall juke boxes have been playing 45RPM records vertically since forever. Remember that the ubiquitous Rega RB300 arm applies VTF via spring.

MontanaWay wrote:I've seen this before....and I still have the same question....WHY??

One reason I can think of is it might have a much smaller footprint if you've got a cramped stereo hutch.

Didn't Dual claim you could mount their turntable to the ceiling upside down and it would easily track and play LP's? I've never actually seen one like that but I seem to remember the salesman making those claims.

That was a common claim among major manufacturers in the day of high-quality record changers with dynamically-balanced arms...where tracking force was applied by a downward (in normal use) pulling spring, with the rest of the arm counterweight-balanced.  BSR, Garrard and Dual made the claim, and featured it in advertising and in movie filmstrips at hi-fi shows.  Strangely, I do not remember it in Miracord advertising, though I may have blinked.

Most single-play, manual tonearms could not do it, as they typically applied tracking weight by a gram or two of IMbalance.