ray

I'm interested in your assessment Richard. I think my Gorbe has improved with an OL belt. I was surprised how slack it could be and sound good with low wow and flutter.

The Roksan belt seems ‘slack’ to me i.e. under minimal tension 560mm whereas my brother tells me his ‘pings’ on to the sub-platter they can’t all be right!

Does anyone have any opinions on ‘how slack/tight’ you would expect the belts to be?

I'm unsure that taking general advice on this is the best way forward. 

Hard to put on paper without knowing the specifics of the deck and original belt.

Too loose= poor speed and timing. 

Too tight= noise and bearing wear. 

I would telephone and ask Mark at OL first, he's probably got a pattern or specs. for the specific belt. Alternatively I'm sure he would talk you through the best measuring procedure if you don't feel too confident to get it right. I'm sure he deals with plenty of similar enquiries without any problems. 

HTH 

J.

The dilemma other than observational was that my brothers OE on the same deck was significantly shorter and tighter as was his many moons ago on his TD 125 from the 70s.

Will see what it sounds like when it arrives.

If it helps you I used a thin electronics wire to measure the same path the belt follows and gave this distance to OL. Most string stretches so picture hanging wire may be a good alternative to what I used. My Michell deck has a moveable motor pod so I was able to experiment afterwards with the motor to bearing distance and therefore the belt tension. I used a newish Android app I got off VE which helped me to balance what sounded good to me with low wow and flutter.

I agree with John's characterisation of the extremes of belt tension.

I started listening seriously with my current Roksan belt on my MRM Source TT I am unsure quite how old it is a few years I guess.

Straight to conclusions yes it is superior, big difference no but significant all the same.

Biggest improvement was vocals, greater clarity, fine detail and openness.  Better and more focused soundstage and ‘live’ sounding with more energy in a good way with greater dynamics.

Low frequencies were more difficult to conclude on.  The overall balance was lighter and possibly more focused but in terms of definition no obvious differences, rhythmically certainly no worse possibly better.

There did appear some house similarities with the OL platter mat albeit without the flaws/colouration.

Since my loan spell with the Accession MC I have certainly enjoyed my vinyl but am aware I have missed some aspects at HF (always a danger in trying something better!).  Some of the improvements with the OL belt did remind me of the Accession MC with the improved clarity and ability to sound less loud and sweeter/cleaner in the vocal ranges and above with improved separation.  Whilst not suggesting the magnitude is as big as the AMC just being descriptive.

Attempting to follow OL advice on allowing further bedding in time after switching over, direct comparisons are more difficult to do justice to both and require a longer listening session which have eluded me until now.

At around £33 it isn’t a huge outlay and worth a punt you have 30 days to try and return.

One final observation mechanically the belt is noisier when starting up maybe as textured but not once up to speed.

I am sure decks will vary by application and belt but happy on mine.  Whilst not wholly concluded I suspect the noise floor was lower also hence the greater fine and low level detail will see...