When is an Ariston a Linn Sondek LP 12?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing is, a bit of one record player for ivor. Then numerous record players for Hamish. Seems to be in Hamish's blood. There was no quibble for every thing under the Aristons plinth except the bearing, all exactly the same, ie suspension - coffin - motor etc. If ivor was the TT designer why did he stop at the lp12, if he lived record players in his mind why stop at a half a prototype. It does not add up to me.
So Hamish UTD 5 - linn Wanderers 1 (own goal from hamish).
 
Last edited:
What does not add up though is since the first RD11 and first LP12 *is* without question, the same machine, why do we never hear Ivor saying “Yes, I designed the RD11. It was my idea”.

If he has ever said that, I’ve not seen it. It would add a lot of credence to his story. Instead, he almost denies its existence.
 
https://hifi-unlimited.blogspot.com/2011/12/10-qs-for-ivor-tiefenbrun-of-linn.html

"IT: Now we're getting in to controversial territory here. I was trying to make a turntable based around a bearing that my father designed for some of his projects, and by the eleventh revision, I was fairly satisfied with the results, and thus the Ariston RD11 turn table was born. It was initially marketed by Hamish Robertson who later registered the Ariston company, without my knowledge at the time. Sad to say that in a series of events, it all erupted in to by then a highly controversial court case, which ruled the origin of design in Linn's favour. The LP12 is in fact a revision, based on the Ariston RD11 design".

I am not comfortable with this version because the timeline does not fit well with the "by the eleventh revision". According to the hearing officer the bearing was introduced after Ivor left for Israel. Ivor may not have even heard the turntable with the bearing until he got back from Israel at the end of 72.
 
https://hifi-unlimited.blogspot.com/2011/12/10-qs-for-ivor-tiefenbrun-of-linn.html

"IT: Now we're getting in to controversial territory here. I was trying to make a turntable based around a bearing that my father designed for some of his projects, and by the eleventh revision, I was fairly satisfied with the results, and thus the Ariston RD11 turn table was born. It was initially marketed by Hamish Robertson who later registered the Ariston company, without my knowledge at the time. Sad to say that in a series of events, it all erupted in to by then a highly controversial court case, which ruled the origin of design in Linn's favour. The LP12 is in fact a revision, based on the Ariston RD11 design".

I am not comfortable with this version because the timeline does not fit well with the "by the eleventh revision". According to the hearing officer the bearing was introduced after Ivor left for Israel. Ivor may not have even heard the turntable with the bearing until he got back from Israel at the end of 72.

It also implies that the ‘eleventh’ revision wasn’t as good as the twelfth. Which is incorrect. The RD11 had actually been marketed by C & J Walker and sold before the LP12.
 
I had been assuming that RD11 meant Record Deck version 2. Did not really consider it could be version 11. Don't know if it will be possible to verify either possibility.
 
Fairly serious contradiction here !!
Agreed - one of the things I specifically look for are issues from either viewpoint. There are other contradictions out there and that definitely includes details apparently taken from conversations with Hamish.

Anything that does not fit with the Patent Officer summary is a concern for me. The Patent Officer summary would probably have been based on uncontested material from both sides submissions so I still regard that as the reliable starting point. The Patent Officer summary is corroborated by other stuff that came from sources independent of Hamish or the Tiefenbrun's.

With regard to what I quoted from Ivor above I would really need to see what Jack and Ivor submitted to the hearing to compare but the "while Ivor was away" is definitely a concern.
 
Or the other account from Ivor that Jim Kerr of Kerr McCosh came up with the idea.

Now we have 3


1 Jim told me that the bearing system I was using wasn't good enough. He suggested the [single-point] bearing design that we still use in the LP12.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/interviews/457/index.html#5XvZWhdZYHtPTHkZ.99

2 "IT: Now we're getting in to controversial territory here. I was trying to make a turntable based around a bearing that my father designed for some of his projects, and by the eleventh revision, I was fairly satisfied with the results, and thus the Ariston RD11 turn table was born
https://hifi-unlimited.blogspot.com/2011/12/10-qs-for-ivor-tiefenbrun-of-linn.html

3 From the patent summary
Ivor Tiefenbrun made a prototype turntable with a ball bearing and then went off to Israel in 1971. While Ivor was away, Jack Tiefenbrun and Hamish Robertson changed the ball bearing to a point bearing.

It just gets worse and worse.. I'll betcha there's an interview out there somewhere where IT claims it was him.
 
Last edited:
Now we have 3


1 Jim told me that the bearing system I was using wasn't good enough. He suggested the [single-point] bearing design that we still use in the LP12.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/interviews/457/index.html#5XvZWhdZYHtPTHkZ.99

2 "IT: Now we're getting in to controversial territory here. I was trying to make a turntable based around a bearing that my father designed for some of his projects, and by the eleventh revision, I was fairly satisfied with the results, and thus the Ariston RD11 turn table was born
https://hifi-unlimited.blogspot.com/2011/12/10-qs-for-ivor-tiefenbrun-of-linn.html

3 From the patent summary
Ivor Tiefenbrun made a prototype turntable with a ball bearing and then went off to Israel in 1971. While Ivor was away, Jack Tiefenbrun and Hamish Robertson changed the ball bearing to a point bearing.

It just gets worse and worse.. I'll betcha there's an interview out there somewhere where IT claims it was him.

Yes - I raised number 1 as well.

On the other hand we have Hamish apparently telling Richard Dunn (don't know if I am allowed to link from here)

"Corrections. Hamish's original bearing was a ball bearing. Castle designed the hardened point and thrust plate bearing "for him" to an order. Castle then decided to apply for a patent on the bearing cutting Hamish out".
 
Yes - I raised number 1 as well.

On the other hand we have Hamish apparently telling Richard Dunn (don't know if I am allowed to link from here)

"Corrections. Hamish's original bearing was a ball bearing. Castle designed the hardened point and thrust plate bearing "for him" to an order. Castle then decided to apply for a patent on the bearing cutting Hamish out".

Who is Richard Dunn ? And also Who is Ray Collins ?:
 
Yes - I raised number 1 as well.

On the other hand we have Hamish apparently telling Richard Dunn (don't know if I am allowed to link from here)

"Corrections. Hamish's original bearing was a ball bearing. Castle designed the hardened point and thrust plate bearing "for him" to an order. Castle then decided to apply for a patent on the bearing cutting Hamish out".

I thought IT 'designed' the otiginal RD11 with a captive or floating ball bearing ?? At least thats what their testimony to the patent hearing says.


Ivor Tiefenbrun made a prototype turntable with a BALL BEARING
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Who is Richard Dunn ? And also Who is Ray Collins ?:
Richard Dunn is a Hamish supporter who has been describing a version of events he got directly from conversations with Hamish. His version does not align with the output from the hearing which has the prototype with bearing done by Ivor. Hamish claiming the bearing as his design and the patent threat being used to try to get manufacture back to Castle.

Ray Collins is a former Castle employee who told Nigel Pearson that he helped Ivor with testing the turntable.

One question for you. What is your understanding of the events and what are you basing that understanding on? I can see you want to bash Ivor at every opportunity but there is not a coherent story from Hamish's perspective that fits well with what we know and each version has concerns.

I have already stated I am not comfortable with Ivor's version at Hifi-unlimited. Maybe he is trying to white wash that Hamish had a role in the latter stage of the development but I don't know.
 
Not sure about ‘wanting to bash Ivor’ per se, but his accounts of the genesis of the LP12 are various, varied and inconsistent.

What do you think is the definitive story cre009?
 
Not sure about ‘wanting to bash Ivor’ per se, but his accounts of the genesis of the LP12 are various, varied and inconsistent.

What do you think is the definitive story cre009?
Whatever was submitted for the patent hearing! I don't have it.
 
Ray Collins must have jumped ivors ship as he was head of sales @ Ariston during the RD80 era. I think he liked a drinky poos like all of them.
Does any one reckon WJR got the Hamish moniker after the well known whiskey blenders? (Sorry off topic I know, but a slightly interesting side issue)
 
Ray Collins must have jumped ivors ship as he was head of sales @ Ariston during the RD80 era. I think he liked a drinky poos like all of them.
Does any one reckon WJR got the Hamish moniker after the well known whiskey blenders? (Sorry off topic I know, but a slightly interesting side issue)
“Hamish” is simply the Scottish version of “James”.
 
Whatever was submitted for the patent hearing! I don't have it.
My longer reply to Hamstall has disappeared due the recent forum corruption.

In summary Ivor only does short sound bites with flowering and usually avoids mentioning Hamish by name or the RD11 as a product. Trying to compile a version from the brief comments in interviews is unlikely to recreate what he submitted to the hearing which should be the accurate version from Ivor's perspective.

In the following interview there is similar distortion where he raises the issue of non payment probably for the tables we have been discussing in this thread but Ivor was out of the country so it was Castle (Jack) who had the non payment issue.

https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/sound-innovation-sound-business/

The attached scan is the first page of a 5 page article in Hi-Fi Review where he provides in a couple of sentences a timeline for when he did the prototype.
 

Attachments

  • Image2.jpg
    Image2.jpg
    83.3 KB · Views: 13
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom