just thougt id best mention that heavyweight 7" singles and the beogram 9500 hold no favour for each other.

 the beogram 9500 has trouble with automatically detecting the weight of this type of vinyl. the beogram thinks its 12" or an album and decides to set itself on the edge of the platter, needless to say i was in all of a panic seeing as its an original cartridge.

im going on the assumption that the beogram 9500 goes by weight in order to detect the relevant vinyl size. my other 7" singles have no problem except my two box sets of morrissey's singles. my original versions work perfectly. the newest re-releases are pressed heavy weight versions.

hope this makes sense.

jahur:

im going on the assumption that the beogram 9500 goes by weight in order to detect the relevant vinyl size.

Not quite.  An LP will depress the center disk on the platter; a 45 won't.  That's how it determines size.

how strange.....the my other lighter older 45's work perfectly, its this new batch of 7" 45's wont trigger the feature. the 7" lifts up slightly then resets down for the vinyl. but doesnt lift the new batch of 7" heavyweight vinyls. does this make more sense?

mediabobny:

Not quite.  An LP will depress the center disk on the platter; a 45 won't.  That's how it determines size.

Not quite

A large-hole single will depress the center hub, but not all the way. This is the LP/45 difference, as you say. Put a regular single on it and press start - notice the record will lift a bit and come back down before the arm reaches it... and this is how the deck decides between the different 45 sizes, the bigger ones won't rise. It may well be confused with a heavy, small size record.

aha, so i wasnt far off.... just got a fright when i heard a grating sound.....

The Beogram of this type is solely sensing sizes by weight depressing the center hub. Heavyweight 7" singles can be over the loading "limit" for LP's which can be as light as under 90 grams 

so i was right, it does sense it by weight! i thought it did, how else would it know the difference??? weight sensing would be more cost effective and less of a headache to shoehorn into such a small area, i guess

anyhow those who have the beogram9500 or the like beware of heavyweight seven inch 45's! you may end up losing the tip of your needle!

Yes you will need to treat these like you would 10" records, i.e. cue manually! It was a huge letdown for B&O to omit the optical sensor in these decks especially considering the fact the deck was desgned to be operated from anywhere within the linksystem!

Just imagine you had played an album the previous night, then another family member wacked a new 10" single on the deck without you knowing. You later continue playing your album from your study only to be greeted by a scraping noise as your mmc1 carves new tracks into the platter

omg! im not alone then! very good point you made there with regards to the sensor and link system.

thought i was going mad...

Even more frightening is when the detector system for a 4000 does not work! However B&O had thought of this and the cantilever wrecking ribs have a cut out at the correct place. the arm drops but the tip of the stylus is a tiny bit higher than the dip in the rib! Still slightly unnerving though!

god yes, each revolution of the platter with the needle grating is one step closer to soundsmiths with a wad of money! not the stuff dreams are made of!!!!

are the needles (original mmc/etc) very hardy or very susceptible to damage?

They are pretty hardy, partly because they track at a very low weight. Using them to play metal platters is, however, not recommended!

ha ha ha spot on!