Anyone replace the power cord on 1200G?

Yes with Shunyata venom I had laying around an older model with purplish jacket I think the 2. It is the only one I had that would fit. 

Sure sure did. The right cord can make a substantial improvement.

Yes, Shunyata Venom 14.

It seems with this table being direct drive that the power cable would be very important

"The right cord can make a substantial improvement."

So, can you describe the before and after change, please?  I have 1200G that will be pressed into service pretty soon, so I am all ears!  TIA

Why do this? Why would it be especially important for a DD turntable? TT's are most often guilty of putting noise back into the AC supply for the rest of the system, so it would be prudent to isolate the AC supply to the TT.  Likewise, shielding might be worthwhile, to prevent RFI from contaminating the supply to the TT.  So, I could imagine that a shielded AC cord would sound different from an unshielded one, in a high RFI location.

On my lenco with massive aluminium plinth a shielded AC cord was easily better.
Then putting the TT on the ground was another improvment. In the sixties the TT in Europ has just a two pins AC cord.

The Powercord is a huge.  I am using a 1 meter gutwire.  Immense difference.

Now just waiting for the Delos to run in.  Sounds amazing with only 10 hours on it

I may have to increase VTA slightly

I am using a pass Labs Xono loaded at 91 ohms

@tzh21y Technics' overhang tool was off from what? Technics use a proprietary Japanese pseudo Stevenson like alignment. The tool is not off. 

@tzh21y  Curious, why did you replace the Technics mat so soon? Are you hearing a difference with the Boston Mat?
   

tzh21y,

Glad to see you tweaking the Technics. Let us know about the improvements.

Its off, trust me about an 1/8th inch.  Maybe it was just me and I eyeballed it wrong but it did seem off quite a bit.  Just trying different mats.  The original rubber mat is actually not bad at all.  I also have a cork music hall mat and the funk firm achromat.  Waiting for the Delos to run in.  It only has little under ten hours on it.  The arm is very good on this table.  I know Ralph likes the Triplanar.  I bet it would sound amazing on this table but the stock arm is no slouch.  One thing I am hearing is how good older recordings sound on this table.  Originals for the fifties, Living Stereo stuff is just amazing. Silky violins just incredible.  I have been told this table needs at least 200 hours to really start to hear the potential.  It sounds pretty good right now.

Right now playing an original copy of Saint Saens Symphony No. 3  RCA LSC 2341 with Boston symphony.  Great recording.

@tzh21y Either explain what it's "off" from, or please stop spreading misinformation. 

@invictus005, I think he means compared to a protractor, the overhang tool seems to set the stylus further back when I compared it to my set up with the Feikert protractor

@zh21y yes I feel the table does need to run in some it does seem to be quiter after a couple of months. It gives a very resolving presentation, I hear more detail and resolving hall information

@jtsnead "Off" indicates that something is wrong with the Technics. Why does it need to match the Feikert and why is it considered off or wrong if it does not match it? 

I am happy that there is varied discussion about the Technics table. The only thing that is now cautioning me is; Do I really need (3) TTs ???. 

Will the Technics alone convince me? How about; with a Trilplanar tonearm and custom power supply; the right mat, right cables, record weight etc. really “knock my socks off” and be my retirement TT?  Opinions Please.

"Off" might of been the wrong word

The overhang gauge supplied by technics was close to an 1/8 inch extended beyond the stevenson protractor from mint lp.  The difference was easily heard.  Tried baerwald and did not like it as much. Maybe Mint alignment is off but I doubt it.  Sounds much better now.

@tzh21y You're like a broken record. Who cares about Mint's Stevenson? Technics has a proprietary Japanese alignment. Of course it will not match to the Stevenson A. But why should it? And how is it off or wrong? Technics' gauge will allow you to alight the cartridge to Technics' proprietary Japanese alignment, which is similar to Stevenson A, but slightly different. Tonearm was designed for this special alignment.

Now of course you can allign the cartridge to a standard Stevenson A, or Lofgren A, or Lofgren B because of the slotted headshell, but that's just you deviating from what the tonearm was designed for. 

You shouldn't spread false information that Technics' gauge is off. It's actually absolutely perfectly right on to the Technics' chosen alignment.

A pseudo stevenson alignment?  whats that?

Explain this special Japanese alignment.  The mint sounds better to these ears.

@tzh21y It's a proprietary Technics  alignment, that just like Stevenson, it favors inner groove distortion. It's actually very close to Stevenson, but not exact.

If you prefer the standard Stevenson A, that's perfectly fine. I prefer Lofgren A, or B myself.

Just don't knock the Technics' gauge. It's not off, nor is it wrong. Just an alignment Technics' engineers like and designed the table/tonearm for. 

Alright, I’ll chime in here. I used Baerwald with the Freickert alignment tool. This morning I checked the overhang with the Technics overhang gauge and it was spot on. The reason I chose Baerwald was primarily because that is what Fremer used in his review. After my Hana SL breaks in, I will probably experiment with Stevenson and/or Lofgren geometry.

@invictus005 The Technics manual is excellent, however, it does not go into a lot of detail about mounting the cartridge. Are you saying that just using their overhang gauge and making sure the cartridge is parallel to the headshell (as stated in the manual) is all that is needed for proper alignment? This was never mentioned in any of the reviews I read.
Keep in mind that my prior TT was a Rega, 3 screw mount.

I have had my table up and running for about 10 days and it is quite amazing.

@ericsch That is all that's required to perfectly set it up to Technics' alignment. But if you want to experiment with other alignments, then you'll need additional protractors.

Thanks.

Gotcha.  i did not know that

The mint alignments overhang is a little shorter than the technics

@tzh21y Did you specify alignment with Mint when ordering? I believe if you don't specify, you'll get Stevenson A as a default. 

I did specify.  he said it is Stevenson.

I did specify.  he said it is Stevenson.  It is what he recommended for this table

@tzh21y ,

In my house too, the Technics gauge ends up being about 1/8" different in end place mounting of the stylus versus my Feickert protractor and GeoDisc.

But, I’m not expert, and I think Technics does have some reasoning for this--that it’s not a mistake. Well, that’s my assumption as Technics is clearly nuts about tolerances, fit and finish, and objectives.

I like the sound of both. My AT ART9 cartridge tracks impeccably using either setup tool.

@jbhiller  Did use Stevenson when you did the alignment with Feickert?

I used Baerwald I believe, as Fremer likes it and I figure he knows more than me. 

Erichsch, you may have a better eye than I do so I could be off. Who knows?

@jbhiller Baerwald is not a real alignment. It's called Lofgren A and credit should be given to Lofgren for inventing it. 

invictus005, I believe Baerwald is a real alignment.  This link is for his AES paper of 1941.  He acknowledges Lofgren who developed a similar alignment in 1938.

http://www.helices.org/auDio/turnTable/baerwald.pdf  

Anyway, it is common to see Baerwald identified for this alignment.  I'm not certain if it is precisely the same as Lofgren A, at the very least they are nearly the same.  You likely know Lofgren later developed a different alignment known as Lofgren B.

The point is that multiple alignments have been developed over the years for pivoted arms based upon minimizing distortion within specific  areas of the transcribed arc.  It is up to the user to decide which suits their preferences the best.

@pryso Baerwald is precisely the same as Lofgren A, which was invented several years before, as you’ve posted. Credit should always be given to Lofgren.

I was told that Technics uses Stevenson and when Mint said the protractor was Stevenson, they were obviously different.  I did not know Technics had their own stevenson.