If you’re still using the PH9 for phono, which is not clear from your OP, I can only say that it was not well regarded when it first came out, one of the few AR preamps that was unloved. I heard it in my system and unloved it too.
Seeking opinions on the Luxman PD151 and EQ500 combination
Merry Christmas to all!!
Interested in feedback on the Luxman PD151 turntable, MC5 cartridge and EQ500 equalizer phono amp combination. Several years ago I got back into the music scene and bought a Project S-Berycxx with a Sumiko Songbird cartridge. Combined with that I added an Audio Research PH-9 a couple years later. I have enjoyed vinyl more than I thought I would and have a nice collection Jazz music, primarily. I'm considering adding the above Luxman set up but before I do, would love feedback from fellow Audiogoner's. Currently, I feel that my weakest link is my turntable but my PH-9 makes it sound so much better.
My current set-up is Audio Research 160S amplifier, REF6SE pre-amplifier, with Wilson Alexia V speakers and 2 REL S812 subs. I have a Grimm MU-1 Streamer and a Nagra Tube Dac with separate PSU. I use Roon exclusively and have subscriptions to Qobuz and Tidal. Cabling is mostly Transparent Reference with some Audience Front Row and Black Cat cables as well. I feel that my digital section is superb, for me, but would like to take up my turntable and analog section a notch.
Appreciate your insights in advance.
22 responses Add your response
the luxman phono eq500 has impressive features, I’d like to hear it. Stereophile said this: "especially for the LP enthusiast who uses an analog front end with multiple tonearms and an assortment of cartridges—it’s difficult to imagine another contemporary product offering this combination of flexibility and superior sound. In addition to being a pure delight to use, it was easily one of the best-sounding, most musical phono preamps I’ve ever had in my system. If your budget can stretch this far, the Luxman EQ-500 is a must-hear." IF you change your TT, especially Jazz, I’d encourage you to consider having two arms, both Mono and Stereo ready to go back and forth in any listening session. The Luxman PD444 TT is amazing, I set one up for my friend, I would be quite happy with it, we put two Micro Seiki 505 arms (12" and 9") which I also have great respect for, they have easy arm height, tracking, anti-skate, and the headshell fitting has an adjustable collet for azimuth. My TT is deeper than normal, the Luxman is wider than normal. Built in Switch for the Two Arms makes setup easy. http://Luxman PD444 Vintage Knob Info |
Vintage Knob is also valuable for vintage turntable information. This gives me an opportunity to add to my previous statement about the underwhelmingness of the ARC PH9; the Luxman EQ500 is sure to outperform it, in my opinion. Furthermore, you can consider a TT and a phono stage to be two entirely separate items. |
History of one arm Luxman PD441 and two arm version PD444 I found out about PD444 after I got my JVC TT81 in Large PL-2 Two arm Plinth. In my setup deeper worked better than wider, but it is still tempting to have one. Less wide allows me to keep my promise to let Donna keep her plants on top. One tray moves to/from Tape Player to TT depending on which one is in use. I insist on a Dust Cover, so many high end TT’s do not include one.
Luxman Dust Cover is hinged, you can use it closed or left up/open during play, or, my friend leaves his unattached, lifts it off during play. My Large Heavy Dust Cover must be lifted/played off (my preference), you need a designated place for it during play, notice mine on it’s edge in front of the Tape Player (felt dots on contact points). I miss Chakster, found this about the Luxman PD444 he thinks it's the one to get/keep. " chakster6,144 posts @xaak I could buy whatever turntable, but I use two PD-444 and my Denon DP-80, Victor TT-101 and Technics SP-10 mkII (and many more turntables) were near and easy to compare to PD-444. I use so many different tonearms and cartridges, but I hate belt drive turntables believe it or not, over 20 years ago I had enough time with belt drives (never again, i came to Direct Drive for a good reason), also I think vacuum pump is inconvenient. I prefer Direct Drive and already have the best of them (not all, but some of the very best). I wish I could buy Denon DP-100 in the next 10 years. ................................ IF not going to add a second arm, then the PD441 is a better choice than the PD151 I think. Smaller size and price, great technology concealed in simple elegance. An arm like the Micro Seiki 505 gives you performance, adjustments, removable headshell for a variety of cartridges. 213cobra, Phil, member here, has had great things to say about the PD444 over the years.
|
The Luxman PD 151 is a modern belt drive turntable, which you can buy new from a dealer without concern about its functional capacities. Whereas, if you invest in a vintage direct drive turntable such as a Luxman PD 444 or 441, you must also be prepared to deal with functional issues that may affect performance just due to age or mis use. Some of us do not have the intestinal fortitude to put up with that. If you do have the guts, then yes I agree a vintage high-quality direct drive turntable is certainly a way to go. As you know, I love them and own several. But it’s a whole different kettle of fish for a person who casually wants to get into vinyl. The OP might be better off with the PD151 or similar. |
Lewm, Good point about NEW, no age concerns. Anybody own that TT? Thankfully that PD151 TT has a removable headshell, a big plus so having spare cartridges pre-mounted is easy enough. Headshell with Adjustable Azimuth is a good option Pat's, mine is black, this says Last One? other adjustable heaadshells, don't forget the finger lift like my friend did.
|
Woots, I can’t give you any insight on the phono stage, but I can definitely give you insight about the PD-151 MKII. After a 10 year hiatus on vinyl (sold all of my records and equipment, and swore I’d never do vinyl again), I jumped back in a few days ago. My teenage son came home one day from a friend’s house and talked about how much fun he had listening to records! It reignited something in my brain, and for Christmas we both got turntables (albeit very very very different levels). I just got done listening to records for about 4 hours. It’s the most I’ve listened to music in years. The PD MKII is like the anti-audiophile, audiophile turntable. Let me explain: 10 years ago I used to pay a dealer to set-up my table. So many factors made setting up my then VPI table seem too daunting. I was afraid of doing more harm than good. Today, with the help of a very good friend over texting, I finished dialing in VTA and sat back and just listened. I leveled the table, had the dealer mount the cartridge (WAY easier because of the removable head shell), set VTF, tracking force, and then VTA. Done. No need to worry about azimuth, no need to mess with on-the-fly VTA for various thicknesses, and no need to tweak endlessly. The sound is great. The table is dead quiet. I’m using a "cheap" cart right now (Audio Technica OC9XML) into my Luxman 509X phono stage. There is an excellent level of transparency and, for lack of a better audiophile term, the PRAT is addictive. I listen to a lot of heavy music and rock, and the leading edges and propulsion in the mid bass and bass makes everything enjoyable and exciting. On the flip side of the coin however, I think the table does potentially limit one’s ability to squeeze out those last few percentage points of performance. This is why I call it an anti-audiophile, audiophile table. It sounds great. It’s set and forget with a high level of performance. However, you’re stuck with the tonearm. If you want to experiment with multiple tonearms, or crave climbing up to something more expensive and potentially better performing, you can’t. Additionally, adjusting azimuth, VTA-on-the-fly, etc can all be beneficial in the hands of the correct individual. Dialing things down to the last minute detail can pay-off in the SQ department. All that said, I personally LOVE this table. I wanted something that I could manage myself, but still provided a high level of performance. It matches well with my Luxman integrated, it’s built very well, it’s a pleasure to use, and I don’t feel like I have to do much more to dial it in, if anything. It also doesn’t hurt that it is beautiful to look at with the dust cover. Eventually I’ll get a better phono stage and cartridge, but I don’t think the PD- 151 MKII will ever be a limiting factor in the caliber of system I can afford.
|
@elliottbnewcombjr @lewm @kingdeezie Well, I made the plunge! I ended up purchasing the table and phono stage and traded in my Audio Research PH-9. First spin was Dave Brubeck Take 5….and WOW! Significant improvement over my Project S Bercyx and PH-9. Incredible detail with outstanding bass and mid bass and overall detail. Thanks so much for the honest feedback and without the commentary I would have kept the PH-9.
|
wootscongrats. that Sumiko Songbird cartridge has excellent specs for an elliptical stylus. Is yours the Low Output or High Output version?
https://sumikophonocartridges.com/product/songbird-low-mc-phono-cartridge/ if you know it's condition/playing hours, I would consider keeping it, even if it means selling your existing setup without a cartridge, or installing a new cartridge to increase potential buyers. Do you have the few inexpensive tools and skills to mount/align cartridges? If not, YET, I encourage you to learn to do it yourself, the more your collection grows, the more important and satisfying it is. |
I prefer DD, but it sure seems like a terrific belt drive choice, gotta love a platter weighing nearly 9 lbs, one of the things that made my Thorens TD124 so great (wish my wood floors were not so springy, it’s bearing was too sensitive to vertical vibration). Stereophile Review of PD151 II "What matters is the result, and even when I held my stethoscope against the top plate adjacent to the motor, I couldn’t tell whether the motor was on or off. It’s that quiet." read that again, that’s amazing. I would buy the optional heavier counter-weight now while still in production. You never know what you might collect, and if you ever sell it in the future, "The tonearm comes with a standard counterweight suitable for cartridges weighing up to 10gm, while a heavier weight—part number OPPD-HW2—is available as an option for cartridges that weigh between 9gm and 19gm. I used two cartridges during the review, an Ortofon Cadenza Blue and Luxman’s own LMC-5, and found the standard weight suitable for both. Luxman provided an extra headshell, the OPPD SH2, which allowed me to switch easily between the Ortofon and Luxman cartridges with minimal recalibration." And I’d buy a spare headshell, to have two OEM, as well as another brand like Pat’s or vintage with azimuth adjustment. Best to check and learn about it’s arm height adjustment, also from the review: "The pin that locates the headshell vertically in the armtube will typically have some play, making precise, repeatable azimuth setting difficult, and the way the collar holds the headshell into the armtube can change the front-to-back angle of the headshell depending on how much the collar is tightened. I found that with the Luxman arm, tightening the headshell collar firmly resulted in the headshell surface being about 1.5° out of parallel with the armtube. This isn’t really a big deal because you can easily compensate by raising the height at the back of the arm, but it’s something to be aware of when adjusting the stylus rake angle." "Luxman says that all four feet should be lowered at least slightly to allow the isolation function of the feet to work as designed." this surprised me, did yours come with the optional dust cover? "The OPPD-DSC151 dustcover is offered as an optional extra; at nearly $800, I guess it’s nice that Luxman gives you the option of going without it if your budget is tight. That’s a lot of money for a dustcover" "Summing up This is exactly what Lewm had in mind in his post above.
|
I did get the dust cover. It pops off easily while playing. I think the Sumiko is Low Output, as I recall. I did buy this with less than 50 hours on it so I didn’t really have any choices. I figured that I would get to know the ins and outs on this unit and broaden my horizons with a different cart down the road. I was able to set this up and get it going in a decent amount of time but make no mistake I am a novice’s novice when it comes to adjusting, etc. So, you can count on me to ask some questions from you guys, the experts. I do think it is a skill that has high upside based on how the growth of TT’s have been in the last 5-10 years. I had my heart set on a Vertere audio TT but am really happy I paused and went this route. I’m actually pretty shocked with the musicality of the two pieces versus my ARC and My Project which I will be keeping. I appreciate all of your feedback and this really happened fast with a phone call that this was available. |
Just so you know, I am not an advocate of dust covers except to keep dust off the platter when the TT is not in use. When playing LPs, my dust cover(s) are somewhere else in the room, never on the TT or over the LP. This is because I think a closed dust cover creates unpleasant colorations. Not everyone agrees. You will have to make your own decision on that, so it is good that you have a removable dust cover. The key word is "removable", not just raised up for playing LPs. As to alignment, I think the obsession with it is way overdone, but I do try to be as accurate as my tools permit and leave it at that. VTA is a matter of taste, like cartridge loading. Go with VTA that sounds OK to you and you'll be fine. For me that means I level the TT arm wand so it is parallel to the LP surface. And boom. To further my nihilist approach, I do not think you can predict the sound of a cartridge from any published spec or even from the aggregate of all the published specs, so long as the specs are not obviously awful. |
OP, Glad you got the dust cover, you were lucky to get that call and smart enough to get a few quick answers and jump on a great opportunity, one you will forever appreciate. I see that the word ’low’ is printed on the top of the Sumiko Songbird cartridge body, (high version if it doesn’t say low) which is not visible after it is mounted (unless it shows thru the slots). Low or High, I would keep that cartridge and move it to a spare headshell to play on the new Luxman. If you have room, perhaps keep the existing TT, put a MONO cartridge on it, ready to go. I learned here, and it is more than true, playing Mono LPs with a true Mono cartridge is a little/lot/hugely better depending on the specific Mono LP. Recording techniqes and manufacturing were excellent in the 40's and 50's, the distinction of individual instruments and voices, lack of noise, is always better and sometimes far improved on some of my Mono LPs. Lewm, I also am an advocate of ’do your best’, ’good enough’ ’avoid attempting perfection’, ’don’t let the over-priced thingy scare you’ and encourage people to acquire the few inexpensive tools and skills (practice until confidence is gained) to mount and align their own cartridges. Arm parallel ’when playing’, i.e. stylus in the groove, cantilever flexed by the specified tracking weight. One of the two included allen wrenches fits a set screw that allows arm height adjustment, not as easy as a hand tightened lever, but simply trial and error until it’s "close enough for government work". OP’s dust cover has hinges. Even though I don’t like the appearance, I would play it with the cover left up, and verify the table remained level when the cover’s weight was in that position. You, like my friend with his PD444 (also has hinges), would not use the hinges and carefully lift off and replace the dust cover which is what I must do with my JVC dust cover. Mine has cutouts designed for hand held movement, the Luxman cover does not. Of course I’ve tried to hear/prove differences, I simply cannot get the idea of reflected microphonics out of my imagination, so up or off it is: off my visual preference despite the inconvenience. I agree you cannot predict sound qualities from specs, however wide channel separation and tight channel balance are cartridge performance measurements directly relating to good/better/best capability to create the pseudo imaging 2 channel sound involves/requires. If a company can repeatedly manufacture and achieve those parameters, that is remarkable. I have slight preferences among my half dozen cartridges, and choose one over another for specific music, or just to hear it for a while. I have never had a cartridge with great imaging capability not be a keeper. My friends bring their cartridges here, I can play with all 3 arms in the grooves, and simply switch the SUT input to choose which signal is active, so back and forth comparisons within seconds is possible here. I made a chart for hours played, forgot I made it. If I stop thinking ’damn that thing sounds great’, that’s when I ship a cartridge in to be checked for wear, and I’m lucky enough to live 35 minutes from Steve Leung at VAS. |
"wide channel separation and tight channel balance are cartridge performance measurements directly relating to good/better/best capability". Perhaps, but the numbers quoted by manufacturers are for an average sample when brand new. There is no guarantee that any particular sample meets the stated specs or that any given sample will retain those specs over a period of use. Moreover, we are never told how the measurements were made, whether they pertain to the real world of playing an LP, or not. Could it be that your perception of a correlation between channel separation, etc, and SQ are influenced by the fact that you know the specs in advance? Or that cost often is a correlate of those measurements, with manufacturers quoting the best specs for their top of the line cartridges that therefore cost the most (and sound best too)? I guess I am a cynic. There is nothing inherently wrong about your approach. |
