I've owned hi-end Pro-Jects (which were beautiful and very nice), but I'll never go back to the expensive boutique-style belt drive tables again. My KAB SL-1210M5G performs better than those expensive turntables I've owned, and others I've set up by doing needle drop comparisons (same records, cart, phono stage, interconnect, alignment geometry, A/D converter). Never once in any situation with tracking, noise, speed stability and tone was the Technics bettered. Ever. It's an ugly table. So what. It performs as good as it could reasonably get. The only advantages I can see other tables having over a KAB modded Technics is (maybe) a longer arm, a linear tracking arm, and a vacuum pull down platter. Those things would absolutely help.
The modded SL-1200 is a great sounding, great performing, easy to use, ugly ass turntable. It works where it counts, and is a snob repellant. |
and some audiophiles "feel" threatened that the so called high-end expensive turntables they show off and wear as audiophile jewelry.. could possibly be bested by the lowly 1200... |
Audiofeil forgot to add, that there are Audiophiles out there who have no idea from anything, some sell the better and feel good with the worst.... |
Audiofeil said.."And believe me, audiophiles with great systems aren't using Technics 1200 tables as their vinyl sources. Read some of the threads here; it's that simple."
I'm an audiophile with a fairly decent system and guess what..I use a highly modified 1210 for my vinyl source...
I ditched a $5000.00 VPI rig and have never looked back.
I suspect there are many more 1200 users who consider themselves audiophiles...but are silent due to snobbery and dismissive attitudes expressed by some. |
How many of the super expensive belt drive TT's need a speed controler to be accurate? |
In the days of the LP and top of the chart radio much of what you heard was recorded onto single play quarter inch cassettes. Some stations ran reel to reel tapes of Thursday or Friday shows or produced them prior to the weekend or holiday.
The SP-10 and 15 were the de facto decks because of their phenomenal start up torque, the shape of the platers edge made track cueing easy, and the remote power supply was quiet. I don't recall ever seeing a Panasonic tone arm in a studio. I never understood Panasonic's decision to make the SL 1200 arm captive and no 78rpm.
Mine is relegated to 78rpm play with the KAB mod and a Grado 78E.
The Thorens 124 is a three speed idler deck that, if maintained and equipped with a good arm, will still out preform many of todays high end players. |
Yes, back then I recall both belt and DD tables that cost more outperforming less expensive BSR and Garrard idlers. Those became mostly "entry level". Belt drive tables sans carts started typically at about $120 or so. DD usually carried a premium above that. You bought a BSR or Garrard idler if the newer options stretched your budget.
Spme of my favorite tables to look at back then were the Philips, but these tended to also have a lot of reliability problems compared to the Japanese BDs and DDs. BIC was another line that seemed to have a lot of quality issues. |
02-24-12: Mapman
FUnny, I used to sell many Japanese turntables back in their 70's heyday, both belt and direct drive.
Funny, so did I. I would say that the DDs didn't come in to blow away the belt drives, they blew away the idler drive turntables. Within a very few years, Garrard and BSR were gone and Dual had migrated to belt drive and direct drive. The idler drive 'table was DEAD. I worked at the oldest audio chain in SoCal in 1975-6. We carried Garrard, Dual, Rabco, Philips, & Beogram. I remember that on FM stations I could actually hear the rumble of their idler drive turntables. The DD turntables were much quieter than those (unless you know how to plinth them) while still having that strong torque which BDs lack. Some of the highly regarded BDs of the time were flaky. My sister bought two Philips BDs that didn't work right and took them back. She bought a Pioneer DD in frustration and it still works. And it's no doubt that when the Micro-Seiki's hit the market they were a force to be reckoned with. Still, I think the virtues of BDs and the vices of DD are mis-identified. Yes, the Linn and AR TTs were belt drive, but they were also suspended. When you plinth and/or platform a DD turntable, the noise attributed (wrongly IMO) to the drive mechanism disappears. On the Technics DD 'table, the upper midrange glare is (wrongly) attributed to the 3.5 Khz servo, whereas damping the hollow aluminum tonearm makes *that* resonance disappear. After 1985 or so, turntables didn't really fit into Panasonic's business model anymore, but they had to keep the 12x0 series in production because the dance club scene continued to keep them viable in the marketplace for another 25 years. Still, it marked the end of additional R&D expenditures related to audiophile playback. And that's all that's wrong with the SL12x0 series--other other audiophile turntables have 25 more years of development in noise, vibration, and resonance control, but they never improved on the torque or speed accuracy of the 12x0 series. |
Well, I say leave well enough alone. How much improvement do these tweaks really give you in performance? |
FUnny, I used to sell many Japanese turntables back in their 70's heyday, both belt and direct drive.
For whatever reason, I was never swerved to actually buy or own a DD model myself. I think because they tended to be more expensive and I did not hear a difference in general. ALso the stroboscope devices on many of these never seemed to indicate DD had better speed control than belt and I was not convinced that DD tables isolated against motor noise well.
In the mid 80's, as vinyl was dying and CDs the rage, I bought my Linn Axis that I use to this day. Its British and belt drive. It blew away the Japanese tables for the most part back then, at least that was my impression. With the right setup and cart (I am sold on the Denon DL103R), it still sounds spot on to me and I feel no compulsion to tweak or change.
I do notice that to get good quality turntables new these days that seem to be built well enough to compete with the better ones from days yore, the cost is probably at least 3-5X what it used to be, probably more.
There is always something to be said about buying a cheap fixer upper and doing it right your way compared to something all ready to rock and roll at the gate. Only for those who have the means and knowledge to do it right though I would say. |
02-23-12: Mapman
Its hard to discern that the original table is one of the best when so many custom tweaks are needed to deliver the bomb in performance.
Whenever a device is modded and a performance difference results, its now a different beast.
It depends on how you look at it. When they were still in production, you could get an SL12x0 TT for $400-500, a high precision transport with nearly unmeasurable wow and flutter, dead-on speed accuracy, and a S/N ratio you rarely see in "audiophile approved" turntables under $5K. Given such a low entry level and its naive lack of other vibration and resonance control features, it practically begs to be modded to bring out its best. Get an armboard from Origin Live or Sound Hi-Fi and swap in a Rega RB303, JA Michell, Jelco or SME tonearm and you'll have an astounding turntable for under $2K, possibly under $1K. I'd love to do the tonearm upgrade, but in the meantime, my tweaks cost me a grand total of $250 (fluid damper, Sumiko headshell, sorbothane mat, Vibrapod feet), plus a butcher block as an isolation platform. That $750 got me a turntable with speed accuracy you can't buy (new) otherwise. The customary price/performance ratio of turntables would be far different today if the British TT industry had embraced the Japan-sourced DD mechanism and built their turntables around it rather than foisting over-the-counter AC synchronous motors and rubber bands as a "superior" drive system. |
Its hard to discern that the original table is one of the best when so many custom tweaks are needed to deliver the bomb in performance.
Whenever a device is modded and a performance difference results, its now a different beast.
PErhaps these old DD tables are just good fodder for mods in that they are old and relatively inexpensive these days in their stock form.
If I were brave enough, I could probably come up with custom tweaks to many modern SOTA tables to make them better, or at least meet my expectations better also, however I would have to be quite brave or rich to do that given the economics involved with these things.
I am not so brave in general. Any tweak I do is generally easily reversible if needed. THings like aligning or changing/better matching carts, adjusting settings, etc. These are my kind of (easy) tweaks that usually pays dividends. |
Hey Ralph, (Atmasphere), I was surprised to see your statement, "they are built for the expedience of semi-pro DJ work, which is the market to which the product is aimed." I would expect something different with your product knowledge.
The SL-1200 was introduced in 1975 as a consumer product. In the 1980s as CDs impacted development and sales of all turntables, it was the discovery and adoption by dance club/party DJs that created demand which kept the 1200 series in production. Unfortunately I think the common current false perception of the Technics 1200 models as "DJ tables" gets in the way of many audiophiles admitting to any credibility for their performance.
I do agree with Audiofeil and others who identify the 1200 series as good performers and a great value, but not necessarily the best tables available. And I must offer credit of another sort. About four years ago I started reading reports on the performance of the 1200 series and how that could be improved even more with a few basic mods. That led me back to consideration of a DD table and after further research, finding a decent Technics SP-10 Mk2.
Thus my appreciation for the Technics 1200 tables was to open my mind to a DD after decades of belt drive brain-washing. ;-) |
02-22-12: Vicdamone
"TT Weights 454 record weight" What does this mean?
I suspect it means the turntable weight weighs 454 grams, which is the metric equivalent of one pound. See TT Weights' website. |
"TT Weights 454 record weight" What does this mean?
How much does your SL weigh? |
I dunno, I like my 1210M5G as is, bone stock without tweeks. It sounds great to me. The secret imo, is the quality of the cartridge. I'm running a Audio-Technica AT150MLX MM cart, and it's pretty damn good. |
I love my ugly 1210MKII. What sweet sounding beast! |
I set up a NEW SL1200MK5 that I found on eBay last December and went with a KAB/Ortofon Pro S cartridge and STY40 stylus.
It took only twenty minutes to set up the table and catridge and I was spinning my old vinyl from the 70's. My albums sound great with black background and next to no surface noise. Punchy bass, clear treble, and I can definitely hear the difference in the quality of various recordings.
The Technics is built like a tank and speed control is critical. I spent a lot of time researching this purchase and felt that belt drive is inferior unless you have a lot of extra cash sitting around.
So for about $1000 I am in heaven with a table that will only get better with low cost modifications. |
This will always be a battle of the Hatfields vs the McCoy's but in my system, the Zu modified Technics 1210m5g with Zu Denon 103r was so much more engaging than my Well Tempered Amadeus with Dynavector xx-2 cartridge that there was no way I could ever go back to the Amadeus. I'm not trying to get in the middle of this battle but I can't imagine ever wanting to upgrade from the Technics table and it should last for 30 years without a hiccup...can't ask for much more than that. |
02-02-12: Tomjoe
I owned a Technics SL1200 and it was mediocre. It sounded electronic. Bass was not articulate and imaging was not very specific. I doubt your tweaked out Technics would impress me.
That's pretty consistent with how most of us perceive a Technics SL12x0 right out of the box. But if you never tried any enhancements such as a better mat, headshell, damping, or platforming, you have no frame of reference for what the rest of us are talking about. |
Real nice Tomjoe. You're a veritable festival of constructive helpful criticism. |
I owned a Technics SL1200 and it was mediocre. It sounded electronic. Bass was not articulate and imaging was not very specific. I doubt your tweaked out Technics would impress me. |
Johnnyb53,
I totally agree with your statements and personally, I think one has to spend upwards of 10k for a turntable that will beat a modded SL-1200 markedly. |
01-29-12: Tonywinsc
It is clear that the Technics tt is best in class for speed control. And that should be an indictment for all of the high end hifi turntable makers out there that seem to come in at a distant second for speed control with motors and/or drive systems at 5 or even 10 times the cost. But while we can give kudos' to the Technics engineers for their motor design, they failed to follow up on optimizing the other design parameters of a turntable. It is a valid question to ask: Why can't someone build a commercially viable turntable with a drive system like the Technics, but with the isolation and support structure for a decent tonearm that doesn't cost upwards of $12k?
I think that in the '70s the Technics DD turntables posed a threat to the emerging high end status quo. High end brands of the time represented USA and European efforts to beat back the onslaught of mass market audio from (primarily) Japan. When Ivor Tiefenbrun made his tours with his Linn turntables, he was discrediting the DD principle in favor of cottage industry belt drive turntables. To me, however, it was sleight of hand. The comparison tests created the widespread (and persistent to this day) conception that the DD principle was inherently flawed. What was not apparent is that the Linn suspended turntable was what was draining most of the noise. While the belt drive drained some of it, it also introduced speed fluctuation as the belt flops and wobbles. That's why these days people try to replace the stretchy belts with dental floss or mylar tape, and VPI finally came out with a rim drive. This created the high end dogma that BD=Good and DD=Bad. Truth is, the Technics DDs had it all over the cottage industry BD TTs regarding speed accuracy and inherent noise floor. What was not apparent is that the Linn had *other* features that drained vibrations and controlled resonances that the popular-priced DD tables didn't do well. If--rather than vilifying DD as a concept--the UK turntables had bought the Matsushita-sourced DD motors in bulk and then sued their engineering to drain vibration and control resonances, then the TT industry would have produced what you envision here--an affordable table with low noise floor and speed accuracy. You don't get the speed accuracy of a Technics SL12x0 'table on any belt drive table under $5500 Why Technics didn't continue to develop the table after 1981 is a matter of business model. The units became so affordable ($399 from Musicians Friend for awhile) because Technics had ceased any significant further development. After 1981 they knew they had to shift to CD and digital audio. The Technics turntables stayed in production for as long as they did because the bigger turntable market shifted from quality home audio to DJ use. If it hadn't been for that, Technics would have discontinued their DD turntables when everyone else (Denon, JVC, etc.) had. There was no motivation to improve it further except for DJ use. |
It is clear that the Technics tt is best in class for speed control. And that should be an indictment for all of the high end hifi turntable makers out there that seem to come in at a distant second for speed control with motors and/or drive systems at 5 or even 10 times the cost. But while we can give kudos' to the Technics engineers for their motor design, they failed to follow up on optimizing the other design parameters of a turntable. It is a valid question to ask: Why can't someone build a commercially viable turntable with a drive system like the Technics, but with the isolation and support structure for a decent tonearm that doesn't cost upwards of $12k? |
One thing I left out from my previous post was my Allnic AUT-2000 Step-Up-Transformer which feeds the Harman Kardon Citation 1 Preamp. |
I have a technics SL-1210 with KAB fluid damper,Cardas arm rewire,strobe disabler,and power supply.Funk Achromat 5mm,sumiko headshell and a Denon 103R running thru a Harman Kardon Citation 1 pre feeding a Mccormack DNA 500 feeding a pair of JMlabs Diva Utopia Be's and the sound is absolutely "Stunning".
BTW,for something that will better what I am hearing presently take a look at:
http://www.audiocognoscenti.com/index.html
Pitch Perfect Audio has the Shindo/Garrad 301 system |
If you really want a Technics and to improve on the SL-1200Mk2, then get an SL150Mk2. It's an armless table with the same electronics and similar motor from the SP-15, heavier platter that's dynamically balanced. The SP-25 is identical electronically and same motor to SL1200Mk2. After messing around enough with the SL-1200, you can just get a better turntable. Also don't forget the SL-M2 is also same motor and electronics in a wood plinth and much better heavier platter and comes with a decent integrated tonearm. Unfortunately most come with a P-mount headshell. Rare version comes with detachable headshell though. There are so many ways to NOT use the SL1200 and still get similar or better result and for even less money, in my experience. ______ |
At some point, with the new power supplies, motor mods, modified or replaced plinths, etc, one wonders where the mod is and why not just build a new machine from scratch?
True enough. At some point you have to know when to quit, or plan ahead as to where the cost of mods hits the point of diminishing returns. However, when it was easy to get an SL1200 for $399 (from Musicians Friend), for another $1500 you could add a lightly used or demo SME 309 tonearm, and you would have a $2K turntable that had the tracking *and* the speed consistency and low noise of a more expensive 'table. Rather than put $5K into an SL12x0, however, your money would probably be better spent elsewhere. |
Atmosphere: "From the sounds of it, that Dual DD motor is the one to start a new build with... of course, $80 is a nice price of admission :) " I can recommend getting a JVC QL-7 and start modding with that because it's a manual table and the motor unit is TT-71 and the arm can be replaced with something better. Not to mention a new plinth.... A lot of potential. The Dual requires more gutting and hassles. The JVC is the one that started me the alternative path away from the Technics. It's fun and it's cheap. _____ |
Hi Audiomaster1967,
Today, I am listening to computer audio only, but I miss vinyl and have no doubt, I will re enter. As you, I have had an old Kenwood KD600, a Linn, Walker, Oracle and Micro Seiki. The Oracle and the Micro Seiki with nice arms Grado & Saec competed quite well with the Technics and in some ways were better. As you did, I dampened inside the unit, added tampening tape(putty) to the platter, heat shrinked the arm(no cotton), changed the headshell and used different tonearm cables. If you want a beautiful table some of the micro seiki are georgeous, they cost alot of money and I can tell you for me, I'm going to pick up a used SL1200 from around town and be happy. Tim |
I agree with Audiofeil w/regards to the arm of the 1200. Nice table, especially with some of the mods mentioned, and the arm will be better too with the mods mentioned. But- regardless up updates, the arm of that table is the bottleneck. I've had a few of them apart and they are built for the expedience of semi-pro DJ work, which is the market to which the product is aimed. Its cool that there are after-market armboards for the 1200 platform, after the initial surprise at what a reasonably well-engineered unit like this can do I think you will find that an upgraded arm will yield even more delight. At some point, with the new power supplies, motor mods, modified or replaced plinths, etc, one wonders where the mod is and why not just build a new machine from scratch? I used to go through that a lot when I would update/modify Dynaco PAS-3 preamps. These days I like to make all the mods fit in the original box so the preamp retains its original looks and is thus a 'sleeper'. If you are thinking of building up a 'table from a stock unit like this, you might look at the 'Vintage DD turntables- are we living dangerously?' thread http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1317949815&openflup&65&4#65From the sounds of it, that Dual DD motor is the one to start a new build with... of course, $80 is a nice price of admission :) |
11-07-11: Dklk
I owned a SL1200 for awhile and liked it alot sound wise. It just didn.t look audiophile to me.So I sold it and went throu several TT,s and landed on a Rega P25...
I'm one of those geeks who gets a perverse pleasure in getting killer sound out of unconventional sources. By the time I tweaked and platformed my SL1210 M5G, it no longer looks particularly DJ either. |
I understand your situation. I owned a SL1200 for awhile and liked it alot sound wise. It just didn.t look audiophile to me. So I sold it and went throu several TT,s and landed on a Rega P25...
|
There are a lot of needle-drops on Pink Fish Media that have Technic turntables(SP 10 and, I believe, one of the 1200 series). I think most use other arms, and have some modifications, if anyone is interested in hearing for themself. There are also other turntables(I was interested in Linn lp12 dynamik.)for comparisons. |
I found that after adjusting the bearings, new arm wire, cotton internal filling and heat shrink on the outside and a Sumiko headshell (which is not only a better headshell but also adds Azimuth adjustment) the arm sounded way better. I installed a Sumiko Premier MMT with the thought that it would be better yet only to find that I really did not gain a thing, but lost lots of the original arm's ease of adjustment. |
Enjoyed your post, sold my Scoutmaster/Dyna XX2 combo (thank you Dan ed, etc., for saving my viny life re: unique ringing arm/tracking issues "thinning of sound myth"). I picked up a Technics D202 w/AT 130E cart which I bought on a whim for $20 in a Thrift as a "place-holder" until I was to decide what to acquire next; most likely a DAC--I sold my record collection. Well, I was pretty stunned at what the Technics could do: flawless tracking, open inner groove sound, nice soundstage, imaging, "organic" sound, could even capture the lowest fundamentals of pipe organ.... To be fair to the Scoutmaster/Dyna, the Technics didn't have quite the explosive dynamics, nor the ultra-black backgrounds. Though I was initially thrilled with Scoutmaster/Dyna, I really hadn't acquired enough Lp's to judge its performance accurately. |
Forgot to add the arm was also changed and totally agree the arm is a bottle neck
It also had the feet replaced and was using a SPU
As I said to upgrade to this standard will not be cheap but will compete with high end TT at this stage. Of course most people will not take the 1210 to this level
|
Filling an arm with cotton and then covering it with shrinkwrap does not sound like something I would want to do to any arm. Are you sure this helps the sound? I would think its a good way to kill the life and depth out of the music. |
Hi johnjc,
Modify the bearing, add isolation, change the power supply, etc. and you still have to deal with a lame tonearm. It's a major bottleneck. See my earlier post.
When are you guys going to get this?
Look, I own this table. I use it almost daily. It's a great value. Perhaps the best value in turntables. I'm simply identifying the limitations.
Peruse the analog threads for users' systems and pick out 10 killer vinyl front ends. See how many Technics 1200 series tables you find.
Answer: None.
The campaign here to elevate this product to something far beyond its' capabilities is just plain lame.
I'm done; anybody that wants to compare please come here and give a listen. I'll mount your cartridge(s) in my 1210M5G with a Mint LP protractor and you can hear alongside some "snob tables", "snob tonearms", and "snob cartridges".
Bring your own bottle.
The humble pie and crow are on me.
I'm out. |
Hi Audiofell
I heard the 1210 with a the Mike new platter and bearing, the Paul Hynes power supply and Oylide matt along with a few other mods in with this level of modification it sounds pretty good I will compete with a lot of high end TT. All just IMHO |
Jmoog08, I forgot more about analog than you've ever learned.
And believe me, audiophiles with great systems aren't using Technics 1200 tables as their vinyl sources. Read some of the threads here; it's that simple.
Now come give a listen and stop yakking.
Your inexperience is showing. |
Perhaps you would find the following titles interesting reads Mr. Audiofeil. 1. Priceless: The Myth of Fair Value 2. The Comsumer Trap. You see, when you want to sell products to over indulgent consumers you don't lower the price of items--you send through through the ceiling. I guess that's another hypothetical theory, but something tells me your own empirical knowledge on the subject will be substantiating. |
Yup. I'd plug in yer 12xx. |
As in anything, getting that last 10% takes 90% of the effort, whether it is in athletics, business,education or manufacturing. the first 90% is the easy part. |
10-14-11: Jmoog08
"What would he say about the Technics facing off against something that has snob appeal? That the higher end unit is 5 or 10 percent better? Would that be worth putting up 10 times the price?"
Absolutely would be to many people given the choice. Many people spend a lot more than 10x the cost of a technics TT to get 10% better performance for sure. |
Jmoog08,
Why don't you stop by here some time and decide for yourself instead of proposing hypothetical arguments?
You can listen to some "snob appeal" turntables.
I have a 1210M5G for your comparison.
Thank you. |
For the sake of argument let's say there is a hypothetical audio professional that can quantify how much better a particular TT is over another. What would he say about the Technics facing off against something that has snob appeal? That the higher end unit is 5 or 10 percent better? Would that be worth putting up 10 times the price? |
>>10-14-11: Johnjc
The 1210 suitably mod is a great TT<<
Incorrect.
It is a great value but it is not a great turntable. |
The 1210 suitably mod is a great TT So far the best example of this i heard has the following upgrades
The Paul Hynes SP5 power supply It seems the power supply is really important to getting the best out of the 1210
The Mike New bearing and platter
The Olyide matt
as well as the usual feet upgrades
This takes the TT in a very similar performance level to the Trio LD07
Its not cheap to do this lol |
