2. analog
  3. 136281-369

Technics Sp10 Mk2 vs SL-1200G - I finally did an A/B

Guys, it is payback time. I have asked so many questions here to improve my knowledge or make a good purchase. I should give back now.

This is a topic that is HOT these days. Are the new generation Technics 1200G/GAE and Sp10-R better than the vintage Sp10 Mk2 and Mk3 ? 

I have myself asked this question multiple times here. The most common reply was a resounding "Yes" in favour of the new 1200G/GAE. The 10R is still too new and not many have a direct opinion. But in general, even those who have commented on the 1200G vs Sp10 mk2, almost no one has compared them side by side. Some have written based on aural memory, some based on specs and design, and some have written based on pure subjective opinion.

In any case, most of us are very happy that Technics has done it. A very few business oriented minds might be disappointed that their business around vintage Technics DDs would take some hit due to these modern machines.

Since I was in the market for a good high resolution TT to replace my modded Loricraft Garrard 301, I took active interest in the Technics DDs. Overall I was convinced that the 1200G is the machine to look out for. It was clearly favored over the smaller sp10 and more or less compared to the bigger sp10 mk3. I got a brand new 1200G and sent it to Time-Step audio for their Evoke PSU mod. It is a very well accepted mod in the UK markets. In general the Switch-Mode PSU of the 1200G is considered its Achilles heel so this mod was a necessity.

I finally had the 1200G at my home. I won't go into the process of setting up as it was a simple and straight forward one. I used its own Technics tonearm to start with. I tried couple of platter mats but its own default mat sounded fine so it remained. I have 2 cartridges to play, the Denon 103r and Ortofon Cadenza blue. None of them are esoteric stuff, but I find them very neutral and musically "right" sounding carts.

Straightaway the 1200G revealed that it was a more transparent and higher resolution player than the Garrard. The noise floor was lower, inner details more easily heard. Soundstage more precise and layered. Great! There was an extra sparkle to the sound which was quite thrilling. More like going from HD to UHD. What felt a bit lacking was overall dynamics and scale. The 1200G sounded "Compact". The Garrard was like a full blown full scale sound. I let the 1200G run at 78rpm for many hours so that the burn-in process is expedited. I also tried both the auto and manual servo settings to vary the torque and balance of the sound. As I listened more I also realized that the 1200G does not have the fluidity that I am used to with the Garrard or other belt drive TTs I have heard. Notes bloom but die out instantly, followed by a silence before the next note. Something that joins the notes so that it all sounds related was missing a bit. In terms of dynamics, the intensity of an "explosion or a shout" was kind of controlled. That takes away a bit of that startle factor which allows us to get awestruck with our systems. Bass on the 1200G sounded a bit chopped. It did not feel very deep and powerful. I rather felt I am listening to mid-upper bass with average impact. But when it came to details it sounded like a super Cd player in a good way.

I decided to play with the tonearm at this point. I have a 47 Labs RS-A1 tonearm which has its own standing mount. One can just lift it and place it at the right distance so that the under-hang is correct and you are good to go. It is a musical tonearm. Once installed, this tonearm gave the Technics a significant jump on the performance. Especially it made the Technics sound less hifi and more musical, more fluid, more jump factor. Just plain more realistic. But then it brought the same kind of improvements to the Garrard too. I did a lot of comparison shifting this tonearm between the 2 TTs. All my above comments about their differences holds true. 

After about 2 weeks and multiple hours of comparison on all kinds of music, I decided that while there are areas where the Garrard lacks and Technics clearly shines, musically Garrard is more realistic whereas Technics is more cerebral. I knew I was going to miss that hi-rez sparkle from Technics but I could only keep one so it has to go. I sold the 1200G. But the curiosity still remained so I bought a Sp10 Mk2.

After there 1200G left my place, the Sp10 Mk2 arrived. I did not have a plinth but I had read on Audiogon that it can be used in the naked form with a suitable isolation like the Audio Technica AT-636 Pneumatic footers. I have those footers so I installed the Sp10 on those footers and used the 47 Labs tonearm with Denon 103r for listening.

In the first 10 secs it was clear the Sp10 Mk2 is a more dynamic player than the 1200G. It sounded more like a Garrard in terms of scale, dynamics and drive. At the same time it was more transparent than Garrard. I had read couple of opinions that the vintage Sp10 DDs has more torquey motor drive. Here I was clearly hearing that. If I enter the room, I would not know which player is playing simply because of the similarity in slam, dynamics and tonality. My Garrard has the audiosilente idler wheel, woodsong audio brake disc and kokomo bearings. It is also driven by a dedicated AC regenerator for a clean AC input. In effect it is a much cleaner and neutral TT than typical Garrards. The Sp10 Mk2 is a less romantic sounding TT overall but it does not feel "compact", "thin" or "bright". It sounds natural, which is a very important trait to enjoy music. It sounds big and punchy without sounding colored or veiled. I have not even installed the plinth yet. My Garrard is still the king in the system but the Sp10 is a good contender with higher resolution and lower noise floor overall.

Guys, I don't know how to put it. I am not here to spoil the party of the 1200G/GAE owners. It is definitely a very complete package. You get warranty, company support, spares and all the peace of mind with the new Technics DDs. But if you are one of those adventurous types deciding between the old school and new gen Technics TT, the old Sp10 mk2/mk3 wins it for me, purely from the sound quality perspective. New technology probably has given the new Technics a bit more refinement but the drive, excitement and immediacy of real instruments still is conveyed best by the grand old boys.

My system:
. Loricraft Garrard 301 (mods: Kokomo mk2 bearing, Audiosilente idler wheel, Woodsong audio brake disc, Funkfirm Achromat, Monarcy Audio AC regenerator)
. 47 Labs RS-A1 tonearm
. Ortofon Cadenza Blue, Denon 103r carts
. Trilogy 907 phonostage
. Berning MicroZOTL 2.0 preamp
. Audio Note Conquest Silver Signature SET monoblock amps
. Tannoy Turnberry SE speakers

P.S: I did not compare the 2 Technics side by side but it was almost back to back as the Sp10 arrived after 3-4 days of the departure of 1200G. Since it was all in my own system, I had a good hang of what they felt like.
pani

Showing 24 responses by lewm

lewm
13,476 posts
 
Stalker, know thyself.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Or if there have been 70,000 boutique fuses sold (which data would be very hard to get hold of since there are so many different vendors of so many different fuses), we have no way to know whether a given buyer was happy with his purchase or heard no difference or felt ripped off.  What I think is that the end caps can make a big difference in terms of the goodness of the contact they make with the fuseholder and maybe what metal they are made of.  Then too, the fuseholder has to be jsut as important as the fuse.  Geoff, I ask again, HOW can directionality make a difference?  Give me a physical explanation.  I suspect that the idea of directionality is really the result of the fact that when you take out a fuse and flip it around, there is at least a 50-50 chance that when you re-insert the fuse, the contacts have been cleaned by the friction of R&R'ing.  Perhaps that can make a tiny audible difference.

I hedge my bets by using Acme silver-plated, cryo-treated fuses in Acme silver-plated fuseholders, both of which products are "reasonable" in cost.  And I never worry about directionality.  I don't even worry about whether it makes a difference.  It's kind of like praying, if I believed in a deity.

Pani has every right to be pissed off about this digression in his thread.  Sorry, Pani.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
 Actually, the flaw in my own position is that I did hear a difference between fuses, and the cheap fuse sounded better than the boutique fuse.  I got it backwards according to gospel, but those are the facts. What is more important is that five other people heard it the same way. Presumably, there was a mixture of listener biases in that room, pro and con.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
I don't think this is the place for this tired debate to be rehashed.  I will only say that I completely agree with Raul when he describes the very powerful effect of listener bias, especially the bias that is there when one has spent hundreds of dollars on fuses to replace perfectly good (in terms of their function) fuses that probably cost $15-$20.  Fuse tweakers will deny this bias, but it is inevitably there.
From there we go to "directionality".  I am perfectly willing to "believe" in directionality if any other believer can provide one iota of a scientific explanation for same.  Wire directionality is already supposedly explained by differences in the direction of the grain or by methods used in casting the wire.  This is delightfully unproveable, but it's out there.  I don't reject directionality of wires, necessarily. I do reject directionality of fuses.

And no, doubting these tweaker beliefs does not at all compel one to believe that "all amplifiers sound the same" or that all of any components sound the same.  I certainly do not believe that.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Geoff, You wrote, "I tend to discount oddball results like yours since no single test should be used to draw general conclusions."

This is such a puffball one-liner that I almost don't have the heart to start on it.  First, "no single test should be used to draw general conclusions", UNLESS it is a single test that supports one's own pre-existing bias. Because such single-test reports are exactly what one has to go on when it comes to most tweaks.  Second, where are your 70,000 counter-vailing reports?  Is that how many boutique fuses you or the industry sold? If so, do you know that every purchaser came away convinced in favor of boutique fuses? My general impression reading this forum and the Tweaker's Asylum is that there is at best a 50-50 split on fuses.  And of course the total of all reports in writing on forums is probably in the realm of a few hundred, pro and con taken together.  So, where are your 70,000 reports stored?  Third, if you were paying attention, I drew NO general conclusions. My report is simply an anecdote, has no statistical validity, except it does have unusual power in one respect: five (5) people were in the room, including me, and ALL FIVE of us heard it the same way.  Like I wrote, two of the 5 guys (maybe 3, now I think of it) are very much professionals in the audio business, designers and one journalist.  We were all surprised by the results, more because the circuit that was fused should not be affecting the audio at all.  This certainly has me questioning my own bias against the importance of the fuse. Fourth, I kind of expected you to bring up "directionality".  What is electrical evidence that fuses have directionality? Why would they have directionality when passing AC which is by nature bi-directional (has positive and negative phases alternating with regular frequency)?
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Geoff, the point is that we could hear a difference. And the difference was decidedly in favor of the cheap fuse. I don’t know why we should’ve heard any difference. I tend to discount the whole experience, except for the fact that four other people, 2 of whom you would recognize by name, also heard it exactly the same way as I did.

On the one hand, perhaps this should convince me that fuses do make a difference. On the other hand, it may also convince me that it is not necessary to spend big bucks on a fuse.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
I think I was being too hard on Pani.  I can well understand why he went for the PS upgrade just based on this affliction we all suffer from, that of being an "audiophile".

Then too, I had the very weird experience of hearing that a fuse connected only to the LED lights in an autoformer volume control affected the sound of the system dramatically.  And in the presence of four other experienced audiophiles, some of whom are "in the business", and who all agreed on the observations. So, the autoformer itself is completely passive with no power supply at all.  On its chassis it has a digital read-out based on LEDs that light up; that little circuit that runs only the LEDs has a fuse.  We compared an expensive audiophile fuse to the OEM "hardware store" fuse.  If anything, we expected to hear no difference at all, because the electrical circuit has no relation to the autoformer.  But to all 5 of us, the hardware store fuse sounded BETTER; it was obvious.  I am still chewing on that.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
There's no denying the possible ways in which a PS can negatively effect performance of any device that is actively passing the signal and especially if it's amplifying the signal, like one of DB's amplifiers.  What I am questioning is how the PS of a turntable can affect the sonics of the vinyl reproduction system, except by the mechanisms I did acknowledge that require direct radiation of RFI or EMI from the PS to the cartridge, via the "air".  And it does require some care to shield the LP from such potential radiation. I recently found that a copper platter mat greatly enhances the sonics of my Kenwood L07D, probably for this reason.

So, having taken that position, I must also doubt the possible effects of a power cord, for essentially the same reason.  The signal is never modulated by the PS or vice-versa, in a turntable.  However, because I am as anal as anyone else here, I have upgraded power cords on my turntables just as a matter of course; I've done no listening tests, because I would not believe my own results.  I know from my scientific background that it is impossible to divorce onesself from listener bias.  If you've spent money on a new toy, and if it looks cool, then you are bound to hear that it is "better" too.  (Just read any of the threads on this Forum.) Life is too short to worry about it.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
With due respect, I disagree with many of your a priori assumptions.  True, EMI from the tt motor can move back onto the AC line and contaminate the AC going to other components, and I suppose any EMI or RFI from an SMPS can do the same, but it is only normal prudence therefore to isolate the AC line supplying the tt from the AC going to other components.  The same, by the way, goes for digital equipment.  How could switching distortion from an SMPS supplying a turntable affect performance except by the mechanisms mentioned?  And how is it that Berning amplifiers are so highly regarded, given that they have used SMPS type supplies for a few decades now?  (Because I do think it’s possible to create a clean SMPS or at least a well isolated one.) Whether an AC cord can make a difference to the sound of a tt, I will leave for another day.  I’m sure it can, via the mechanism of listener bias, which is very real.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
I take that back.  Of course there is another way that the PS could color the sound, and that’s by direct radiation of RFI or EMI that could be picked up by the cartridge. But that is a problem that could easily be prevented in the design, if adequate shielding is utilized.  Having the PS outboard also would help.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Pani
I just cannot come up with a hypothesis to explain how the SMPS could cause a fogging of the audio signal from the turntable. In my most paranoid way of thinking about it I suppose it could cause a periodic speed aberration but no one has reported such an observation. Anyway, good luck with your new tt.

lewm
13,476 posts
 
Apologies to Pani.  I am afraid I am the culprit for getting us off topic.

What does the Time Step psu do to or for the performance of the 1200G?
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Thanks, Chakster, but my dance card is full of two full range crossover less speakers.  The Sound Labs 845PXs from which I’ve removed the crossover and the Beveridge 2SWs which employ electronic crossovers, high pass and low pass set at 80 Hz.  Above 80 Hz it’s a single driver.  I am very familiar with Zu but I have never heard a pair in a private system, only at shows.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Pani, How are those Tannoy Turnberry speakers?  I often see them in stores, but I’ve never heard a pair in action.  They are popular in Japan, for sure.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Nandric,  The screws are marketed by Yamamoto under the product name, BT-1.  I think you can probably buy them from an eBay vendor.  The price was about $25US.  When I saw them, I remembered clearly that DT regarded titanium screws as a categorical imperative, per your now ancient posts on the subject (not directly from DT). I think Henry had some too, for his Palladian cartridge.  By now, I thought you were a happy user of titanium screws.  Anyway, now you can be.  If you can’t find them, and if you let me know in the next few days, and if I go back to an audio store for one of those other much more expensive items, I’ll pick you up a set.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
I'd carry on the tonearm and yes good idea re the 10R.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Thanks for the clarification, JP, as you are one of the few who actually has all the usual suspects in your custody.  This means also that a 10R would drop in to my 90 lb slate and wood plinth that I made and had made for my Mk3.  Still not persuaded to pull the trigger.  Have one or two more shopping days before we depart.

Off topic.  I have been and remain very tempted to purchase a Viv Float tonearm while here.  The price is very attractive compared to US norms.  Have any of you guys sniffed the Viv?  My interest is part experimental and part based on my fondness for my RS Labs RSA1 tonearm, another underhung one. I’ve already stocked up on 4 new headshells and, Nandric, titanium headshell screws marketed by Yamamoto.  I trust that Dertonearm might approve, although these are Japanese by definition, not German.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Actually, I am very much a “whole-ist”, Nandric. I have reached a state of satisfaction with each of two audio systems and feel no real need to radically change either one. This perhaps is one reason why I feel no compulsion to purchase an SP10R, even though I am in the land of Technics for one more week. I have room in my thinking for trying different cartridges and headshells and maybe a few electronic mods to equipment I already own, but that’s about it. I do have a weakness for old things that were beautifully made by craftsmen. So I “love” my Leica M3 as much as I love my L07D and the other DDs. I could be tempted to purchase a Yamaha GT2000X and/or a Pioneer Exclusive P3, but it would take a lot of tempting, and it would really only be to appease my other muse for good old stuff.

The Apolyt must be extraordinary, but at that cost, it may as well not even exist for me. However, I am interested to see how DT will eventuallly create a little brother to the Apolyt which he can sell for perhaps 10% of its cost. THAT would be interesting.

lewm
13,476 posts
 
Pryso, Sorry I apparently missed your previous post regarding cross compatibility of plinths.  However, the information is unlikely to be correct, simply because the Mk2 and Mk3 per se are not cross compatible with regard to plinth, unless Technics leaves a gaping hole that can accommodate both the square shape of the Mk2 chassis and the smaller diameter round shape of the Mk3.  Plus the placement of the threaded inserts for mounting the two tables is slightly different, if I recall correctly.  Most of the best aftermarket Mk2 and Mk3 plinths are custom fitted to either one or the other chassis, but not both.  Now I am writing this, I think perhaps the factory obsidian plinths might be cross compatible by virtue of the use of inserts at the corners, so as to convert the square hole for the Mk2 into a round hole for the Mk3.  I know I saw that somewhere, long ago.  Anyway, I think Chakster has the details above.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Downunder, In your above post, are you suggesting that Technics ought to offer the option of SP10R + plinth but no tonearm?  If so, I was thinking the same thing myself.  Perhaps that will come eventually.  Because there might also be a market for the plinth alone, to use with an SP10 Mk3.  I would imagine the new plinth kills the old obsidian plinths that Technics supplied with the Mk2 and 3.  This is assuming that the old tables will bolt right into the new plinth. Well, at least the Mk3, because the Mk2 has a different shape underneath from the Mk3 and 10R.

To belabor the capacitor issue once more, I once replaced all the electrolytic capacitors in an SP10 Mk2.  There are 21 of them, as I recall.  Mk2s are now around 38 years old.  What are the odds that all 21 of those capacitors are still fully up to spec after circa 38 years, if they are still OEM?  (As you might imagine, my opinion is that the odds are slim.) By the way also, the cost of those capacitors was probably less than $25US.  I’d say it was a precaution well worth taking.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
I wish I hadn’t written that, only because I dislike categorical statements as much as you do, Nicola.

on the issue of replacing capacitors, those who scoff remind me of those who deny climate change. Aged electrolytic capacitors eventually WILL leak either electrically or physically. It’s a fact, not an opinion. You’re probably better off with a well worn unit that has seen continuous regular use than with a mint condition unit that sat in a box in someone’s house for 35 years and looks like new, when it comes to the risk of a lytic going bad or already being bad.

My mk3 was NOS, but it had a few bad caps when I bought it. Case in point.

lewm
13,476 posts
 
Chakster, TT101 is not better than mk3. No matter how much you may wish it.
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Not too many of those $1200 to $1400 SP10 Mk2s have already been refurbished, freshened with new electrolytic capacitors where needed, and calibrated by someone who knows what they are doing.  That’s what bugs me when I read that someone compared this or that vintage DD turntable to their favorite belt-drive or whatever, and found the DD to be second best.  Most of the DDs floating around out there for sale are in unknown condition, even if they “work”.

Good idea to do the Krebs mod on the Mk2.  IMO, the Mk2 potentially benefits from the Krebs even more than does the Mk3, and yet the mod is less expensive when applied to the Mk2.  (I had it done to my Mk3 by Bill Thalmann.  I was surprised at the improvement, because I heard no real “problem” related to the issue that Krebs addresses, a priori. Whereas, I think I could hear why the Mk2 would benefit, back when I owned one.)
lewm
13,476 posts
 
Pani, thank you for your detailed report.  The Technics on those AT footers is very different from the very same turntable placed into a massive plinth.  You heard the Mk2 one of the two ways it should be used.  True, the “no-plinth” approach has its staunch advocates, and there are long threads in which the question of how to mount the Mk2 was argued back and forth.  But you might continue to explore the set-up of the Mk2, if you want to go all the way with your comparison.  Also, you’ve done nothing to rank the Mk3 in the mix; it’s a totally different animal from the Mk2, IMO.  I agree with you on the RS Labs RS-A1 tonearm; it’s quite surprisingly good and very “musical”.

As an aside, can you comment on the condition of your Mk2? Was it refurbished and calibrated before you bought it?
More to discover