Thoughts on moving from a 1200G to Sota Saphire or above

1) If you want another turntable in your listening room - it’s fine, I have 6 turntables, but I only use 2 of them and they are identical (Luxman PD-444)

2) But if you’re not happy with the sound and looking for something else you’d better start buying different cartridges, not turntables!

You can also change Technics tonearm on your SL1200G, Reed tonearm would be nice (definitely better than stock Technics tonearm).

I really doubt you will be able to hear the difference between MOTORS, what you will hear is the difference between tonearms.

You can see many different cartridges, tonearms, turntables in my SYSTEM ONE and in my SYSTEM TWO here on audiogon in virtual system galleries. My next stop after several Technics turntables was Luxman PD-444, then Victor TT-101, then Denon DP-80 ... 

Classic idler like 301 are beautiful indeed, but “musicality” is subjective. 

For better “dynamics” we need a high efficient speakers. 

Turntable drive function is to spin your record on a constant speed. 

Not everyone has an extraordinary hearing ability, especially at certain age. 

There is no doubt that you can improve your turntable by changing the tonearm. I replaced the arm on my Technics 1200G with a Glanz and the improvements were notable.

Did you try any Glanz cartridges? @dionisofun

Thanks for reminding about GLANZ, I enjoyed Glanz MF cartridges for a long time, but never tried their tonearms, Glanz is back in business, so let me posts some additional information from my old notes:

Glanz is a brand that has been producing Cartridges and Tonearms masterpieces for many years, and has been adored by audio lovers for a very long time.

Mr. Masataka Hamada who was the developer of “GLANZ” at Mitachi Acoustics, has resurrected “GLANZ” within his own company, Hamada Electric. A legendary brand is reborn! New Glanz tonearms appeared in the market recently. The head office is located in Numazu City, Shizuoka, JAPAN.

Glanz tonearms are manufactured by Hamada Electric and exported by Sibatech Inc.

Mitachi Acoustics for whom Mr. Hamada developed various analog products and was founded in 1951 under the brand name Glanz and closed in 2003. In 1980 Hamada-San established Hamada Electric and secured the Glanz brand license from the Mitachi family in 2008.

Quote from the advertising literature:

"Beyond time Glanz’s legend has been revived. Many long-established audio manufacturers have vanished since analog audio entered its glacial epoch with the advent of digital. Against this tide Glanz issued products such as tone arms and phono cartridges favored by audiophiles to survive with its ingenious technology. The birth of an ultimate tone arm—the Glanz — proves the real advantage of analog audio and talks of its regeneration."

"After engaging in the development of Mitachi Onkyo, I spent many years doing jobs such as repairing Ortofon’s SPU series cartridges. During this period, I learned a great deal from the audio fans, who talked about their dissatisfaction, and made suggestions concerning the various tonearms that were being sold around the world. Armed with this information, THE GLANZ tonearm was designed and manufactured to faithfully reproduce “sound”. My policy is to pursue “original pure sound”. Our company’s products are aiming for the top. “Original pure sound” is the pinnacle! The sound produced by the current electronics industry is far removed from “original pure sound”, but when I air my opinion about this, I am considered ‘eccentric’! I am therefore keen to get to know other people who agree, even a little bit, with my ideas." - Hamada-San (Glanz).


****

It’s time to spread the light (AGAIN) on some of the very best Moving Flux cartridges made by Mitachi Corporation in Japan. This cartridge is the Glanz MFG-61 with Boron Cantilever and special design "PH" stylus tip. This is not a typical vintage MM/MI or MC, the patent for unique Moving Flux technology belongs to Mr Tsugikuma Minamizono (Japan). Mitachi Corporation made some very nice MF cartridges in the 70s/80s for US/Canadian brand Astatic, for French Jamo and for Italian Azzurra. But for the domestic Japanese brand, technical engineers of Mitachi Corporation designed the ultimate Moving Flux model in 1982. The Glanz MFG-61 is stand alone cartridge, the most prestige model among Glanz MF cartridges, employs BORON cantilever in order to achieve maximum efficiency at the electro-magnetic mechanism, where characterized most advanced feature of MF cartridge, when the energy is converted from mechanical vibration system to electric vibration system. BORON is considered as an ideal material of cantilever in its character that transmits sound as fast as 7 times than Aluminum, due to its large young rate and small specific gravity. With use of Boron cantilever, the signal picked up from disc to specially designed PH stylus tip is faithfully transferred to the conversion system, and hi-fidelity sound reproduced. The rest of the MF cartridges made by Mitachi for other brands do not have such cantilever and diamond. This fact makes my Glanz MFG-61 highly collectible. This is the best sounding Moving Flux cartridge. Find one in my virtual system.

About 10-11g if I remember correct (you can change it a bit with different headshells), $3k is a lot for a cartridge, you can buy amazing cartridges within $3k budget (including some killer NOS), just don’t buy a low compliance carts for this tonearm! And don’t afraid to look for MM and MI (there are some decent carts under $1.5k)

You’d better try it yourself in your system (if you can compare both), but, again, if you want a better sound you just need a different cartridge for your G, not a different turntable. For quite modest price you can completely change the sound and the whole impression of your Technics turntable will change, believe me (I did it many times). 

If you want a different look of your turntable then it’s another story. 

removable head shell kills it for me.

For you, but not for me, nearly all Japanese tonearms have a removable headshell (or even removable armtube with integrated headshell), it’s an amazing feature to swap cartridges for those who have many cartridges.

It’s much more difficult on my Reed 3p for example (check my system)

If you have many mono LPs, and want to swap regularly a mono cart and a stereo cart...that makes sense. But many of us would benefit more getting the best cart we can and using it all the time.

This is so stuid idea for people with many mono records, all they need is a dedicated tonearm for mono!

There is no such thing as “the best cart” and this is a big problem, without trying many cartridges peole have no idea which one is the best in their systems. For many people the most expensive and “the best” is the same thing. 


Additional headshell pins and even a DIN connector on a tonearm will not change the sound of a great tonearm/cartridge.

Don’t overestimate the problem, nearly all modern cartridges are made for modern tonearm. Carts are mid compliance and tonearms are mid mass. Most of high compliance carts are high-end vintage MM and MI, most of low compliance carts are vintage MC. Very few new carts are low compliance (SPU for example), but they are definitely not for Technics mid mass tonearm. This arm is amazing for mid and high compliance MM and MI, and modern mid compliance MC. 

But cartridges are different and for your ears one specific cart can be much better than others. If you did not compare many then your Ortofon can be not the best for your ears (theoretically). 

I’ve been playing my mono LP’s the last couple days by installing my dedicated mono cart (and headshell) to my Jelco 850 arm.

So it’s a benefit of a tonearm with removable headshell. But without this option of your Jelco on SOTA turntable (that can’t accommodate second tonearm) it will be a nighmare to swap a cartridge on a tonearm without removable headshell each time you want to play a MONO LP with dedicated mono cart.

So my generalization (that physical connectors DO make a difference with LOMCs) does not hold up 100% even in my experience. That’s another reason why I was wondering about your level of certainty.

Here on audiogon people always ask simple questions about cartridges, tonearms, turntables. Reading some of the questions I found that most of the people may not have an exceptional hearing ability to detect any difference between direct soldering or a wire with several collectors on the signal path, they are not reviewers and not trained to act like a computer. I don’t think I have an exceptional hearing ability at my age (45), but I can’t detect the difference! If some reviewers can detect a big difference at the age of 60-70 then I think they are super humans, well at least they are trained to detect it. The majority of audiophiles just repeat what reviewers said and as a result we have some funny statements that have nothing to do with reality. If it’s important for trained ears of reviewers with million dollar system, it’s not important for everyone. Maybe people will say that FR-64s or FR-66s is amazing tonearm, for the price for 66s it must be amazing (I don’t have this one, but I have long 66fx with FR-7f and fz LOMC and it’s an amazing tonearm to my ears with a removable shell and with a connector).

OP is a Technics user, this brand made tonearms with removable headshells, the best is probably EPA-100 mk2 (I have this one), their new reference tonearm is different, but there is a removable headshell. Long time ago they made EPA-500 with removable arm tubes (great feature too).

They did not try to make a new tonearm with a fixed headshell in the 21st century for some reason even for SL1000R.

Since you are drawn to MM and MI cartridges with output voltages way higher than 1mV, that may account for your personal experience.

@lewm

I’m not drawn to MM or MI at all, I have/had some amazing LOMC, such as: Miyabi Standard, Miyajima Kansui, Shelter 5000, EMT 75th Anniversary, Miyabi MCA, ZYX Premium 4D, ZYX Airy-3, Fidelity-Research FR-7fz, Victor MCL10, Grace Asakura-One, KLIPSCH MCZ-10, Ortofon SPU Spirit amd Royal G mk2, Supex, Ortofon MC2000 … is that enough? I have more MC cartridges in my collection and I like them a lot!

What is the reason for you to say that I’m drawn to MM or MI or anything at 1mv or higher (even if I like the usability and sound of MM) ??? I have all types of cartridges (phono stages, suts, headamps), many tonearms and turntables to compare them all in my system. I’ve been doing it weekly since 2011 (I even uploaded 100 images in my virtual system for the first time after my 11 years of membership on a’gon). Of course you will not find $10k cartridges, $15k tonearms and $30k turntables in my system. 

In fact I bought my €5000 Reed 3p 12 inch (earlier version with fixed shell) a long time ago, before I discovered FR-66fx or EPA-100 mk2 and related vintage Japanese tonearms with removable headshells. I have MORE FUN using all those Japanese classics than modern Reed 3p.

Put FR-64s or FR-66fx (you don’t have this one) agaist any modern tonearm like Reed, TriPlanar … whatever and you will head that DIN and removable headshell have ZERO EFFECT on the quality of FR top of the line tonearms (if you have a good cartridge).

I’m sick when people repeat high-end propaganda. It’s not as simple as some people would like to represent it.

KAB is a USA-based company who've generated quite a following with their SL1200 upgrades. Their are many threads here and on other forums with 1200 owners trading tips & experiences regarding which upgrades were most impactful.

This wave of excitement kind of died down when the G was introduced, as I believe a number of the enhancements were accounted for by Technics in the new build.

Definitely, because KAB upgrades are for cheap and old SL1200 mk2, mk3, mk5 and related popular models from the past. Those models cost no more than $300 secondhand and that was a price tag for decades. KAB never specialized in upgrades for high-end SP-10 mk2 or related models.

There is nothing to upgrade the reference turntable in SL1200 series, such as SL1200G with retail price nearly $4k.

For audiophiles an upgrade is always an option. Tonearm upgrade is an expensive upgrade, to beat new Technics tonearm you could pay more than new "G" turntable. If one thinks about different tonearms then SP-10R is much better for that needs, because the SL1200G was introduced as a complete turntable.    

BTW the most popular tonearm upgrade for old (cheap) SL1210mkII and related was Jelco. I don't think for the new SL1200G the Jelco is better than the stock "G" series magnesium tonearm.

SME is probably in the same price category as Reed, but not better in my opinion, Reed is the most beautiful (and fully adjustable). They may not have a proper distribution in the USA and hence not as popular in America as much as old British SME and TriPlanar, but Reed is an amazing tonearm than available with different arm tubes (different mass) and different length.

I have a pictures of Reed on Technics SP10 mkII in my System TWO.
Upgraded Sl1210mkII and SP-10 mkII are in my older System ONE.

Nothing will give you more than another cartridge without changing anything else in your system. 


Room treatment can give you a lot. Room analysis is FREE at https://www.acousticfields.com/

I read recently that a low capacitance cable also help with carts. Any suggestions other than Fire IC’s that make good RCA to RCA phono IC’s?

try this (you can return them for full refund if you don't like them, it’s their policy)

Try SAEC SS-300 mat, you can easily use it with any clamp on Technics.
It equally good on SP-10 mkII

Phono cable can be RCA to RCA and mr_m posted in Technics thread, phono cable for “G” is RCA to RCA and easily can be confused with regular interconnect cable. The main difference of a phono cable is shield, an unshielded cable can pick up a radio signal, if you don’t want to hear a radio station in your speakers use shielded phono cables.

It’s about Shielded vs. Unshielded cables, not about the separate ground wire @mr_m

Original mat for SP10 mkII is rubber mat, I think this is the worst mat ever.

Below is an interesting article from SAEC engineers about mats in general (including rubber mats) and their own Solid Mat (perfect for Technics btw). 

FROM THE ORIGINAL SAEC SS-300 (ENGLISH) MANUAL:

The conventional turntable mat is made of soft material such as rubber, in the belief that soft cushion will effectively filter out vibrations between the turntable and puck-up stylus.

***A lesson from an old tradition:
In certain Buddhist ceremonies a bell or wood block is used which sits on a cushion. The cushion, being softer than the bell or wood block, does not prevent the instrument from ringing when it is struck. It merely dampens the vibrations somewhat so that they are of shorter duration (that is, they decay faster) than in the case of a bell or wood block suspended in the air.

The record disc and turntable platter used in conjunction with a soft mat are in state resembling that of the bell or wood block on a cushion. As the stylus oscillates in the record groove, the disc having a certain elasticity, it causes it to vibrate slightly. Depending on the size and other physical properties of the disc, these pulsations vary in frequency from 100 Hz to 400Hz. If the turntable mat is softer than the record disc, it will deform along with the vibrations of the disc. The Sympathetic vibrations are of sufficient amplitude to cause an audible low resonance peculiar to record playing. Likewise the turntable platter, when a soft mat is used, vibrates sympathetically and contributes to the problem of low resonance.

***A classically simple solution:

After two years of development, the audio engineers at SAEC have produced a completely new turntable mat which solves the problems of the conventional soft mat. The new SS-300 Solid Mat is of material harder than any record disc. Placed directly on the turntable platter, the Solid Mat by its mass and hardness cancels sympathetic vibration of the platter. Likewise a record disc in immediate contact with the Solid Mat is prevented from vibrating. Whereas the conventional soft mat merely damps sympathetic vibrations, the Solid Mat reduces these vibrations by 10 to 15dB compared to the conventional mat, thus effectively eliminating the problem of low resonance.

***We did it our own way:

This new component brings us an important step closer to realizing a technical ideal of record-playing. For a record to be reproduced perfectly, the stylus and its cantilever must oscillate with no interference from vibrations of the other record-playing components. Thus not only the headshell and tonearm but also the turntable platter and record disc itself should be completely oscillating.

The famous SAEC tonearms with their patented Double Knife Edge design are the only tonearms made that have solved the problem of tonearm resonance. This was accomplished by radical departure from conventional approaches.

Again with the SS-300 Solid Mat, SAEC has turned conventional wisdom on its head to solve the problem of record and turntable resonance.


*** Turntable Solid mat. Model SS-300:

The holes in the mat are made not to cause resonance in the radiant direction on the plane of the turntable.

Aluminum alloy - using special surface treatment (rough surface).
The solid mat is so shaped that may be used for many representative record players and turntables.

The resonance of a turntable itself (resonant sound from turntable), which could not be eliminated by the conventional type turntable mat made of soft material like rubber, is prevented by using the SS-300 solid mat, which creates a state of non-resonance through its interaction at its critical point.

The Solid Mat must be placed directly on the turntable platter. Do not use a soft mat between the Solid Mat and the turntable platter, since the Solid Mat will then be caused to resonate either independently of or jointly with the soft mat. Similarly do not place a soft mat between the Solid Mat and the record disc!

Under ordinary conditions there will be no problem of slippage, since the SS-300 Solid Mat has a special non-slip surface.


Do not place a stabilizer weight on the record disc, as this will deform the disc and reduce the effectiveness of the Solid Mat.

Use reasonable care in placing records on the Solid Mat. Do not place/remove records while the turntable is rotating.

Do not drop the Solid Mat, since any crack or deformation will reduce its effectiveness.

I paid $1200 for my SP-10mk2 drive in mint condition, it was about 7 years ago. If you want two tonearms it must be at least ‘10.5 or ‘12 inch tonearms (otherwise you can’t mount them). Old SME (if not a ‘12 inch) are the ugliest on that deck in my opinion. Look at SP-10 mk2 in my virtual system, you will see many different tonearms on it: EPA-100 (‘10.5), Schick (‘12), Reed (‘12) … This is great turntable, especially with Micro CU-180 mat! However, for dual arms Luxman PD-444 is much better turntable (I sold Technics when I bought Luxman). Here is one for sale.



If you want SP-10 mk2 then $1500 is a fair price for the drive alone (without plinth or tonearm). If the seller in an amateur then your turntable can be damaged during transit. Platter must be removed and motor must be fixed with special board with screws. The drive is heavy!


You could service SP-10 mk2 at Fidelis Analog.

SP-10mk2 drive cost $1500 maximum! With old SME tonearm and some unknown custom plinth for $3500 it’s too much! All you need is drive, the rest you can buy yourself (better tonearm and better plinth).

For $3500 you could buy Luxman PD-444 (complete)

Technics SP-10mk3 drive alone is about $5000 minimum, usually higher

Also, for the 1200G owners what geometry do you all use to set up your carts. I have a Feickert system and have three choices: Baerwald, Logren or Stevenson. Thx.

Technics tonearm alignment method is very close to Stevenson, but not exactly Stevenson. You can stick to 52mm using that Technics plastic overhang gauge, or you can try Baerwald using your Dr.Feickert protractor. Try to detect any difference! 

Regarding cart @chakster, I appreciate the feedback. I’ve kind of built my system to accommodate the low output of the Cadenza Black and would like to stay in that performance range. To compare, I may order a cart from a place I can return if it doesn’t best the Cadenza.

1) How can you return a new cartridge after it’s been opened and used?

2) Who will give you this option and why ?

3) Are they gonna sell your used cartridge again as new or they will burn over $1k+ this way just for fun ?

I believe no one will give you "return" option for any cartridge if this cartridge is not a factory defective unit (warranty issue only).

Weak points of the 1200G are tonearm, bearing and power supply. All can be upgraded here - http://www.soundhifi.com/sl1200/Timestep%20Technics%20EVOke%20%20SL-1200GAE%202018.htm

Same old BS.

Some companies are always happy to sell something for astronomical prices, but Technics completely rebuilt their production line a long time ago when the GAE was introduced. Companies that offered an upgrade for an old $400 Technics SL1200 series continue to sell same BS for brand new "G" series.

Technics is not REGA, Pro-Ject or Linn, for those companies buyers are a slave of constant upgrade.

There is nothing weak in Technics SL1200 G and tonearm is excellent, any better tonearm will cost more than the entire turntable!

In fact Technics tonearms are the best in the world, for those who don’t know I’d like to remind about EPA-100 mkII which was Technics top of the line tonearm and today it will be better than so many overpriced high-end toneamrs.

So it’s obvious that for better tonearm one needs a SP-10R (not SL1200G).

I’d like to admit that so many audiophile never paid attention to Technics products, they noticed Technics AFTER Mr. Fremer reviewed it when Technics returned to business with new turntables. Mr. Fremer actually compared Technics (without any mods) to one of his most expensive turntable, soundfiles were uploaded for everyone.

British companies will always push those ugly SME tonearms "as an upgrade" for everything, but you should really understand what is Technics and what is SME.

@chakster , I set up the new table to Lofgren B and I very much like it. Most modern pressings do not go in as far. Very few records go in farther than 65 mm and at 65mm Lofgren B has the same harmonic distortion it has at 90mm, 0.03% Lower than all alignments over the vast majority of the record. This is also the first time I used the SmarTractor. What a beautifully made device. I didn’t even bother with the magnifier it is so easy to read with the naked eye and a bright light. They should sell the magnifier as an option to bring the price down.

@mijostyn

I use different methods with my two Luxman PD-444 turntables and 4 different toneamrs in my main system now. I use Dr. Feickert NG protractor.

I don’t care about modern pressings, because 90% of my records are vintage (mainly ’70s).

Stevenson’s alignment method was the last of those 3, this is a modern method compared to the very old Baerwald or Lofrgen invented a long time before stereo or even before proper vinyl pressing.

In the 60’s Stevenson invented his method for CLASSICAL MUSIC and he explained very well why - to take into account that on records with classical music very often crescendos occur towards the innermost grooves.

Japanese tonearm manufacturers have been using Stevenson method ever since, it’s not mandatory, everyone can change it to Baerwald. But when I set up any tonearm I want to head with standard manufacturer settings. Some of my tonearms designed with Baerwald method (like Reed 3p), some designed with unique method (not Baerwald, not Stevenson). Some tonearms like FR-64fx are great with Stevenson and I will never change that. And I don’t listen to classical music at all.

Very few old records go in farther than 65mm.

If you want to know there are at least about 10mm of music on the record surface on most of the 45 rpm (’7 inch) singles, the song ends at 53-55mm from the spindle (not as far as 65mm). On average ’7 inch single pressed in the ’50s/60’s (I just measured some of mine) the last 10mm before lead out groove is 1/3 of a song and there is music.

Mr. Stevenson was a mathematician, I can’t explain why till the present day Japanese tonearm manufacturers prefer Stevenson (or very close to Steventon) geometry. There must be a reason, right ?

I do not share your taste in tonearms but a lot of other people do.

Of course they do, because you will hardly find any better tonearm than boron/titanium Technics EPA-100 mkII or Fidelity-Research FR-66fx. You have never tried them yet @mijostyn

I do not play, and I would venture to guess most of us do not play 7" singles. That is a non issue for most of us.

@mijostyn

I’m following AudioGrail on instagram, he often plays Vintage 45s. The British always paid more attention to American heritage than Americans. Audiophiles actually play vintage 45s, not everything available on LPs.

But I have mentioned 45s, because in the 60’s (when Stevenson invented his alignment method) it was a Radio Broadcast format and Japanese tonearm/turntable manufacturers like Denon, Technics, Grace supplied tonearms/turntables for Radio Stations (professional segment of hi-fi market).

Those arms were by products of the late 60s. Everybody except the Japanese have moved on.

If this is your opinion on two tonearms in my previous reply then I want to tell you that Technics EPA-100 mkII and FR-66fx were introduced in the MID 80’s (they are NOT a product of the 60’s). They are both highly regarded today and go for $3k - $6k. 

Those tonearms are terrible. Because of their mass they have much higher levels of inertia and distortion, they are not neutral balance and their vertical bearings are high above the record surface. They are very pretty and have an air of precision about them.

EPA-100 mkII (10.5 inch) and FR-66fx (12 inch) are NOT high mass tonearms, especially Technics. Both are excellent for any modern LOMC cartridges if you want to know. The EPA-100 mkII is the most versatile tonearm ever made (because of dynamic damping and all these features).

New British SME and Slovenian Kuzma are two ugliest tonearms on the planet in my opinion.

Stevenson may have been a mathematician but in todays world his theory is wrong. Modern cartridges and styluses have much less difficulty with the inner grooves and all you have to do is look at the data. It is pretty obvious that Stevenson has the highest levels of error across the board.

I actually compared Stevenson to Baerwald on my turntables, but you said you never compared those alignment methods.

The only time Stevenson might make sense is if you are running an SPU in one of those tank tonearms. You would then be replicating the conditions Stevenson knew. A picture tells a thousand words: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/uni-din-versus-l%C3%B6fgren-b-just-clarify

According to this article every tonearm manufacturer must use UNI-DIN instead of Baerwald, but they don’t care and keep using Baerwald and Stevenson.

Also looking at this article you can say that only Linear Tracking tonearm is good, but how many people actually use them?

I wouldn’t even touch the RUBY BALL bearings on Technics EPA-100, especially on EPA-100 mkII. There are people who are always ready "to sell you an improvement", someone in his garage pretending to have better knowledge than Matsushita Japan. The EPA-100 mkII was the best Technics tonearm in the ’80s and still one of the best tonearms ever made!

I have owned several samples of EPA-100 and EPA-100 mkII in the past 5 years, they are all fantastic, I kept only EPA-100 mkII for myself and sold 3 EPA-100 models to justify the extremely high cost of the MK II in mint condition.

My first EPA-100 was refurbished (rewired) in 2012. After rewiring there was a ground issue, the reason for rewiring was loose bearings, so I believe Foxtan (ebay seller in Hong Kong) asked his tech to replace the ruby ball bearings with silicone for me, after I complained about quality. I would’s refurbish EPA-100 (NEVER AGAIN)! I wouldn’t change the original ruby ball bearings if they are fine (all samples I bought after the incident are just fine).

Rewired sample with (VdH silver tonearm wires) and new silicone bearings was the worst sample I have ever owned!

FIRST OF ALL: Find vintage tonearms in NOS condition, fully functional as new.
I just don’t buy beaten, worn, broken garbage !! I only buy stuff that I can plug and play without any expensive refurbishing BS and snake oil promises.

If you can’t find a NOS sample - don’t buy vintage gear. Pay more to get NOS and you will be fine. This is my policy, my style.

Leave the garbage for someone else.

People charge absolutely insane prices for refurbishing in the USA, it’s better to pay more for a rare NOS (unused) item anyway.

I know very rich people who can buy all that new high-end gear, but they don’t want it, what they actually want is vintage NEW OLD STOCK (preferably still factory sealed) and they want only the best stuff.