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.
|
@atmasphere, I was using the mat that comes with Sp10 mk2. Sounded better than any other mat I tried on 1200G. But my overall impression of dynamics did not change. |
One of the great benefits of hooking up a cartridge in balanced mode to a balanced phono stage is the total lack of hum problems. I have been doing this for decades, and I have never experienced a problem with hum using any of many cartridges. However, if you do have hum and everything is grounded to everything, then I usually start by removing some of those ground connections and listening as I go. Sometimes the grounding scheme can generate ground loops which actually cause the hum.. |
lewm,
Thanks for your explanations. Wasn't my intent to second guess you as my electical expertise is very limited at best.
I had a very bad ground hum problem with my TT awhile back, and found going from a cheap switching power supply to a linear power supply solved the problem. Go figure. |
2. Dynamics: Everything sounded smaller and controlled in 1200G compared
to the other TTs. The explosive dynamics were missing. The SP10mk2 was
better. The idlers were simply in a different league. My previous TT was
a Platine Verdier and that too had an effortless seemingly unlimited
dynamics. 1200G sounds puny compared to them. If that's your concern
then no tonearm or cart upgrade will cure it.
@pani I ran into this with the stock SL1200G too, but I solved it by replacing the platter pad- its not a drive issue. The rubber one supplied with the 'table is too soft and since the stylus is exerting 1,000's pounds/square inch on the vinyl, its important that the pad support it properly or dynamic impact is reduced. I've used the Oracle pad with good results. But it has an adhesive backing so you can't install the hardware fixing the platter to the motor. But as long as you have gravity that isn't a problem. |
|
Mrm, I tried to answer the question you seemed to be asking. Incidentally, all hum is AC by definition. I inferred that sometimes you can reduce hum, if hum is a problem, by NOT grounding the TT/ tonearm to the phono stage. Also, note that the trade off for shielding is increased capacitance. The first thing I would want to try is low capacitance unshielded cables that are kept as short as possible between the tonearm and the phono stage. It is not a given that every unshielded cable will bring in RF interference. That is something you can experiment with in your home environment. If you can get away without shielding, then you have reduced the total capacitance of the cable, for any given length. |
Hey Chakster, I was actually looking at those Zu cables this week. They seem reasonably priced and I like the return policy. Speaking of return policy, I’m probably going to order a cart from Music Direct because I can return/exchange a cart if I don’t like it. I’m targeting a brand where I can get the cart rebuilt by the company when it wears out. In my price range it’s the Van Den Hul Frog, Soundsmith low output and the Kiseki Purple Heart. Also open to options under $3K. |
Ortofon tonearm cable. Reasonable and nice |
I should have made myself a bit more clear. The ground wires on the IC's are more or less used to reduce AC induced hum. As Chakster said shielding is important in helping reduce radio signals and other electrical noise pollutants from coming through your speakers.
Thank you too, Jim. Your input as well as advice are always helpful! :-))) |
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) |
Hi Tim - My SOTA / Sumiko FT-3 came w Sumiko din to 2xrca plus ground wire box. Lew is spot on, some experiments w various ground schemes recommended to get best performance. i do have a Nordost Rca to rca that i use w integral wire for grounding. AQ Fire w a seperate ground wire sounds better.
ideally i should have had tonearm wired in one continuous run from headshell to phono inputs…..like my Triplaner.. |
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? |
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.
|
Mr m, dedicated phono cables meant only to be used between a tonearm and a phono stage input, usually have a female DIN plug at the tonearm end. A DIN plug mates with a male DIN to be found at the base of the tonearm, and it contains five connections, two for right channel hot and ground, two more for left channel hot and ground, and the fifth connection makes contact with the body of the tonearm. That fifth connection is what you see as an external ground wire, and it is meant to be connected to the external ground lug on a typical phono stage. Some tonearm/turntable combinations offer a pair of RCA outputs. In that case one can use conventional ICs. As you noted, those don’t give an external ground connection per se. In that case the only grounds are the Audio grounds. If your tonearm offers RCA outputs, then you might consider adding a secondary wire that you can attach anywhere on the tonearm or to a metal part of the turntable and then to the ground lug on the phono stage. Sometimes that is not needed. In fact, sometimes you’re better off without it. |
It’s about Shielded vs. Unshielded cables, not about the separate ground wire @mr_m |
I have heard/read that a special phono IC with ground wires be used from turntable to phono stage due to the extremely small signal coming from the cartridge. I had used a conventional IC from the TT at first, and noticed a big improvement switching to a dedicated phono cable.
Can anyone else confirm this as I have heard others using just conventional IC's. |
Water is the bare minimum, IMO
|
|
@pani limited dynamics could be a product of the table. I guess the only way to know would be to bring another one in my system to compare so need to see if I can swing that financially. Would be fun to do an A/B test. Maybe that’s what I’ll do with the Sota or another table. Right now the Sota intrigues me the most. I played an album on my 1200G yesterday and noticed the vinyl had a slight warp and was thinking the Sota would flatten that record out. I have a Funk Achromat on my 1200G and it doesn’t leave enough spindle to place a clamp on top which would help some with warped records. |
There must be something wrong with me. Maybe I need to smoke more weed? |
I forgot to mention, the 1200G dug out more micro details than my Garrard |
@bfoura, I have used the 1200G with Timestep mod and tried couple of tonearms on them too. I used it along side a Loricraft Garrard 301, Jean Nantais Reference Lenco Mk2 (still use it) & SP10 Mk2. Everything in the same room, same system. I particularly dislike SMPS & Wallwart PSUs so I had the Timestep motor controller. The 1200G is a fantastic TT if you don't hear it's flaws. It sounds clean, times very well, no-nonsense.
But having other TTs in the room and being accustomed to idlers and BDs I heard 2 distinct drawbacks:
1. The note to note transition was not fluid, a start-stop feel.
2. Dynamics: Everything sounded smaller and controlled in 1200G compared to the other TTs. The explosive dynamics were missing. The SP10mk2 was better. The idlers were simply in a different league. My previous TT was a Platine Verdier and that too had an effortless seemingly unlimited dynamics. 1200G sounds puny compared to them. If that's your concern then no tonearm or cart upgrade will cure it.
But 1200G still has its pluses. I have not heard the SOTA but reading about it I do get a feeling it would be nice. Nottingham Analogue Hyperspace is also a good choice. |
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/ |
Not fussy is one of the attributes I like about the 1200G too. I would say it’s neutral. I think dynamic is the descriptor where I’m looking for more. But, other things could contribute to that like cart, preamp, speakers, etc. I listened to a couple other album sides using the AQ Water IC from phono to preamp and with the other two album sides I could here a more dynamic presentation compared with the IC I use regularly. I can’t help but think how what the improvement would be with another Water going from phono preamp to line stage. Investing in two Water IC’s would be close to $1400 for me. I know there would be an improvement but from a cost benefit ratio, not sure I would hear $1400 of improvement. If I were to move on to more phono specific IC’s I’d look at companies that allow for an upgrade at most or all of original purchase value like with Transparent Cable or similar.
|
Personally, I’d play with different cartridges before moving on from your current table. I’d question that a table upgrade alone at $10k will make a bigger difference. I’d go cartridge, then preamp before a different table. But I love your table. I have the GAE. it’s so strong, neutral, dynamic, and not fussy. |
@lewm,
"The audio establishment sold us the idea that headshells were inherently unstable mounted at the end of an arm wand, so now we’ve got a lot of expensive tonearms with fixed headshells. Around the same time they sold us the idea that bass and treble controls and loudness controls were mucking up the sound quality of our music, so they’ve been deleted. Rightly or wrongly these “innovations” that were near to universally adopted have certainly reduced the cost of manufacture, while prices have gone skyward."
Same thing happening with phones and chargers - its green, and it’s good for the planet etc.
Similar thing happened in the 1990s when the loudspeaker manufacturers jumped on the MDF bandwagon.
As usual it’s nothing more or less than about reducing manufacturing costs and maximising profits.
The tricky bit is selling this reduction of choice/lack of freedom to the customer.
This is where the clever marketing comes in.
Some of the best arms ever built had removeable headshells. |
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. |
If I were going for a $10,000 TT upgrade, I would really look into a new SP10r with whatever Tonearm (or two) that looks appealing. From what I've read, the SP10 is about the most speed accurate TT motor one can find. I have a 1200gr and the speed is dead on. I hope to upgrade to a 1200G or higher one day |
Greetings. I have a fully modded 1200 mk ll with an SME 309 & a Hana ML cart.
I also have the 1210 GAE with the stock arm & a AT 150 MLX cart on that. Now both arms are in their own rite no slouches. In my system the Hana is a lil warmer sound then the AT. You can’t go wrong with the new Technics with the ease of adjustments. Both headshells are easy to swop out on my TT’s. Now I’m just curious if the SME would make a difference on the GAE.
I’m not that bored enough to find out rite now! Spend you money wisely, you can’t go wrong with the new Technics. |
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.
|
Yes, I agree, the 1200G arm is no slouch. If I wanted to upgrade I’ve learned of some nice arms to upgrade through this thread. In a previous post on this thread I mentioned having a AQ Earth IC on demo and would move it from the table to my phono preamp. It’s not an Earth but a Water IC. I also realized I had an AQ Sydney coming out of the table and not a McKenzie. I have a McKenzie going from the phono to the preamp. Anyhow, I replaced the Sydney with the Water and noticed a difference with one album side. Before I say conclusively it was the Water that moved the needle, I’m going to relisten to a couple of albums I played recently to see if there is a difference. I’ll share my findings later. |
IMO, a dead strobe bulb on an SP10 mk2 is no great loss and would not affect speed accuracy or servo function , I don’t think but could be wrong. (A question for JP.) Also, by saying I thought the SME V is superior to the stock G tonearm I certainly did not mean to denigrate the latter. I am sure it’s very good too. |
IMO, a dead strobe bulb on an SP10 mk2 is no great loss and would not affect function. Also, by saying I thought the SME V is superior to the stock G tonearm I certainly did not mean to denigrate the latter. I am sure it’s very good too. |
Tough question comparing the arms! The SME has been considered close to world class for many years. The Technics arm is new and sold only with that table, I think. We know from the EPA series that Technics can build a great arm when they decide to.
The Eclipse upgrade would be an option on the Sota. I love having the digital readout tach. Strobes on Technics have a limited life too. PITA to replace the lamp, at least for me it was on SP10mk2. Cheers,
Spencer
|
I like the arm on the G. Sounds pretty good to me. I also have no problems with dynamics on this table. I love the ease of use and the flexibility the table offers. after having this table for a while, I cannot see myself ever going back to belt drive unless it was an extremely high end belt drive. Its a very neutral sounding table. all recordings sound different as they should. |
in my opinion, the SOTA turntable would need the eclipse motor upgrade in order to get near to the SL1200 G in terms of speed stability. The electronic fly wheel business makes a nice story. On the other hand, the SMEV tonearm is almost certainly superior to the stock tonearm on the 1200 G. |
What’s the feedback on the 1200G arm vs. the SME V arm on the Sota I’m considering?
The owner also says the Sota has the electronic fly wheel and along with the latest generation motor. How would the latest fly wheel and motor compare to what’s offered on the 1200G? Thx. |
@bfoura,
Similar to Timestep, 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. I'm sure others with recent research on this can chime in. Cheers,
Spencer |
@lewm , @chakster , I do not think stability with removable head shells is a problem at all. They lock down tight. I do not like additional contacts with low level voltage devices and I do not like the additional mass it entails. Regardless of how light a removable head shell set up is it is lighter without it. I also do not like low compliance cartridges. Given the exact same stylus a low compliance cartridge will wear out records faster than a mid or high compliance cartridge. Just a fact of life. I also think more compliant cartridges generally track better. I think multiple tonearms and/or turntables is a better solution if you are using different cartridges for mono and certainly 78's. I did the multiple cartridge deal for years and what happened was I always listened to the one I liked best and the others sat hording money I could use for other purposes. I now have a collection of 78's to deal with and eventually I will record them all to the hard drive via Channel D's program. I already have a 78 cartridge for that purpose. I do not switch cartridges for the few mono records that I have mostly jazz from the early 50's. All this amounts to personal preference nothing more.
The Cosmos is on it's way. It will arrive this Tuesday. I have started prepping the arm. I fashioned a finger lift and a locking arm rest for the Schroder. Mr Schroder does not like extraneous stuff hanging off his tonearms. The arm rest will mount to the Sota's plinth and the finger lift was added to Schroder's cartridge mounting plate. |
No DIN. RCA on back. Been thinking about getting better IC’s for the TT/Phono Preamp/Amp. Not ready to spend $4,500 on one pair of interconnects. I’m demoing a pair of Earth I think makes a difference in my system but haven’t hooked them up to my table yet.
You think the Stillponts make a difference with the Herron? |
i also have my Herron on Stillpoints w HRS damping block on top. |
OP yes. Fire or better. Is your tonearm cable a DIN ? |
“I think you should spend $ on Fire Level or better IC out of table and phono, different cartridge and isolation for table. Maybe not in that order.” @tomic601 are you referring to AQ Fire interconnects? I couldn’t find a Fire Level interconnect doing a search. Only found the Fire IC’s.
|
@chakster, unfortunately I've never heard a Glanz cartridge. |
Thanks for sharing the sound hi fi link, @rogerstaton. Definitely something to consider. Always learn something new on Audiogon. |
@tomic601 i was thinking of upgrading my IC’s to phono preamp to amp. I just leaned about lower capacitance IC’s for TT’s, so they got me thinking if that could make an improvement. I have my 1200G on a Auralex isolation platforms for TT’s. Probably could upgrade that as their is a skip when I step too hard on this one section of my floor.
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. |
|
Of course it would. One of the reasons I liked the Jelco TS-850 MKII as my arm of choice with the SOTA Sapphire.
No complaints. Works for my set-up.
And the fact I’m not a big believer in a phono stage with a mono switch vs a dedicated mono cart. |
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. |
