I confess that I was biased against the GP Monaco because of its carbon fiber chassis. In general, I have not liked carbon fiber as used in vinyl reproduction. Also, the Monaco was deliberately low in mass; I have another bias in favor of high mass for direct-drive. This is not to say that I know I am right, and they were wrong. There's a good argument for low density/low mass, as well.
Shane (Downunder), I am rather surprised that the GT2000 so outperforms the Bardo. In this case, both use coreless motors, and I would not have thought that the Bardo would have audible "speed control" issues at all, certainly not in comparison to a vintage control circuit. Maybe he is hearing differences between the two that are caused by something other than imprecise speed control. (Or maybe his Bardo is "broken"?) |
So why did he sell the Monaco? (Presumably you refer to the Grand Prix Monaco, a turntable we once thought was "expensive" at $20,000 or so.) |
The other relevant comparison that I would like to see done is between the SP 10R or SL1000R and any of several modern direct drive turn tables that have hit the market in the last five years or so. One example is the VPI classic. Another is the Brinkmann Bardo.
|
tzh, Where does JP say he returned his 10R? Also, where does he say that the Mk3 sounded "better"? From what I read, he said the 10R very slightly outperformed the Mk3 in terms of measurements only and that the Mk3 is built better. He made no comment on SQ. Thanks, JP. |
The verbal description of the difference between the SP10R and the SP10 Mk3 SQ sounds to me like what I would describe as the difference between a coreless motor (in the 10R) and an iron core motor (in the Mk3). I run my (JP- and Krebs-modified) Mk3 right next to a Kenwood L07D (coreless motor), and the difference between those two, to my ears in my system, I would describe in about the same language. My conclusion is different, however. I don't say the Mk3 is "better", necessarily. There are certain qualities of the L07D that I find to be more mellifluous, at times when I notice the difference, although I'd have to say the Mk3 is a tiny notch above these days. Before JP and Krebs mods were applied, I'd say I preferred the L07D by maybe a hair. I had already come to believe that coreless motors are to be preferred in direct-drive, so I applaud Technics for going in that direction. |
And last year, Pani thought that the Audio Teknika ART9 was the greatest cartridge ever. (My deliberate exaggeration of his opinion.) This year he is on to something else and has sold the ART9 He is only human like you and I. Why hinge your thinking on his opinion? I don’t care how tweaked would be an SL 1210, the SL1200 G and the other new versions of the SL 1200 really have almost nothing in common structurally with the old line. Everything about the new series of SL 1200s is superior to the old. The only thing similar is the physical appearance from external view. From the get-go the SL 1210 motor, platter, and bearing just cannot compete with the motor, platter, and bearing of the new series.
|
Chakster, why are you waiting for a “proper“ review of the SL 1210 versus the SL 1200 G? in my view there is absolutely no way that the SL 1210 could possibly outperform the SL 1200 G. This is based just on knowing how the two turntables were built, what kind of motor each uses, and a general Gestalt of each product. If a reviewer were to claim that the SL 1210 outperformed the SL 1200 G, then I would question the reviewers capabilities, his ears, his system. It would not change my mind. The comparison between the SL 1200 G and the SP 10 mark2– is a closer thing, but there too I would expect the high-end model of the SL 1200 G to outperform the mark2 by at least a little bit. The Mark III is in a different world entirely. The best comparison to that would be the SP 10R. My impression is that the two turntables would be very very close in terms of any audible differences. This is why I did not buy a 10R when I was in Tokyo. I am very happy with my Mark III, and I am through chasing rainbows. Of course, my Mark III is in a 90 pound slate and Wood plinth that I designed for myself and built with professional input, and it has been subjected to the Krebs modification.
|
Chakster, What you say about tax is true in Tokyo. Only the big stores, however, want to be bothered with the paperwork needed in order not to charge the tax. And one would need to present a valid passport, of course. Of all the stores I have so far visited, only Yodibashi Camera, an enormous department store that sells everything from audio to cameras to kitchen and bath appliances to etc., are willing to sell tax-free. Someone told me it amounts to 8%, but I would want to verify that. So you could take the price in yen and divide by ~1.1 to account for the value of the dollar vs the yen. Then deduct 8% from that amount, I guess. I am not feeling the urge or the need to indulge myself with the SP10R. We are here to spend time with our son; that’s most important.
No sooner did I buy the Oyaide HS-CF than I read that there is an even more expensive CF headshell made by Oyaide, called the HS-TF. It’s a silvery color, and I have seen it before for sale on line. Not much info is available on line to discuss the differences, except I think the one I bought is made of layers of plastic and CF, not 100% CF.
|
As you know, I have a Reed 2A, 10.5-inch, on my Mk3. I lust a bit for the 3P. I think this new pivoting/SL tonearm is called the 5T. It seems to work like the Schroeder LT; the base moves as the tonearm traverses the LP, so as to maintain a straight path from the outermost groove to the spindle. Headshell offset is zero. I like that part. What makes the base or pivot point move in concert with the stylus is a big question; looks like there is some sort of servo motor. This would mean that some tracking angle error has to develop in order to activate a sensor and then a motor to move the pivot point in order to re-establish tangency to the groove. But I don’t really know for sure.
|
Wow. Thanks for the recommendations. I too am interested in the Yamamoto CF headshell, but I did not see any Yamamoto products in any of the 3 high-end stores I have so far visited. Today I did buy an Oyaide HS-CF, perhaps close to the Yamamoto. I also bought an Ortofon LH8000, the wooden one. I’ve heretofore been a cheapskate when it comes to headshells, so it’s about time I owned some good ones. If I do see the Yammy CF, I’ll buy that too, providing it is not too expensive. This despite the fact that I have misgivings about CF used in audio products; I generally have not liked the sonic signature which is too obvious to my ears. This applies to one tonearm and a few speakers, so far.
This afternoon, I did see but not hear an Acoustic Sounds Axiom tonearm. It seems to be beautifully engineered. Seems also that Dertonearm is behind a whole line of products under the business name Acoustic Audio, which sport an “aa” logo. They’re all gorgeous to look at and very expensive. I also saw but did not hear a Reed pivoted straight line tonearm that I did not know existed. It looks to be very complex but nicely made. Has anyone messed with it? NAndric? The Axiom was mounted on a Feickert Blackbird tt. Although I favor DD, the Blackbird looks to be very well designed to avoid or minimize belt creep.
Chakster, Is that Grace HS6 a current product or another piece of vintage art?
In the stores that had salesmen who spoke any English (a rarity), I inquired about pricing on the SP10R. No one is willing to discount it at this point, because it is so new to them that many stores don’t even have one to sell. The standard retail price in Japan must be the one I quoted in Yen, somewhere up this thread.
|
Even if a local (Japan) 10R is set up for 100V, that is no problem at all. Good robust step down transformers for AC are very easy to find and very cheap. I already have two turntables at home, my L07D and my DP80, running off 115V to 100V step down transformers. Interestingly, in this newly built apartment that we’ve rented for the duration, all the electrical outlets are 3-prong type, exactly the same as what we use in the US. No adapters needed.
SMPS. I guess you are referring to the fact that the 10R PS is an SMPS type and you’re assuming that an SMPS is per se a detriment. I don’t necessarily agree that it is. Anyway a comparison between Mk3 and 10R would be to assess overall sonics; any negative effect of the SMPS is subsumed in such a comparison.
A bigger concern would be the cost of shipping, unless I could carry it with me on board the plane. Judging from JP’s photos of his unit as packed, that might be awkward at best.
I visited Disc Union yesterday, major purveyors of new and used LPs, CDs, and DVDs. They are now spread out into 5 stores in the area of the Ochanomizu rail station. 8 or so years ago, they were all in one building that was about the size of any one of their stores, now. The hobby, especially the vinyl hobby, is definitely alive and well in Tokyo. I think I’d rather go home with a bag full of LPs than with a 10R. And a few new headshells.
Headshell recommendations, anyone? For both high and low compliance cartridges. Also, I note that mono cartridges are on prominent display in all stores.
|
Chakster, Why are you so obsessed with market values? Who gives a hoot? (I use the word “hoot” in lieu of an obscenity.) My prediction is that there will be a difference between the two up or down, and that the difference is so small as to be negligible in practical terms, which is to say measurable but maybe not audible. If I had to worry about the value of my Mk3, I probably should not have bought one in the first place. I consider the comparison between the Mk3 and the 10R to be nothing but fun.
By the way, I don’t happen to agree with you, long term, on the effect of the 10R with respect to market value of the Mk3. But as someone else famously said, in the long term we’re all dead.
|
Brf, Yep. At this very moment, my SP10 mk3 power supply is with JP for installation of his replacement chip and calibration. I have been completely satisfied with the MK3; it is the best of my 5 turntables, albeit maybe by only a small margin over the Kenwood L07D with copper platter mat. And the Mk3 might get slightly better after JP works his magic. So, why would I want a 10R at this point? That is the question. Also, I need to check other stores for maybe a lower price. I was not overall impressed with the pricing at Yodibashi Camera, where I saw the Technics display. For example, the AT ART1000 cartridge is around $5800 there (6500 yen), more than the US cost in dollars. Also, Sony cameras and lens prices there are nothing to get excited about. |
I am in Tokyo for the next two weeks. Today I saw both the 10R and the 1000R, on display and on sale at a store in Akihabara (the electronics Mecca in Tokyo). The 10R is 864,000 yen and the 1000R is 1,728,000 yen. Just for displaying my passport I would get 10% off and maybe more of a discount than that. Shipping would add back some significant expense. But I’m just sayin’....
It’s a beauty for sure. Just based on inspection, the tone arm on the 1000R looks as if it’s a true precision instrument, like my Leica M3, and that on the 1200GR (also on display) does not convey the same impression.
|
audiofun, No, I do agree with you from a purist point of view, but I also believe that it is possible to implement an SMPS that doesn't pollute the signal (e.g., Berning products) and that in a turntable, an SMPS is not much in the signal path. However, in the context of "cheap" products, where the cost does not permit much to be spent on the PS, I would also be leery of an SMPS.
Have you guys read Fremer's "preliminary" impressions of the 1000R, in the context of his blog? Pret-ty, pret-ty impressive. |
Audiofun, So if you have "ways to mitigate" noise generated by your GAE power supply, then we agree completely. That's what I wrote; all turntables should be run from an isolated AC power source if possible.
Berning uses switching power supplies, and he has done so for many many years. To my knowledge, he does not use tubes in the power supply, but the PS works in service to a tube circuit. If the PS were noisy, it would affect a tube circuit just as it might effect a solid state circuit. All of David's stuff is very wide bandwidth, tubes or no tubes. |
audiofun, We are talking about turntables. I realize the "to do or not to do" of PSs for amplifiers and preamplifiers is a different kettle of fish, because the music signal is imposed upon the DC produced by the PS. In the case of a turntable, what matters is that the PS (of any kind) is delivering well regulated voltage and current to meet the demands of the turntable motor and of any motor control circuitry. Music does not ride on the output of a tt supply. Where one is not concerned with an audio signal, the filtering can be as intensive as needed to keep out HF noise. You or someone else mentioned the fear that SMPS puts noise back on to the AC line; all turntable motors are also capable of doing this, and turntables should be run from an isolated AC source, ideally. I think a large fraction of the benefit derived from external motor controllers is related to isolating the tt motor. (You mentioned putting a scope on an SMPS supply; did you do that? Did you see hash on the AC line as a result? Did you try the same experiment with a linear supply running a tt motor?) Anyway, I would not be concerned about a well designed SMPS for a turntable. You feel differently. That's OK, too.
David Berning is one of the most modest, unassuming persons I have ever met. Which I think is why he made the comments Chris quoted, in response to questions about HIS SMPS. In reality, he is an innovative genius, in my opinion. I have had a pair of ZOtls in my system, running my pair of Sound Lab 845PXs. While I did not think they were quite up to the level of my Atma-sphere monoblocks, I certainly did not perceive the slightest problem with HF noise, or any noise for that matter. (This proves nothing, I admit.)
|
So how do you think Berning manages to build an SMPS that does not offend you? He's been using such supplies for maybe as much as 20 years or more. Which is why one can lift his ZOtl amplifiers with one hand. Also, the linear supplies of vintage direct-drive turntables were hardly state of the art even for the time in which they were built, which was before we all got obsessed with power supply quality. Old school diodes with capacitor filtering into a voltage regulator, was about it. |
audiofun, Once upon a time I would have agreed with you about the superiority of a linear PS in all cases, but in recent years there have been big improvements in the design and execution of SMPSs. And, like Invictus says, there are some pretty nice amplifiers and preamplifiers now sporting SMPSs. So, I would not assume that the SMPS incorporated into the 10R is necessarily a negative, compared to the Mk3. (I too own a Mk3, and I love it, but I like to keep an open mind about new products.) Also, the (slightly) greater weight of the Mk3 platter compared to that of the 10R is in part due to the massive circular magnet that is affixed to the bottom of the Mk3 platter. The 10R platter would not need such a magnet, because it uses a coreless motor (because of the way that a coreless motor is implemented in a DD turntable). Also, since the massive magnet on the Mk3 is not out at the circumference of the platter, it does not do as much for rotational inertia as one might think. Thus we cannot be sure that the inertia of the 10R platter is much less than that of the Mk3; it could conceivably be as high as the Mk3, if the 10R platter has proportionately greater mass at its periphery. With regard to differences in torque, it is difficult to build a coreless motor for purely high torque, because of heat and spatial limitations; I am quite confident that the Technics engineers gave the 10R motor "enough" torque to do its job of keeping speed constant in the face of groove friction, etc. In fact, the coreless motor of the 10R might make it superior to the Mk3 in terms of cogging and speed constancy. Based on my experience with the L07D and the TT101, a coreless motor is very desirable in a DD turntable. Albeit the Mk3 is king at my house, by a small margin over the L07D. You made another point about the spindle and bearings of the two turntables. I don't doubt what you say, but I don't know where you got your info, because I have seen nothing on the internet about the innards of the 10R, including the dimensions of its bearing and spindle. |
Dear Chakster, Have you compared the EPA100 to the EPA100 mk2, side by side, using the same cartridge on the same turntable in both cases? In that context, is the Mk2 version audibly superior to the base EPA100? I know that the mk2 was much more expensive, but I think the cost is owing mostly to the boron construction. I am just wondering whether it pays off on the listener's end. Thanks. |
Here's a thought: What is the evidence that the relationships between the two turntables and the two tonearms that you cite was actually intended by Technics? I think it's just as likely that they were developing their turntables, on the one hand, and their tonearms, on the other hand, and it just happened that the MkIII and the EPA100 MkII were introduced contemporaneously, or nearly so. And anyway, why does it matter? |
Ralph, I knew you would want to use the TP on the 10R, but I did not want to "assume".
Seems I could plop the 10R down into my Mk3 plinth with the 10.5-inch Reed, but not for the moment will I consider it. Later, maybe. I am going to ask Tri about converting my 9-inch TP to 12-inch. |
Yes, I kind of wish they had dropped that square escutcheon that characterized the Mk2 and Mk3. Because of it, you are pretty much limited to a 12-inch tonearm, if you want to add a second tonearm to a Mk2 or 3. |
Chakster and Totem, Based on Ralph's description of the plinth for the SL1200G, which is very favorable, I would imagine that the plinth for the 10R is state of the art or even represents a new state of the art. If an exact replica of the EPA100 were to be manufactured today, what do you think it would have to cost? I am thinking at least $4-5,000. So, I am betting that Technics was well aware that there would be push-back on the $10K surcharge for plinth and tonearm but that they have gone to the max to justify it. There is at least one aftermarket supplier selling plinths for the Mk2 and Mk3 that exceed $10K in cost, and you only get a plinth, no sota tonearm. |
Chakster, The shape of the whole SP1000R package should remind you of the analogous predecessor packages from Technics, the Mk2 and Mk3 in OEM plinths with a ringer for the EPA100 tonearm (SL1000, etc). Why on earth would you bring up a "Lead Console Grandee-S", whatever that is?
Ralph, First of all, the tonearm suggests a reincarnation of the EPA100 or EPA250, two very very fine tonearms from the Technics past. Why is that so terrible? Worst case scenario for someone who MUST use a different tonearm is you buy the package and re-sell the tonearm. But also, you can buy the 10R alone, for HALF the cost of the 1000R, and mate it to whatever plinth and tonearm you like. I don't see a cause for disappointment.
These products should be a cause for joy in the world of DD lovers and for all vinylistas who can open their minds to get rid of belt-drive. (OK, the dollar value of my Mk3 just took a hit, but I can survive that.) Also, I can gloat, because I predicted the retail price of the 10R very closely on the nose, albeit on my second guess. My first guess (15K to 20K) was correct for the 1000R. |
Nandric, Thank you for correcting me. Perhaps the Serbian himself was indulging in wishful thinking, on two counts: the price of the 10R and my willingness to part with the L07D.
|
Pani, Will you like the 10R better if the price is more than $10K? Some will. I find it pointless to argue about what the price will or won't be. Whatever it will be is what it will be. Also, haven't you changed your tune just a little bit? Without looking at earlier posts the thread, I thought you or maybe someone else was predicting around $5K, as against the group, including me, that predicts $15K to $20K. The more I think about it, ~$10K to $12K does make a lot of sense. That would place the 10R clearly above the 1200GAE, yet not be so high as to alienate a broad base. In that price range, the 10R would "kill" lots of products that cost up to $30K retail. There I go, doing what I said is pointless.
|
I would say that adding another coil makes it a new and different motor, but it's a question of semantics. The basic design of a coreless motor suitable for use in a turntable has not changed since Dual invented it 60 years ago. If you look at the Dual motor compared to the Victor and Kenwood coreless motors, you might think they all come from the same source. I could also have included the Brinkmann coreless motor which is now only a few years old. The only really novel coreless motor in recent years is the Thingap motor used by VPI in their DD turntable.
Coreless motors inherently have lower torque than a similar size iron core motor and also tend to run hotter, which places a limitation on how much torque can be generated within size constraints. Adding a coil is one way to do it. Maybe that is also why the 10R platter will not be quite as massive as that of the Mk3. Also, consider that a large fraction of the mass of the Mk3 platter is the huge circular magnet structure (the rotor), attached to the underside. The 10R platter probably does not employ such a magnet, which alone could account for the difference in mass.
|
Dear Raul,
I am very happy to hear that you and your family are OK, and at the same time, I am sad for others in your country who are suffering so terribly. I will do what I can to support them.
Dear Inna, For me, the goal of the plinth is to eliminate any coloration that could emanate from a plinth. Thus, I would not want to "hear" differences between and among different woods, unless one wood sounded clearly more neutral compared to any other. In that regard, I have also become persuaded that Combined Layer Damping (CLD) really works. This means using different types of materials to make a tightly bound "sandwich" where each layer dampens the whole structure and also cancels the colorations of any one particular material. I have built 4-5 plinths from slate and/or wood, and this is the source of my thinking, based on that experience. (Like Totem said, I guess.) |
My criterion for condition of a used LP is flawless surfaces on both sides, and they should reflect light pretty well, too. Early on in my purchasing of used LPs, I would tolerate a scratch here and there or other signs of wear, but that proved to be a bad idea.
Inna, the term "original Japanese pro" is kind of an oxymoron. The LP you describe was probably first issued in the USA and then re-issued by a Japanese company, albeit the Japanese re-issues are very often superior to the originals in sound quality. Because one of our sons lives in Japan, I am fairly often there. Prices on jazz are a bit higher than in the US, but on the other hand the condition of just about any used LP you pick up is usually mint. The Japanese really take good care of their LPs, based on my experience purchases from audio stores in Tokyo. Then too, such stores probably pre-screen the LPs before placing them on sale. Anyway, I begin to understand what you guys are up against in buying used LPs. On the other hand, we have Trump. I'd rather pay $100 per LP and not have Trump. |
Chakster, I don't understand your predicament, quite. Over the course of time, some of the best quality LPs ever produced came to us from Europe. In the good old days, my buddy and I used to look long and hard over here (typically at the now defunct Tower Records in downtown Washington, DC) for British, German, and even French pressings of US-made LPs or LPs that wholly originated in Europe. (Columbia recordings labeled "CBS" or Capitol recordings labeled "EMI", for two examples.) I cannot imagine why you feel dependent upon imports of expensive used LPs from USA to Europe. Moreover, I do not give a fig for the rarity or collectability of an LP. The proof of the pudding for me is only in the playing quality and the musical content. As a result, I own very few wildly valuable LPs, and I don't feel the need to accumulate them in my collection. I would probably sell off (or more likely throw out) any $1000 LP that played badly or sounded awful. In a few weeks, I will be attending the Capitol Audio Fest here in the DC area. There will be a large room full of LP vendors and their wares. I expect to load up on mint to mint minus LPs, at no more than $15 per LP or less. Yes, there will be $50 and $100 LPs on sale, too, but I resist them easily.
Guys, I am getting worried about Raul.
|
Inna, Yes, I grossly UNDERestimated the total cost for 100 really good tapes. Likewise, you horribly OVERestimated the cost for a like number of select LPs. I never ever pay more than $25 per, and by far most of my LP purchases are less than $10-$12 each. However, if you think you can be happy listening to the same few tapes over and over again, that's up to you. I could not be happy with such a limited repertoire. Each of us has his own predilections, but I don't see how you can rationalize R2R over vinyl on the basis of lower cost. I see R2R as a boutique endeavor.
Unless I and others grossly misunderstood the grandiose introduction of the 10R by Technics, there is no way it will retail for less than $15K. There is no need for them to place the price any lower than that, because they will sell all they can make, if it is as good as it looks. But the proof of the pudding is in the pricing, ultimately, and none of us really know for sure. |
Dear Nandric,
Even if I never used the L07D, I would not part with it. However, I am not going to live forever, so perhaps you should become friends with my wife, who does not play LPs and whose mother lived to age 96. She will have a lot of stuff to sell, if she outlives me, as expected.
In my opinion, there is no way that the SP10R will sell for less than $10K, retail. If for no other reason than the fact that it will be viewed as a "bargain" even in the $15K to $20K price range. Further, it will be the flagship of a new high end line of equipment from Technics, as Raul suggested. Speaking of Raul, I hope that he and his family escaped injury and loss of property in the Mexico City earthquake. Raul, if you are out there, please report.
Inna, I share your appreciation of R2R tape recordings, but that pursuit is for the deep of pocket crowd only, not because of the initial cost of the machine but because of the outrageous cost (and paucity) of the best quality tape recordings. A 100-tape collection might set you back $10,000!
|
Before now, an SP10 Mk3 complete and in good to excellent working condition would have been worth about $10K to $12K, sans any plinth. I think the introduction of the SP10R into the market place will drive the value of the Mk3 down below the 5-figure level, because the SP10R will likely retail for less than $20K, and with its coreless motor and modern drive system, it has to be at least as good as, and maybe better than, the Mk3. So, in one way or another, we will all benefit. Tweakers apparently can remove the motor/platter from the SP10R for mounting in an aftermarket plinth, thereby eliminating the upper square escutcheon entirely. If I were in the business of selling $50,000 and above belt-drive turntables, I would be concerned. Done right, the SP10R could change the game entirely. (As a Mk3 owner, I can take solace in the apparent facts that the 10R motor has less torque and the 10R platter has less mass than either analogous part of my Mk3. But I will want a 10R.)
|
I think what Ralph is saying, and I agree, is that the square shape of the escutcheon surrounding the platter makes it nigh impossible to mount a 9-inch tone arm, at least one of the type that Ralph and I are fond of, where the bearing assembly is offset to the outside of the vertical pillar that allows for VTA adjustment. Peter, I have no trouble mounting a 10.5 inch Reed on my Mk3, so at least 12 inch tonearms are not mandatory. But why oh why did they have to retain that idiotic square escutcheon? Marketing... They want to remind us of the SP10s of yore. So, Peter, there will still be work for you to do to separate the operating elements of the 10R from that silly escutcheon. Peter, are you also saying that the motor looks just like that of a 1200GAE? I would doubt they would try to put that one over on us; at least I hope not. |
