Upper Level Vintage DD Strenghts and Weaknesses
All of these tables have been discussed in some form or another here over the years. I have read quite a few threads on them, but its a bit difficult to nail this point down.
Basically I am looking for a non-suspended table to install a Dynavector DV505 arm on, and these tables can fit the bill.
The most widely available is a Denon DP 75 or DP 80 in a Denon plinth, and they are perhaps the most affordable also. Are there any of their plinths that are desirable, or are they just a veneered stack of MDF or plywood?
While more expensive I can find a Sony TTS8000 in a Resinamic plinth although shipping from HK is expensive. There is one thread I came across here where a member who restores tables says two of the three TTS8000 he has done had play in the spindle assembly which looked to be wear in the brass bushings of the motor. That does make me pause in concern.
The JVC TT101 is not only difficult to find, its apparently a bit of a bear to get serviced, so its not high on the list.
The Technics SP 10 MK II I have owned, and its a nice table but to be honest I had a Denon DP75 that I felt actually sounded better. Also the models that are out there are either abused or have a premium price tag attached to them. Also I don’t need instant torque, and I think the bi-servo designs might offer better speed control.
As I write this the Denon and Sony seem to be at the top of the list, unless there is another I should be looking at.
Basically I am looking for a non-suspended table to install a Dynavector DV505 arm on, and these tables can fit the bill.
The most widely available is a Denon DP 75 or DP 80 in a Denon plinth, and they are perhaps the most affordable also. Are there any of their plinths that are desirable, or are they just a veneered stack of MDF or plywood?
While more expensive I can find a Sony TTS8000 in a Resinamic plinth although shipping from HK is expensive. There is one thread I came across here where a member who restores tables says two of the three TTS8000 he has done had play in the spindle assembly which looked to be wear in the brass bushings of the motor. That does make me pause in concern.
The JVC TT101 is not only difficult to find, its apparently a bit of a bear to get serviced, so its not high on the list.
The Technics SP 10 MK II I have owned, and its a nice table but to be honest I had a Denon DP75 that I felt actually sounded better. Also the models that are out there are either abused or have a premium price tag attached to them. Also I don’t need instant torque, and I think the bi-servo designs might offer better speed control.
As I write this the Denon and Sony seem to be at the top of the list, unless there is another I should be looking at.
Showing 14 responses by chakster
It’s top quality and heavy plinth, DP-80 is a killer DD, you just need a decent lightweight mat (I use modern Graphite mat on my DP-80). If you never tried original Denon plinth you have no idea what is it, it’s better than you can expect! Do not try to make Denon look like Micro Seiki with that ugly plinth for 3 tonearms. Just respect the aesthetic of Denon, it’s proper engineering from plinth to turntables, tonearms and cartridges. |
So how can Denon have proper engineering in all aspects and then not do the mat right? Seem to be contradicting yourself here. Where you’ve been in the 70’s ? Look at the cables, speaker terminals whatever when you got vintage equipment.. Over 40 years it wasn’t so important, rubber mat was a standard mat by default from many manufacturers including top Denon, Victor and Technics. Stock feet under those plinth for Denon, Victor, Technics is garbage. But even in the 70’s some manufacturers made separate mats, feet etc or upgrade for those who willing to spend more. DP-80 platter is has its unique structure, you can search audiogon, heavy mats are not recommended for this particular platter structure. |
There are currently modern feet that do the job exceptionally and cost less than an old and rare set of AT 616 I don’t care, because I have 4 sets of AT-616 (16 of them). I use some of them under my Tannoy System 15 (look at the right corner on this image) The AT-616 are better (in my opinion) because you don’t have to screw them in something, you can’t do that with Gaya Also I don't want to put my equipment on something like the sky-scrapper (too high). |
Vibration from the Earth ? Go to any professional studio and see how the main monitors mounted. Look at Rey Audio for example. The monitors are installed in the wall or placed on a wooden stands (on the floor). There are NO esoteric anti-vibration platforms anywhere. |
Luxman PD-444 is suspended on its adjustable feet, placed on top of the heavy metal custom made rack in my system. Wooden floor with parquet on top was made in 1957. And thanks god I don't have to think about plinth, because nearly all my DD turntables from Technics, Denon, Victor can be used in different plinths (original or custom). When you have an option to change plinth it can be an endless quests for entire life! |
it is right to report the experiences of all but I think it is essential to listen to more music and less attention to bullshit; life is too short to spend all your free time looking for an ideal plinth. Exactly. Or to pay attention to seismic activity of the earth pretending your plinth can protect your cartridge when there is an aliens invasion while you're listening to your favorite LP. |
Picked up an Ortofon MC200. Has a fine line stylus, boron cantilever, samarium cobalt ring magnet, and Ortofons WRD damping system. Output is low... Do you like it? It's Concorde MC200 ? Rare model, most people forgot the Concorde was an MC and not for DJs :) Because later the Concorde MM became the most significant model and the best seller (but not for audiophiles) on professional market. |
The one I have looks like the OM body cartridge, but its silver and has a non user replicable stylus. So it’s like this, but without replaceable stylus? Here is the specs for "U" Interesting that these type of cartridges were popular back then, so many manufacturers made "OM-alike" design, but most of them were MM. SONY made an MC-1 and MC-3 with, but my personal favorite are MM XL-50 with Boron Pipe (and very rare XL-70 with Sapphire cantilever). I was lucky to find a few NOS samples of XL-50, now I hope to replace my XL-70 with NOS unit. Accutex (Azden) cartridges have the same "OM-alike" design. Stanton and Pickering also made something similar. The Ortofon MC200 is even worse with an output voltage of .09 mV. But it uses some pretty snazzy technology for a cartridge this age. Boron cantilever, fine line nude (line contact) stylus, samarium cobalt ring magnet, and Ortofons WRD damping system which is still found on their higher level cartridges today. I never tried Concorde or OM MC200, but I have Ortofon MC2000 with terribly low output too, and all the advanced technology of that age. MC2000 is completely different from MC200. the Fidelity Research MC202 with an output voltage of .13 mV. These are tough output voltages to work with, but I wonder if the low number of coil windings is what contributes to the wonderful sound of those cartridges. At that time you likely had to use step up transformers. In my case I have an Esoteric E-03 phono stage that can handle those low voltages. Besides the FR best 7f and 7fz, I enjoyed PMC-3 and now discovered the MCX-3 designed by Ozawa (now Shelter) which I posted in FR dedicated thread recently. |
My point is that I think you would have more fun investigating vintage moving magnet and moving iron cartridges and stick with later production moving coil types, say from the 1990s onwards to the present. Definitely, my recent discovery is Azden Piezo Ym-320X (IM) Azden and Accutex is the same thing. |
I worked for an audio shop during my college years. Late 1980s, in Washington State. We carried the Azden YM series of cartridges. So they were available in the US too. Great. More about Azden/Acutex with pictures and scans of the catalog here. |