Chris, this is from the manual for my SP-10 Mk2A:
"The quartz phase-locked control system and the DC servo motor with large torque can maintain each rated speed of the turntable even with a load torque of up to 5 kg-cm (4.3 lbs. in.). If 500 tonearms of 2 g. tracking force were placed on a record at the same time the turntable would still maintain each rated speed."
From the way this is stated, I assume it applies to the sum of the weight added on top of the platter. There was an accessory Audio Technica disc stabilizer (vacuum) designed for placement on top of the SP-10 platter (perfect fit after the mat was removed) which I believe weighed 1.4 kg. So mats heavier than the standard rubber mat have been used. |
Downunder, I've never read a claim that electrolytic cap replacement would improve sonics. But I have read advice from respected posters who know much more about electronics than I do that they can dry up or fail in other ways with age. The danger is not that they simply quit working but that their failure may take out other components, some which may no longer have replacements (ICs).
So your initial thought about "preventative maintenance" seems sound. I might look for a different tech. ;^) |
Lew, brief power cord story -
One of my best audio buddies (who we unfortunately lost last year) had decades of experience with electronics, audio components, and on-site recording. So he approached problems with a background of technical knowledge, yet he kept an open mind to experiment, even when it went "against the rules".
His old school side was content with decent quality Belden PCs and only smiled at the pricing for most of the aftermarket "audiophile" PCs. Until one day he needed a longer than standard PC and couldn't find a Belden long enough. However he did have some spare Kimber 8TC and so fabricated a PC of the needed length rather than go shopping. The improvements with the Kimber made him a believer that standard PCs can indeed be improved upon. |
Lew, does Krebs address the mat with his modification procedure? If not, does he have a recommendation?
Thanks |
Lew, that is what I remembered but wanted to be sure.
Richard, thanks for adding your comments. |
Regarding additional platter weight affecting performance, there was discussion of this in the past and I remember at least Lew and I participated in that.
The manual for my SP-10 Mk2A states its performance has "stable load characteristics up to 1 kg tracking force". It also suggests the quartz phase-locked system and DC servo motor torque can maintain rated speed even if 500 tonearms of 2 g. tracking force could be positioned simultaneously.
That seems clear to me that a new platter or heavier mat up to 1 kg heavier than the original platter/mat should operate normally. |
Dover,
"with the DJ market in mind". I trust you were referring to radio station DJs, which were a market for early Technics DD tables, not dance club scratch/mobil DJs. I've read many false assertions the Technics SL-1200s were designed for dance club DJs. I believe the SP-10 and SL-1200 series were designed in the '70s, a time before dance club DJs evolved.
I don't mean to sound picky here but I hate to see the DJ misrepresentation continued for any newbie readers here who may not be familiar with DD design and development. |
Hiho, your suggestion for a VPI 10.5 might not work. Remember the mounting pedestal for the VPI arms is offset from the pivot point and requires more clearance adjacent to the platter. They will not work with SP-10 Mk 2 or 3 for example with their square frame unless that is removed. I have mounted a 10.5 with my SP-15 but that frame is rounded and provides clearance.
I'm not familiar with the QL-A95 to know if it is framed. |
Lew, re: elevated LPs?
This seems to be popular in Great Britain, I believe the source of the Ringmat. And that company may or may not have produced an earlier version utilizing a number of cork dots (smaller than a quarter) to suspend the record.
Also, B&O made at least one table with radial plastic supports on the platter to suspend the LP.
So I must ask, as I have with other "out of the box" ideas, if it was truly successful would not nearly all manufactures have adopted something similar by now? |
|
PBNaudio,
I believe you mentioned Peter that among the DD tables you've restored your list included a SP-10 Mk2. I have one which has been calibrated and seems to be functioning fine, but I'm pushing my luck by not yet having replaced all the electrolytic caps. Now I believe Lewm said his tech replaced some diodes along with the electrolytics. So for the benefit of Technics owners could you share if you found need to replace anything more than the caps?
Thanks
|
Lew, thanks for correcting my faulty recollection of work on your SP-10 Mk 2. I suspect my memory may contain some electrolytics which have faded and lost their value. ;^)
Anyway, I should go ahead with the 'lytic replacements in my Technics since as JP says, they are known to have reliability issues. |
Peter, that's very good of you. JT did my initial calibrations but with him gone I don't know anyone now with the test gear to do it. I suspected it would be worthwhile after the cap changes. It will be a couple of months but I'll be in touch.
|
Lew, re: metal mats
Some time ago I believe it was Raul who recommended the Audio Technica AT666. That is a metal mat with vacuum hold down. His preference was simply as an added mat, ignoring the vacuum. I looked that up and it weighs 1.4 kg, still pretty heavy but within the range listed in the SP-10 MK 2 manual.
|
chris74,
Or any others familiar with the SP-10 series of tables. The mat on my SP-10 Mk 2A is the SFTG172-01. That one "feels" heavier than Technics mats I've seen on a few other tables but I can't be sure.
So does anyone have a reference for which mats were original to which models? Mk 3? Mk 2A? Mk 2? SP-15?
Thanks
|
Thanks JP, appreciate the full reply. I also happen to own a SP-15 which is why I included that. But I didn't want to sidetrack the post any further.
|
frankmarsi, we may be similar in age, although I expect I have a couple of years on you. But like Lew, I was left wondering about the purpose of your post.
In fact I suspect these audio sites are the playground for far more folks in the second halves of their lives than for younger ones. For interest in "antique" systems you might like to visit the Vintage section at Audio Asylum.
For myself I built Dynakits for ST-70, PAS-3 and FM-3 in 1966 as part of my first stereo. That included a Dual 1009. Today there are still those who admire that Dual but I can't say I'd ever seek one out again. Still, I just ordered new tweeters to upgrade a mint pair of Dyna A-25s I intend to set up in the den/office after I move. I'm also looking at current upgraded versions of the ST-70 to drive them. So again like Lew, there are many who have not forgotten the merits of quality older components.
Oh yes, I'm also awaiting a Dual 1229 from a friend who bought it new but no longer uses it to install in that den system. I'll reserve my Technics SP-10 Mk 2A for my main system.
|
chakster, in your 5/16 post you make reference to "armwands". However it sounds to me like you refer to armboards? To me an armwand is a single tonearm arm tube/headshell assembly, such as in the EPA-500 and other arm examples.
Anyway, congrats on the P444. That was on my list when looking for a vintage DD table, but a SP-10 Mk 2 was much easier to find. |
audiolabyrinth, The Kenwood KD-500 was more popular than the 550, at least around here. It was sold minus an arm, allowing the owner to choose their own. SME, Grace, and Infinity were popular choices at the time. http://liquidaudio.com.au/kenwood-kd-500-kd-550-direct-drive-turntable/In addition their 600 and 700 series were decent players as well. As lewm mentioned, their L07D was/is one of the top tables so don't sell Kenwood short. |
Lew, matter? Only if you need to book a room at Faulty Towers. ;^)
|
"Technics claimed the SP-10MKIII would maintain speed with up to one thousand tonearms tracking at 2 grams each."
The manual for my SP-10 Mk2A quotes maintained speed "even with a load torque up to 5 kg-cm (4.3 lbs. in.)" That's only 500 tonearms tracking simultaneously at 2 g. each. So obviously a very inferior performer. ;^)
|
This recent discussion reminds me of the "Princess and the Pea"* fairy tale. But then that applies to many aspects of our high end audio hobby.
No doubt the new Technics SP10R is an upgrade from the older SP-10 Mk 3, and more so from earlier models, at least on paper. However I believe two considerations should be made. First, how much of an audible difference will the improvements make? That answer may vary from one system to another. Second is the cost. I've read the SP10R will be priced at $10K in the US, with the complete unit with arm and plinth at $20K. Many of us own older models with less investment, so the question becomes how much improvement will be realized and is it worthwhile to each of us individually?
Anyway, my hat is off to Technics for developing this updated model.
*No, the Princess didn't have a bed-wetting problem. ;^)
|
lew, that’s my favorite Brooks film. I’ve seen it several times and still chuckle with each viewing.
My most quoted line, "Could be worst, could be raining." But there are almost too many to count. |
