Technics SL 1210GR2 Turntable

[Bob from Florida]

Thank you for the summary.
I have a Technics SL-M3 and am not a Fremer fan. Usually, if I read anything by him or about him, it is accidental
I was hoping to get the wow & flutter spec (or measurements) without paying Fremer's site a visit.
As everything else that I was interested in was in the Stereo Review article.
Just so (you, in case you did not) & others know the specs on the unusual SL-M3, I'll post them here:

Technics SL-M3​

Quartz Controlled Direct-Drive Fully-Automatic Turntable System (1984-1988)

with linear tracking tonearm

Specifications​

Type: fully automatic

Drive method: direct drive

Motor: brushless DC motor

Drive control method: quartz phase locked control

Platter: 325mm, 2.5kg, aluminum die-cast

Pitch control: +-6% range

Speeds: 33 and 45rpm

Wow and flutter: 0.022% WRMS

Rumble: -82dB

Tonearm: dynamically-balanced linear tracking

Effective length: 238mm

Effective mass: 13g (including cartridge)

Cartridge: moving magnet

Replacement stylus: EPS-33ES

Dimensions: 526 x 205 x 425mm

Weight: 15kg

That looks like a “fancy living” turntable! Being functional after all these years is a testament to its engineering.

 

[EJ3]

That looks like a “fancy living” turntable! Being functional after all these years is a testament to its engineering.

It has been refurbished about 10 years ago & since then I have replaced the drive belt to the linear tracking arm.
I also have a refurbished DUAL 1229 with an American walnut plinth that I gave as a gift to my mother for her system.
She has it in almost daily use several hours a day, playing mostly LP's of Austrian & German Folk songs (she is a WWII survivor from Salzburg, Austria).
My SL-M3 is not in use quite that extensively but it is in use a lot (usually with a SHURE V-15 ULTRA 300 or one of the other V-15 P-Mount variations [occasionally with a NOS Technic's original cartridge]).
It seems adequate for every day use. (I started out in the mid-late 70's with a Connoisseur BD-2, a Grace tonearm & whatever the TOTL SHURE cart was at the time).
Here is a pretty good video on one:

 

[anmpr1]

To bad you have to go to Fremer and Tracking Angle to find the wow&flutter measurememts…

Back in the day, Ed Long (writing for Audio magazine) provided some of the best analytical data on record players. I recently reread his SP-10 Mk3 review, a deck which at the time was considered best of the best of Technics DD players. Surprisingly (at least to me) Long reported that it ran 'fast' at its quartz locked nominal speed:

Figure 3 shows the spectrum due to playing a recorded 3,150-Hz tone and indicates that the SP-10MK3 is running slightly fast in the 33.3 rpm quartz-locked mode. This is shown as +0.19% in "Measured Data." What this means is that a record which should be exactly 60 minutes when played at 33.3 rpm, will take 59 minutes and 53.2 seconds. This is excellent long-term stability and could be made almost perfect by setting the speed back two clicks to -0.2%.

For comparison, below are two charts, representative of two contemporary players. First for the SP-10 Mk3 ($1800.00 for player, $900.00 for optional base), the second for a top tier belt drive-- the SOTA Star Sapphire ($1600.00) player featuring vacuum record hold down.

 

[EJ3]

Back in the day, Ed Long (writing for Audio magazine) provided some of the best analytical data on record players. I recently reread his SP-10 Mk3 review, a deck which at the time was considered best of the best of Technics DD players. Surprisingly (at least to me) Long reported that it ran 'fast' at its quartz locked nominal speed:

Figure 3 shows the spectrum due to playing a recorded 3,150-Hz tone and indicates that the SP-10MK3 is running slightly fast in the 33.3 rpm quartz-locked mode. This is shown as +0.19% in "Measured Data." What this means is that a record which should be exactly 60 minutes when played at 33.3 rpm, will take 59 minutes and 53.2 seconds. This is excellent long-term stability and could be made almost perfect by setting the speed back two clicks to -0.2%.

For comparison, below are two charts, representative of two contemporary players. First for the SP-10 Mk3 ($1800.00 for player, $900.00 for optional base), the second for a top tier belt drive-- the SOTA Star Sapphire ($1600.00) player featuring vacuum record hold down.

View attachment 358734 View attachment 358735

I suspect that would be pretty hard to notice for most people listening to one side of an LP & then turning it over to listen to the other side.
Perhaps some drummer's might be better than he average person at catching that.

 

[JP]

Consider the signal being measured.

 

[mike70]

maybe the top belt drive compete with the Technics in speed accuracy (until the belt stretches) but ... in mid / low tier budget (where the 99.9% of users are) what's the reality with similar products?

 

[anmpr1]

I suspect that would be pretty hard to notice for most people listening to one side of an LP & then turning it over to listen to the other side.
Perhaps some drummer's might be better than he average person at catching that.

Probably impossible to tell. Without a stopwatch. Especially considering all the other stuff going on with LPs-- off center records, mistracking, lateral tracking error and so forth.

Ed Long kind of throws out a somewhat misleading factoid in his write-up. He offers a figure for a 60 minute record, which is quite rare, and in any case has no practical relation to what about 100% of listeners encounter.

Recall how over 60 minutes the uncorrected lag on his example was 7 seconds. That's 3.5 seconds for one side (which is all anyone ever listens to at a time); it's difficult to even encounter a thirty minute LP side. I know some of the 'historic' Furtwangler LPs had upwards of 45 minutes a side, and Todd Rundgren liked to compress a lot of music into a short run of plastic. However with those, the sonic quality of compression was what listeners noticed, and not timing, per se. So realistically listeners would be behind about 2.3 seconds for a 20 minute side.

For me, what is more interesting than any of that was how the then world's most expensive Quartz PLL DD turntable (as far as I know--and if not the most expensive, at least it was the most well-known) had that much variance. In locked mode my SL-1200 Mk5 runs about 33.5 RPM (measured using one of the popular Android apps). Whether and how much those phone apps reflect rotational reality is something I can't discuss.

 

[morillon]

Probably impossible to tell. Without a stopwatch. Especially considering all the other stuff going on with LPs-- off center records, mistracking, lateral tracking error and so forth.

Ed Long kind of throws out a somewhat misleading factoid in his write-up. He offers a figure for a 60 minute record, which is quite rare, and in any case has no practical relation to what about 100% of listeners encounter.

Recall how over 60 minutes the uncorrected lag on his example was 7 seconds. That's 3.5 seconds for one side (which is all anyone ever listens to at a time); it's difficult to even encounter a thirty minute LP side. I know some of the 'historic' Furtwangler LPs had upwards of 45 minutes a side, and Todd Rundgren liked to compress a lot of music into a short run of plastic. However with those, the sonic quality of compression was what listeners noticed, and not timing, per se. So realistically listeners would be behind about 2.3 seconds for a 20 minute side.

For me, what is more interesting than any of that was how the then world's most expensive Quartz PLL DD turntable (as far as I know--and if not the most expensive, at least it was the most well-known) had that much variance. In locked mode my SL-1200 Mk5 runs about 33.5 RPM (measured using one of the popular Android apps). Whether and how much those phone apps reflect rotational reality is something I can't discuss.

this also modifies the pitch of the sound and not only the speed of execution....

(apart from "karaoke" conditions which could be the most demanding... it seems to me that professional musicians will point out to you the fact that it becomes sensitive if we go to more than 0.1% (0.03tr)... (but the w&f is worse.... logical ..))

 

[JP]

For me, what is more interesting than any of that was how the then world's most expensive Quartz PLL DD turntable (as far as I know--and if not the most expensive, at least it was the most well-known) had that much variance. In locked mode my SL-1200 Mk5 runs about 33.5 RPM (measured using one of the popular Android apps). Whether and how much those phone apps reflect rotational reality is something I can't discuss.

It doesn't, and again, consider the measurement signal.
.

 

[morillon]

Probably impossible to tell. Without a stopwatch. Especially considering all the other stuff going on with LPs-- off center records, mistracking, lateral tracking error and so forth.

Ed Long kind of throws out a somewhat misleading factoid in his write-up. He offers a figure for a 60 minute record, which is quite rare, and in any case has no practical relation to what about 100% of listeners encounter.

Recall how over 60 minutes the uncorrected lag on his example was 7 seconds. That's 3.5 seconds for one side (which is all anyone ever listens to at a time); it's difficult to even encounter a thirty minute LP side. I know some of the 'historic' Furtwangler LPs had upwards of 45 minutes a side, and Todd Rundgren liked to compress a lot of music into a short run of plastic. However with those, the sonic quality of compression was what listeners noticed, and not timing, per se. So realistically listeners would be behind about 2.3 seconds for a 20 minute side.

For me, what is more interesting than any of that was how the then world's most expensive Quartz PLL DD turntable (as far as I know--and if not the most expensive, at least it was the most well-known) had that much variance. In locked mode my SL-1200 Mk5 runs about 33.5 RPM (measured using one of the popular Android apps). Whether and how much those phone apps reflect rotational reality is something I can't discuss.

telephone applications can really pose a problem,... but 33.5tr would just be unthinkable for this type of machine it seems to me... you should check with other approaches
(It is conceivable, and regrettable, with mains frequency turntables because, at least in my country, even if by sliding not too fast, and mains current is at +-0.1% in frequency ....but on regulated DC turntables etc would seem a little incongruous..)

 

[copperblue]

MEASUREMENTS: Technics SL-1200 M3D Wow & Flutter - PlatterSpeed + Dr. Feickert's Test LP...

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

 

[mike70]

Bet for Technics night and day ... since the first 1200s in the end of 70s, they're over many and many negative marketing all the time.

And they become a classic, not only as DJ machine because the high reliability, construction and flexibility enable it, but as a great table in general.

Bring me a really better table at the same price tag in the different 1200s "flavours", from the mk7 to the G, and we talk about it.

I'm a fan? Yes ... after using a Mk2 in the eighties, read all the "audiophile" press had to say and listening to some of the holy cows. They deserve it.