First turntable - any suggestions?

[computer-audiophile]

The weakness of the PLX-1000 is the tonearm and bearing.

Yes, the story with the tone arm bearings.

Loose bearings were a feature of TTs based on the Hanpin modular system for many years. I also played around with some of them for fun. I didn't find it particularly difficult to adjust the bearing properly.

One of my favourites was the DJ-Tech SL1300 with its totally unconventional (ugly?) design. I damped the platter against ringing, put a thick and heavy rubber mat on it, mechanically stabilized the internal main bearing base and connected the output cable direct to the tonearm, skipping the USB/Phono interface. In the end, the TT really played very well, running very quiet and stable - which most people probably wouldn't believe, judging by the look of it.

 

[JP]

Snugging them up isn't an issue, but when you're dealing with Si3N4 balls, hard-chromed and polished pins, and want to exceed spec...

This is a rebuilt EPA-100. At approximately 7 seconds a 1mg weight is placed on the head shell. Granted, this arm is in a whole different league than the Hanpins, or even the OG and new 1200's, etc.:

 

[Angsty]

Yes, the story with the tone arm bearings.

Loose bearings were a feature of TTs based on the Hanpin modular system for many years. I also played around with some of them for fun. I didn't find it particularly difficult to adjust the bearing properly.

There have been lots of comparisons of the PLX-1000 to Hanpin turntables, with several people asserting that the PLX-1000 *is* a Hanpin turntable. I found the evidence unconvincing, but the story persists.

The issue with my tweaking of the tonearm bearings largely was about my confidence to do it well without over-tightening, which can be hard to undo. I tightened a bit with some improvement, but left it slightly loose.

 

[computer-audiophile]

Snugging them up isn't an issue, but when you're dealing with Si3N4 balls, hard-chromed and polished pins, and want to exceed spec...

This is a rebuilt EPA-100. At approximately 7 seconds a 1mg weight is placed on the head shell. Granted, this arm is in a whole different league than the Hanpins, or even the OG and new 1200's, etc.:

Very nice, you can put your own artistry in all sorts of places if you like to tinker.

 

[computer-audiophile]

with several people asserting that the PLX-1000 *is* a Hanpin turntable.

You can count me in. I had some Hanpins and also checked the Pioneer TT in detail.

 

[computer-audiophile]

The issue with my tweaking of the tonearm bearings largely was about my confidence to do it well without over-tightening, which can be hard to undo. I tightened a bit with some improvement, but left it slightly loose.

I think this is a good method.

 

[Angsty]

Let me state for our newbie vinyl friend that tonearm bearing tweaking is NOT part of the initial user experience but is illustrative of the depths that die-hard vinylists will go to get the best results out of their systems. There are endless tweaking possibilities with vinyl systems.

To that end, I moved to a “knife-edge” bearing on the Luxman and my bearing trepidation melted away.

Another lower cost turntable featuring a knife-edge bearing is the Teac TN-3B-SE. Has phono preamp, but lacks tonearm height (VTA) adjustment.

 

[computer-audiophile]

Another lower cost turntable featuring a knife-edge bearing is the Teac TN-3B-SE. Has phono preamp, but lacks tonearm height (VTA) adjustment.

This is interesting, I did not know - thanks!

 

[JeremyFife]

First turntable - any suggestions?​

Now we are drifted far away from the initial topic again and have arrived at the expensive or even high end turntables.
I'll come back to my suggestion of the Pioneer PLX 1000, which has proven itself well with friends of mine.
The tonearm is a little heavier than the Technics arm, with a similar construction, but it is also rubber damped on the inside.

It is specified with the following values, which are quite OK imo.

Wow and Flutter < 0.01 % (Measured by obtaining signal from built-in frequency generator of motor assembly.)*
Signal-to-noise ratio 70 dB

*Not the most trustworthy method of course

There are a few on eBay around £400-450 GBP used ... some slightly cheaper but described as PLX "DJ" 1000 ... is that a different deck?

 

[computer-audiophile]

There are a few on eBay around £400-450 GBP used ... some slightly cheaper but described as PLX "DJ" 1000 ... is that a different deck?

I would never buy a DJ-TT second-hand.

 

[JeremyFife]

I would never buy a DJ-TT second-hand.

Absolutely!! who knows what it's been through! - I was asking if it's actually a different model

 

[MattHooper]

Beryllium, beryllium foil tube, CVD tapered boron pipe, flat frequency response. Practically anyone who understands the evolution and related performance understands this in at least broad strokes.

Ok, you've mentioned some materials.

How does that translate to "nobody has produced a better sounding turntable today than was available in vinyl's heyday?"

Remember: I'm not saying anyone HAS advanced the state of the art, only that I've yet to see firm evidence for the claim that it HASN'T been advanced at all.
And I think the great variety of turntables available today, along with almost none of them having been objectively tested, makes it difficult to settle that question.

Next you’ll tell me all the people putting out boutique cables, broken DACs, cable lifters, resonating rocks, etc. are working tirelessly to bring real objective advancements to the world.

Red herring, unless you were proposing that all the folks building turntables are similarly technically challenged or cynical. That would involve at least a comprehensive assessment of the design goals and/or performance many different modern turntables, which I don't see yet.

Though I don’t necessarily think most of the people putting out turntables are charlatans, rather I think the assumption that their goal is objective improvement is incorrect and there are plenty of misguided attempts.

Cool. Still waiting for the strong evidence for that hunch, or that nobody has produced a turntable with better performance these days.

The “why” aside, as I’ve already said, there’s precious little evidence of any advancement.

Agreed, precious little objective evidence. But...that's the problem in making a strong claim either way.

So, I don't think we can go much further on this. Thanks.

 

[mhardy6647]

Yes, the story with the tone arm bearings.

Loose bearings were a feature of TTs based on the Hanpin modular system for many years. I also played around with some of them for fun. I didn't find it particularly difficult to adjust the bearing properly.

One of my favourites was the DJ-Tech SL1300 with its totally unconventional (ugly?) design. I damped the platter against ringing, put a thick and heavy rubber mat on it, mechanically stabilized the internal main bearing base and connected the output cable direct to the tonearm, skipping the USB/Phono interface. In the end, the TT really played very well, running very quiet and stable - which most people probably wouldn't believe, judging by the look of it.


View attachment 279690

oh that is hideous.

 

[JP]

Ok, you've mentioned some materials.

How does that translate to "nobody has produced a better sounding turntable today than was available in vinyl's heyday?"

Remember: I'm not saying anyone HAS advanced the state of the art, only that I've yet to see firm evidence for the claim that it HASN'T been advanced at all.
And I think the great variety of turntables available today, along with almost none of them having been objectively tested, makes it difficult to settle that question.




Red herring, unless you were proposing that all the folks building turntables are similarly technically challenged or cynical. That would involve at least a comprehensive assessment of the design goals and/or performance many different modern turntables, which I don't see yet.



Cool. Still waiting for the strong evidence for that hunch, or that nobody has produced a turntable with better performance these days.



Agreed, precious little objective evidence. But...that's the problem in making a strong claim either way.

So, I don't think we can go much further on this. Thanks.

Yawn.

 

[Angsty]

I would never buy a DJ-TT second-hand.

Unless you purchase from an audiophile. There are a large number of PLX-1000’s and SL-1200’s that have never been used outside of a residence.

And, yes, the “PLX DJ 1000” is a misnomer for the PLX-1000 by Pioneer DJ.

 

[Angsty]

This is interesting, I did not know - thanks!

The Luxman tonearm is a gussied up version of the same SAEC arm/bearing system. Luxman added a rounded bearing housing, VTA adjustment and a better plinth mounting to it. That knife-edge bearing works wonders for low vertical friction. I had some doubts about it compared to the prior model’s Jelco arm, but SAEC made a believer out of me.

Back to first table recommendations, here are features I personally deemed non-negotiable:

- Low rumble / hum from the motor and platter bearing,
- VTA adjustment (in case you want to change cartridges),
- Speed control that does not require you to remove the platter,
- A MM cartridge with a replaceable diamond stylus (the cart does not have to be included and you don’t need a MC for a first table),
- If it has an inboard phono, it must be defeatable (a better phonostage is likely the second upgrade after a better cartridge),
- A metal, acrylic/delrin or glass platter (no MDF)
- A cue lever.

Of this list, the VTA adjustment is probably the most controversial. Many starter turntables do not have it. Several carts allow you to move up the line without changing height. VTA is less critical if you intend to stay with conical or elliptical styli (as U-Turn does) or are tightly bound on the initial cost.

My first turntable purchase was a used VPI Traveler with an Ortofon 2M Blue cartridge. I still have the table, but moved up to a Hana SL cartridge. Without VTA adjustment, the SL stylus would not have worked well for me.

 

[thewas]

Cool. Still waiting for the strong evidence for that hunch, or that nobody has produced a turntable with better performance these days.

You show me a newer turntable which bests the specs of the Technics SP-10 MK3 from 1981 which mechanically based on Technics' SP-02M cutting lathe(!):

Startup torque : 16kg/cm
Startup time : 0,25s (33 1/3rpm)
Braking time : 0,3s (33 1/3 rpm)
Load characteristics : 0% up to 10kg/cm
Speed drift : ± 0,001%
Wow & flutter : 0,015% WRMS (JIS C5521)
± 0,021% wtd zero to peak (DIN 45507, IEC 98A weighted)
Rumble : -92dB (DIN B ; IEC 98A weighted)

Most current turntable manufactures don't even give such objective data, you can guess the reason...

 

[computer-audiophile]

Rumble : -92dB (DIN B ; IEC 98A weighted)

Most current turntable manufactures don't even give such objective data, you can guess the reason...

Thank you very much, so true, that is exactly the high bar by which today's luxury turntables fail. (I don't know any that can do that)

 

[computer-audiophile]

oh that is hideous.

I understand this view, the design breaks with visual habits. But asked the other way round, why do people find a Thorens TD124 beautiful? It also has such 'organic' curves.

Here is an older setup of mine with my Thorens TD 124 and 300B tube amplifiers.

 

[computer-audiophile]

That knife-edge bearing works wonders for low vertical friction.

These are all important individual points that contribute to a good result. A record player as a whole is a very complex structure in terms of vibrations, etc.
There are many different solutions for this. One could also mention the single-point bearing as a bearing with low friction,