New Turntables - AT-LP8X, DP3000NE, SL-1300GK, and others

[dlaloum]

It is higher mass - which I prefer - the magnetic anti-skate has the ability to disengage without changing its setting, the VTA lifter range is 9 mm versus 6 mm in the Technics, and the overall construction appears more robust (from images versus touching).

Higher Mass is only a positive if you are aiming at lower compliance cartridge designs....

My preferred cartridges have always been high to very high compliance - with optimum arm masses being in the 4g to 6g range

The technics arms are mid-mass designs - typically around 12g... they work OK with high compliance cartridges if fitted with an oil damper.... otherwise it can get tricky.

 

[Chrispy]

The 100C has the classic - arm drops when you release the VTA clamp, AT is adjustable on the fly - threaded riser. The Technics arm lifter looks like plastic while the AT looks like metal. Hard to tell without touching one.

So not the arm itself, just a lifting mechanism you think makes the arm superior? I just have a manual Technics myself, and the aftermarket lifters are limited....one of the best things about digital albums is no need to flip/watch at end of one side .

 

[Bob from Florida]

Higher Mass is only a positive if you are aiming at lower compliance cartridge designs....

My preferred cartridges have always been high to very high compliance - with optimum arm masses being in the 4g to 6g range

The technics arms are mid-mass designs - typically around 12g... they work OK with high compliance cartridges if fitted with an oil damper.... otherwise it can get tricky.

I avoid high compliance cartridges, hence the desire for higher mass in the arm.

 

[Bob from Florida]

So not the arm itself, just a lifting mechanism you think makes the arm superior? I just have a manual Technics myself, and the aftermarket lifters are limited....one of the best things about digital albums is no need to flip/watch at end of one side .

Can you describe arm base material composition on your Technics? The lever to perform the lift looks like cheap plastic from photos. Guitar Center carries Pioneer DJ tables, but finding a place that carries higher dollar Technics or anything else is slim pickings. Unless you are lucky enough to have Crutchfield or Music Direct in your locale.

 

[Chrispy]

Can you describe arm base material composition on your Technics? The lever to perform the lift looks like cheap plastic from photos. Guitar Center carries Pioneer DJ tables, but finding a place that carries higher dollar Technics or anything else is slim pickings. Unless you are lucky enough to have Crutchfield or Music Direct in your locale.

The lift is inconsequential, the arm is aluminum rather than carbon so may lack a bit in that respect, but the resonance thing hasn't been an issue with a wide variety of cartridges over the last 40 years or so. The lack of mechanics for a lift makes it less likely to introduce issues of noise/maintenance. The arm itself can be of different mass/design, which may or may not be important. I wouldn't need a brick and mortar retailer to buy a new Technics.....but wouldn't ever buy new tt or vinyl (been 30 years since buying new vinyl). Generally just don't see any value in revisiting vinyl other than what I already have (still have the tt and all my vinyl collected)

 

[dlaloum]

The lift is inconsequential, the arm is aluminum rather than carbon so may lack a bit in that respect, but the resonance thing hasn't been an issue with a wide variety of cartridges over the last 40 years or so. The lack of mechanics for a lift makes it less likely to introduce issues of noise/maintenance. The arm itself can be of different mass/design, which may or may not be important. I wouldn't need a brick and mortar retailer to buy a new Technics.....but wouldn't ever buy new tt or vinyl (been 30 years since buying new vinyl). Generally just don't see any value in revisiting vinyl other than what I already have (still have the tt and all my vinyl collected)

Unfortunately I was burgled and my JVC QL-Y5F with electro damping (and substantial custom plinth damping... DIY) is gone.

Nowadays pricing for a replacement equivalent has rising to quite remarkable levels (US$1000 ish)

 

[Chrispy]

Unfortunately I was burgled and my JVC QL-Y5F with electro damping (and substantial custom plinth damping... DIY) is gone.

Nowadays pricing for a replacement equivalent has rising to quite remarkable levels (US$1000 ish)

LOL can probably sell my 40 year old SL1200mk2 for near $1k, though if comparing strength of currency, even 3x what I paid is more same than dissimilar. New Technics are significantly more expensive it seems.

 

[Bob from Florida]

The lift is inconsequential, the arm is aluminum rather than carbon so may lack a bit in that respect, but the resonance thing hasn't been an issue with a wide variety of cartridges over the last 40 years or so. The lack of mechanics for a lift makes it less likely to introduce issues of noise/maintenance. The arm itself can be of different mass/design, which may or may not be important. I wouldn't need a brick and mortar retailer to buy a new Technics.....but wouldn't ever buy new tt or vinyl (been 30 years since buying new vinyl). Generally just don't see any value in revisiting vinyl other than what I already have (still have the tt and all my vinyl collected)

Long as you are happy. Me, I have the "lets change something" bug.... Since I already have a $200 DAC, has to be a turntable.
As long as I use Crutchfield, I can evaluate things with minimal loss if I return it.

 

[mike70]

LOL can probably sell my 40 year old SL1200mk2 for near $1k, though if comparing strength of currency, even 3x what I paid is more same than dissimilar. New Technics are significantly more expensive it seems.

1200 MK2 in the mid 80s was like 600 USD ... If you check constant prices difference between 1985 and now, you have a factor of 3x ... so, something like 1800 USD, almost the 1200 GR2 price tag.

And ... the GR2 have coreless motor, improved speed correction, digital pitch, etc.
Do you really think they're expensive now?

 

[Chrispy]

1200 MK2 in the mid 80s was like 600 USD ... If you check constant prices difference between 1985 and now, you have a factor of 3x ... so, something like 1800 USD, almost the 1200 GR2 price tag.

And ... the GR2 have coreless motor, improved speed correction, digital pitch, etc.
Do you really think they're expensive now?

Paid more in the low $300 range in the mid 80s myself. With vinyl do the "improvements" really mean much? I just wouldn't bother with a tt these days at all....but that's partially perhaps due the solid performance of my tt over the years isn't likely to change before my death.

 

[dlaloum]

1200 MK2 in the mid 80s was like 600 USD ... If you check constant prices difference between 1985 and now, you have a factor of 3x ... so, something like 1800 USD, almost the 1200 GR2 price tag.

And ... the GR2 have coreless motor, improved speed correction, digital pitch, etc.
Do you really think they're expensive now?

Personally I would opt for something like a 1600 mk2 - same arm as the 1200 mk2 but with some arm automation, and a sprung base, to improve isolation.... also often to be found much cheaper than the 1200mk2's..... the 1600mk2 was sold to Audiophiles at the time, and the 1200mk2 to DJ's...

 

[Chrispy]

Personally I would opt for something like a 1600 mk2 - same arm as the 1200 mk2 but with some arm automation, and a sprung base, to improve isolation.... also often to be found much cheaper than the 1200mk2's..... the 1600mk2 was sold to Audiophiles at the time, and the 1200mk2 to DJ's...

There was an improvement in plinth/base/suspension from the 1200 mk2? Details?

 

[dlaloum]

There was an improvement in plinth/base/suspension from the 1200 mk2? Details?

I would not call it an improvement - more like two parallel paths.

The mk2 turntables had two seperate series, the 1200 was (mostly) marketed to DJ's - with a very solid plinth made of vibration absorbing damped material - very good at absorbing higher frequency vibrations and avoiding feedback, for nightclub use.
The 1600's were marketed to Audiophiles, on a sprung suspended base, with auto return, and even disc changer models (from memory) - they had the same base arm and motor though - and you can as a result fit the same upgrades/accessories.
The sprung base gave it much superior isolation from things like footfall, but less damping for higher frequency feedback (which is less of an issue in a home / audiophile situation)

 

[Chrispy]

I would not call it an improvement - more like two parallel paths.

The mk2 turntables had two seperate series, the 1200 was (mostly) marketed to DJ's - with a very solid plinth made of vibration absorbing damped material - very good at absorbing higher frequency vibrations and avoiding feedback, for nightclub use.
The 1600's were marketed to Audiophiles, on a sprung suspended base, with auto return, and even disc changer models (from memory) - they had the same base arm and motor though - and you can as a result fit the same upgrades/accessories.
The sprung base gave it much superior isolation from things like footfall, but less damping for higher frequency feedback (which is less of an issue in a home / audiophile situation)

I wouldn't equate 1200s with 1600s at all. The 1200s could well have been marketed that way, but were far above most tts of the time. The additional automation later wasn't "pure" so never paid much attention

 

[dlaloum]

I wouldn't equate 1200s with 1600s at all. The 1200s could well have been marketed that way, but were far above most tts of the time. The additional automation later wasn't "pure" so never paid much attention

I know - and a digital player that has more than a mere play button obviously must perform worse... due to its absence of purity.... (shades of Dr Strangelove...)

 

[Chrispy]

I know - and a digital player that has more than a mere play button obviously must perform worse... due to its absence of purity.... (shades of Dr Strangelove...)

I was avoiding the ridiculousness of a tt to begin with more that a turntable doesn't have automatic features.

 

[Muddywaters]

@Bob from Florida @thewas

Features vs impactful audible/measurables? (I’d lean toward the latter) Not discounting preferences but weigh the necessity. Measurable vs audible obviously aren’t always equal (unless golden ears are involved; not suggesting that’s the case here).

Any bearing friction data for either? Venerable SL12xx was 7mg? My Jelco 750 is spec’d @ 20 mg. I think @JP has a video of an EPA 500 he worked on being influenced by slight air movement? Purely guessing the 1300 GR would be in the same range as the 12xx variants.

Any damping of the arm tubes internally, other damping design/capabilities? Add on’s such as KAB’s fluid damper availability?

Mass in and of itself wouldn’t be a goal in my mind other than intended cartridge compliance range needed. Lateral vs vertical effective mass can also vary (not necessarily in this currently discussed comparison) of 3000/1300 . Mass for compliance accommodation can always be added via headshell swap or good old blutak and coins

*Edited to add connection to 1300/3000 arm discussion since other posts intervened

 

[Kolllak]

Just another Hanpin DD? Looks similar to Magnat 990 etc.

As for specs they are not that bad

 

[thewas]

Just another Hanpin DD? Looks similar to Magnat 990 etc.

I was also wondering if the Denon 3000NE is a Hanpin, as I am not sure who else except few companies like Technics produce their own drives, anyone knows?

 

[mike70]

Paid more in the low $300 range in the mid 80s myself. With vinyl do the "improvements" really mean much? I just wouldn't bother with a tt these days at all....but that's partially perhaps due the solid performance of my tt over the years isn't likely to change before my death.

Technics have some measurements when that improvements matter ... but, my intention was to show you they're not "rebranding" the same product. I mean, it's really a new product with new factory parts, procedure, etc.

If you want to check for crazy price tags is better to look at belt drive manufacturers, where a belt and a microwave oven motor are used without any technology at thousands.