Technics SL-1300G New Generation Grand Class Turntable

[DSJR]

It is not outrageously expensive. But in 2024 it is poor value considering how far behind digital it inevitably is. Trying to improve vinyl playback is a fool’s errand.

Okay, I'll bite -

How far up the vinyl playback level have you gone?

At its very best, vinyl really isn't as far behind digital as measurements would suggest and for UK £700 all in including stylus upgrade and phono stage, I'd love to try this on more demanding music -

 

[Purité Audio]

I bought many really expensive turntables, but as long as they went around at the correct speed, fitted with the same arm and carts hardly any difference.

At one time I used these two Technics SL12 ‘Monarchs’ same table same arms, different cartridges, same two phono stages , I found it interesting interesting but customers seemingly not so much, suspect they would prefer to ‘believe’ .
Keith

 

[GXAlan]

Vinyl equipment cannot be about sound quality. It’s still the novelty/aura of everything else’s that surrounds it and wealth signaling.

Vinyl itself is great, from the standpoint of the content, both from the master/mix and the availability of content.

1) the flattest cartridge in the database measured here is the discontinued Shure V15 Type 5’s. We have not gotten better cartridges from a FR standpoint.

So a lot of cartridges are about the non linear tone curve it imparts. A lot of MC cartridges have an upsloping higher frequency which gives that shimmer and detail. I would not be surprised if the upslope is non linear like my 300B SET.

2) Playback is only as good as the cleanliness of your source. The most consistent vinyl cleaning machine, the DeGritter is $3300. Huge added cost, which provides real improvements in sound — but also another way of wealth signaling…

3) I have the Sony PS-X555ES, the last flagship from Sony. Fully automatic, linear tracking, and BioTracer active “suspension”. In terms of noise, rumble, hum, it’s still better than anything else out there including these new master flagships.

The X800 which is the older version was measured here:

Sony PS-X800 Turntable Lab Report

Lab Report Sony's quartz-locked brushless/slotless direct-drive motor brings the alloy platter up to 33.3rpm in a little over one second and holds it to an absolute speed accuracy of +0.005%. Peak wow is very low at 0.02% [main signal, Graph 1] and while there's some slight broadening of the...

www.hifinews.com

(The X800 is heavier and thought to be more reliable but the specs were better on the X555ES.)

The reason no one tries to match the noise of this classic Sony is that the noise from the medium is way higher. All of those improvements are less useful.

4) I have the Sharp RP-117 and a Linn LP12/Minos PSU/Ittok LVII/Monster Cable Sigma 2000MC which is premium subjective-audiophile-approved setup.

They sound a lot more alike than different. The RP-117 has the most noise at baseline, but this noise disappears once the music starts

At the end of the day, my most used vinyl setup is the LP12, but it’s likely for the lack of neutrality that makes it feel different and exciting.

 

[Purité Audio]

I had their PS-B80 it was great but I always lived with the apprehension of it going wrong, and it was hugely complicated in a 1970s fashion.
Turntables are great but records, you would think in this day and age they would be able to make something with lasers.
Keith

 

[GXAlan]

Turntables are great but records, you would think in this day and age they would be able to make something with lasers.

Cannot tell how sarcastic you are being

But for the purpose of internet discussion, there is the compact disc… and the laser turntable:

Industry Update

Laser turntable launch: Despite its having been available on a limited basis for several years (and having been written about in magazines like Stereophile since 1988), the ELP Corporation's laser turntable was officially introduced into the North American market on May 18.

www.stereophile.com

 

[markstein]

Regarding arm resonance:I have added the KAB silicone oil damper and plastic screw (at the add on weight thread) to my SL1210GR tonearm, and these modifications do not hurt...

 

[Purité Audio]

Tats precisely why I used two identical turntables so I could really judge whether ‘tweeks’ made any audible difference.
Keith

 

[JeffS7444]

So, the cue lever is smoother? That's it?

How exactly do the tonearm resonances measure better? I see that the plots look different. What is 'better' here? How exactly does that influence signal coming from the cartridge?

Good questions, and I've been wondering about making standardized test recordings, using same model of cartridge, and same records, which would allow different TT+arm combos to be measured, even ABX'd, just like any other component. Not a perfect arrangement, as turntables also pick up vibrations from the environment, but it'd be a start. Somehow, it wouldn't surprise me if my dad's old AR XA was really "it", clunky-looking tonearm and all.

 

[undeakyetonde]

3) I have the Sony PS-X555ES, the last flagship from Sony. Fully automatic, linear tracking, and BioTracer active “suspension”. In terms of noise, rumble, hum, it’s still better than anything else out there including these new master flagships.

The X800 which is the older version was measured here:

Sony PS-X800 Turntable Lab Report

Lab Report Sony's quartz-locked brushless/slotless direct-drive motor brings the alloy platter up to 33.3rpm in a little over one second and holds it to an absolute speed accuracy of +0.005%. Peak wow is very low at 0.02% [main signal, Graph 1] and while there's some slight broadening of the...

www.hifinews.com

(The X800 is heavier and thought to be more reliable but the specs were better on the X555ES.)

Would you please share these specs? Which specs were better?

 

[Robin L]

Okay, I'll bite -

How far up the vinyl playback level have you gone?

At its very best, vinyl really isn't as far behind digital as measurements would suggest and for UK £700 all in including stylus upgrade and phono stage, I'd love to try this on more demanding music -

Ah yes, but how far down the digital food chain can one go and still outperform any LP based playback gear? I've got Topping's E30/L30 combo feeding my amp, play lots of densely orchestrated symphonic music, hear the music with greater clarity that I've ever encountered with any of my turntable-based set-ups. $3000 (plus digital source) vs $4,000 (plus phono preamp)? No contest.

 

[Robin L]

Good questions, and I've been wondering about making standardized test recordings, using same model of cartridge, and same records, which would allow different TT+arm combos to be measured, even ABX'd, just like any other component. Not a perfect arrangement, as turntables also pick up vibrations from the environment, but it'd be a start. Somehow, it wouldn't surprise me if my dad's old AR XA was really "it", clunky-looking tonearm and all.

There was an ABX of the AR XA vs an extremely expensive turntable, the results were pretty much a wash, leaning ever so slightly in AR XA's favor. Owned the AR XA a lot of times during vinyl's heyday. There was a time in the 1980's when one would practically trip over the things in yard sales in Berkeley. When everything was operating fine, they sounded great but suffered a lot from floor bounce.

 

[JeffS7444]

There was an ABX of the AR XA vs an extremely expensive turntable, the results were pretty much a wash, leaning ever so slightly in AR XA's favor. Owned the AR XA a lot of times during vinyl's heyday. There was a time in the 1980's when one would practically trip over the things in yard sales in Berkeley. When everything was operating fine, they sounded great but suffered a lot from floor bounce.

That's pretty funny. It's kind of a pity that DD turntables with suspension are rare: Goldmund. Pierre Lurne, Mitchell Cotter's gigantic plinth for the SP10 motor, maybe the original Technics SL1300, 1400, 1500 Mk IIs, and seemingly, not much else. But the combination of a high torque motor and soft suspension can cause some drama.

Could be that the foam dampening material packed into the AR XA's suspension springs (and tonearm vertical bearing!) had rotted.

 

[Petrushka]

Oh crap - this has set my ASD vibes off - and NOTHING to do with the product itself

The SL1300 was a fecking FULL AUTO deck, start and stop, the 1350 a 'changer' type when made. B&O used to re-use model numbers and it got me right going at the time. This re-use of an established number has done it again in my dotage...

Why can't they find another number series to use, it's already all but impossible for a non-anal-follower like me to rationalise the different and 'evolved' 1200 models over several decades now

Oh, where's the strobe and disc support?

Moan over - as you were fellas, as you were


All this money on bling when the basic model at a fraction of the price has arguably better tech performance than many of the lathes which cut the master acetates in the first place

I paid $175, and that included a good AT cartridge.

 

[Robin L]

That's pretty funny. It's kind of a pity that DD turntables with suspension are rare: Goldmund. Pierre Lurne, Mitchell Cotter's gigantic plinth for the SP10 motor, maybe the original Technics SL1300, 1400, 1500 Mk IIs, and seemingly, not much else. But the combination of a high torque motor and soft suspension can cause some drama.

Could be that the foam dampening material packed into the AR XA's suspension springs (and tonearm vertical bearing!) had rotted.

Nope, I experienced that with the AR XA all along, got my first one as new in 1973, bought new.

 

[JeffS7444]

you would think in this day and age they would be able to make something with lasers.

You mean like this?
https://www.elpj.com/
Obvious "problem" (besides price) is that it appears that there's nothing to tweak, and whatever marvelous mechanisms it employs, are hidden from view.

 

[mhardy6647]

Magnesium arm, eh?
Best of all, it's flammable.

 

[Joe Smith]

Remain happy with my AT 120 table, with an AT Microline cartridge. Does everything I need it to do, all for about $400. While I own a lot of LPs, I've always had modest tables and been perfectly happy.

 

[IshkaBibble98]

So, the cue lever is smoother? That's it?

How exactly do the tonearm resonances measure better? I see that the plots look different. What is 'better' here? How exactly does that influence signal coming from the cartridge?

No, it's more than just the cue lever, and the aforementioned smoothness of positioning the arm in the horizontal direction.

The combination of cartridge+tonearm resonance affect the smoothness of how the cartridge is reading the grooves, as the stylus moves up/down, and sideways along the record. In some but not all cases, bad tonearm resonance causes total resonance to have slightly varying volume levels as the stylus tracks. Or simply impacts the cartridge's ability to accurately read all the frequencies in the source.

There's a wealth of discussion if you Google for "tonearm resonance." In general, higher-quality tonearms usually use stiffer, lighter materials with less resonance than a classic aluminum tonearm.

As far as the graphs go -- keeping in mind that the turntable on the right is NOT the SL-1200G but a higher-end Technics -- it's showing that the resonances are much, much flatter (non-existent, or much less) between 400Hz and almost 2000Hz.

It's a personal preference, but if I had kept a SL-1200GR I had once (not a GR2), I doubt I would upgrade to the new SL-1300G. Sure, it'd add improvements in motor accuracy and stability and the platter and plinth. But I'd prefer to also have an improved arm. A more costly but more "worth it" upgrade (to ME) would be to get some future "SL-1200G2" (or whatever they call it!!). With all the improvements from the SL-1200GR and SL-1300G, plus a better tonearm (even if they stick with the one already on the SL-1200G).

I'm not even sure if the 1200GR/GR2's arm is any different than what comes on the SL-100C or SL-1500C.

 

[GXAlan]

Would you please share these specs? Which specs were better?

They are very similar but the effective tonearm length is shorter on the 555ES. Normally longer tonearms track worse but reduce distortion from the center vs outer groove, but for a linear tracking turntable, shorter has the benefits without the downsides.

 

[DSJR]

Ah yes, but how far down the digital food chain can one go and still outperform any LP based playback gear? I've got Topping's E30/L30 combo feeding my amp, play lots of densely orchestrated symphonic music, hear the music with greater clarity that I've ever encountered with any of my turntable-based set-ups. $3000 (plus digital source) vs $4,000 (plus phono preamp)? No contest.

You can go down to the SU1 and its even simpler sibling for top rate digital playback, albeit basic in casework and facilities... I never said how much vinyl at its best would cost, but the best diamond styli and generators can keep the 'effects' of IGD and surface noise surprisingly at bay and a good phono stage with plenty of headroom won't do nasty things when hit with a loud surface tick (the most anal record collectors have proper cleaning machines as an essential part of their regime.

As I said, that AT LP5/add-on 95ML stylus and Spartan 5 phono stage for £700 appears on the face of it to be quite effective. I have several hundred LPs, 200 12" singles and can't afford to replace any more with digital, so have to play the music contained on *something* - and it's the music that's the most important. My vinyl player is acceptable and climbing in value, so I'm not bothered that it may not be the very top of that particular tree...

By the way, I don't play much orchestral/symphonic music at all, but fully understand the terrible issues many domestic lovers of that and similar music genres had with vinyl records back then - over here, most lovers of music such as this, embraced digital with open arms and got rid of their vinyl collections in th efirst years of the appearance of CD. I maxed out on my then credit card very quickly after buying my first CD player in 1985 (Meridian MCD-Pro).