Technics SL-1300G New Generation Grand Class Turntable

[Robin L]

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.

That would be (or would have been) me.

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...

Understandable.

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).

Oddly enough, during the first years of CDs, I still clung to my LPs and turntables because there was something about the sound of CDs I didn't like. They seemed to lack resolution as the sound levels went down. I don't hear that at all anymore. I think the digital gear I'm using now is streets ahead of what I was using around 1988.

 

[undeakyetonde]

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.

If you google "tonearm resonance" you mostly get information about tonearm/cartridge resonance, which is different from resonances inherent to the tonearm (I assume of its tube & bearings). If you dig deeper, you can read some audiophile prose on how this is really important. But I thought here at ASR we tend not to count that prose as evidence of anything real - you can read same things about cables and so on and so on

Maybe you could explain how exactly tonearm resonances can affect signal coming from the cartridge? What kind of distortion would it introduce? How much? Can I simulate it on a computer? How could I hear in my own tonearm, when it is playing a record? A test record? The graphs from hifinews show dBs on one of the axis, what 0 dB refers to? If a resonance 'impacts the cartridge's ability to accurately read' this frequency, then what it reads instead of it? Nothing? Different frequency? If it adds harmonics, surely harmonic distortion added by a tonearm can be measured? Etc etc

It is really hard to find anything decent on the internet on this topic, that's why I'm asking. Maybe somebody has a proper technical article to share

 

[J.M. Noble]

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.

I believe the bolded statements are contradictory if by "quality" you mean a subjective value. "Fidelity" would be a a better word if that's not what you're saying.

Vinyl mastering is different and to my ears frequently more pleasing (and not as loud as) than the latter-day remasters for digital formats. This can even be true for contemporary multi-format releases.

Edited to add:

Regarding the new SL-1300, I am so satisfied with my SL-1500C (with 2M Blue stylus) in every way that the new gee-whiz holds zero interest for me.

 

[restorer-john]

The RP-117 has the most noise at baseline, but this noise disappears once the music starts

That because the RP-117 is just a clever toy. I have several of them mostly picked up in the 90s at recycling centres for a dollar or two. They were fun to restore/repair and they always impressed friends. I mean when did you see a table you can randomly program tracks in any order of either side of a record and watch it play them?

It has a cassette deck style servo motor and belt running around a plastic mini platter on a "bearing" that is just a cheap sleeve/pin. The entire loading mechanism is dependent on a single nylon gear that cracks if the drawer is bumped. Isolation? Nah.

But it was just the turntable in a cute plastic midi system in the mid 80s.

Sharp/Optonica had some interesting stuff but nothing "classic". I had the Optonica RP-7100 QL DD random programmable TT (2nd optical arm) with the plate glass lid. Cool thing, but didn't sound good.

The best thing about it was the built in overhang set point moulded on the plinth. See below.

wall to wall components:

Your PSX-555es Sony is a keeper.

 

[GXAlan]

I believe the bolded statements are contradictory if by "quality" you mean a subjective value. "Fidelity" would be a a better word if that's not what you're saying.

Vinyl mastering is different and to my ears frequently more pleasing (and not as loud as) than the latter-day remasters for digital formats. This can even be true for contemporary multi-format releases.

Edited to add:

Regarding the new SL-1300, I am so satisfied with my SL-1500C (with 2M Blue stylus) in every way that the new gee-whiz holds zero interest for me.

We actually hold the same general perspective. I am a fan of listening to music on vinyl for the end result. However, once you hit a bare minimum threshold in vinyl equipment/hardware, there’s not much more. Your SL-1500c/2M Blue is already 90% of what you can achieve even with the flagship turntables and cartridges, and I would bet that if you got to clean the vinyl before your SL-1500c and the premium one was fresh out of the package (with the paper dust), you would get a similar experience.

That because the RP-117 is just a clever toy.
…
Your PSX-555es Sony is a keeper.

Thanks.

The only things that fail on it are the super slim string that holds the whole thing together and the plexiglass cover.

Mine got so far as to need a bulb replacement for the auto detection mechanism of disc size. These bulbs were supposed to last forever so they were soldered and not socketed…

 

[restorer-john]

We actually hold the same general perspective. I am a fan of listening to music on vinyl for the end result. However, once you hit a bare minimum threshold in vinyl equipment/hardware, there’s not much more. Your SL-1500c/2M Blue is already 90% of what you can achieve even with the flagship turntables and cartridges, and I would bet that if you got to clean the vinyl before your SL-1500c and the premium one was fresh out of the package (with the paper dust), you would get a similar experience.



Thanks.

The only things that fail on it are the super slim string that holds the whole thing together and the plexiglass cover.

Mine got so far as to need a bulb replacement for the auto detection mechanism of disc size. These bulbs were supposed to last forever so they were soldered and not socketed…

The hinge pin/hole breaks on the plexi cover. Did you repair it or is it missing? I may have a spare parts donor in my storeroom. Definitely got a few spare arms. Upper and lower.

They will track just about any really badly warped record whereas a pivoted arm will be thrown off.

 

[DSJR]

Oddly enough, during the first years of CDs, I still clung to my LPs and turntables because there was something about the sound of CDs I didn't like. They seemed to lack resolution as the sound levels went down. I don't hear that at all anymore. I think the digital gear I'm using now is streets ahead of what I was using around 1988.

None of this is about the SL1300G, but to finish off (?) I agree and actually blame the rather coloured state of vinyl pickups of the early to mid 80s (bumped up bass and top-down, coupled with marginal finish and shaping of the styli), coupled with (in the UK) rather dire performing amps rather more like PA types in distortion and speakers basically like NS10's but tamer (I have the series of 'Choice' tests as evidence

I never fully got on with the early Philips/Marantz '14 bit' models, finding I got a headache after 45 minutes or so. It wasn't until I heard the Meridian player mentioned above that I found a player I could use for hours at a time, although the Mission DAD 7000 and B&O CDX I could have lived with back then in my (looking back0 slightly peaky sounding system designed to partner a vinyl source of the time.

A few years ago, I heard an original generation Sony 101 CD player and it 'sounded' absolutely fine to me, maybe a touch 'dry' in perspective, but no harshness or 'dirt' up top.

Anyway, and kind-of back to topic. I'm hugely fond of the mid 70s Technics top-line models, such as the 1300/1400/1500 and the suspended under-tray 1600/1700/1800, as with not silly tweaks and careful siting, they 'sound' grand with modern pickups. the early 'quartz' replacements have fine drives if sited right, but the cueing devices on these first models with arm pillar height adjustment, tend to fail and not sure if repairs are possible (no spares even thirty years ago when the failures started happening ) - I feel that this is a design fault and the makers in a way, should be held responsible and pay to re-tool and make the part, maybe with strengthened materials, as the rest of this generation of decks (1300, 1400, 1500mk2) are so good otherwise, albeit with a slight 'richness' of tone originally unless carefully sited.

So, with this new model, what are we paying extra for? A shiny flat screw-on 'metal mat' offering no real contact on the vinyl for good or ill and maybe some slightly better isolation? One still has the severe weaknesses of the headshell fitting, which 99% of users totally ignore, but which comes up in tonearm resonance measurements time after time in the lower hundred Hertz region - maybe a w@nky headshell and solid-body MC cartridge can disguise it, I don't know, but far eastern audiophiles seem to prefer a collection of cartridges for different pressings and the ability to change them over fairly quickly for some reason (just use effin' tone controls instead - oh... )

Maybe the extra profit made on this model will keep the loss leader siblings under a grand going in production, perhaps?

 

[DSJR]

If you google "tonearm resonance" you mostly get information about tonearm/cartridge resonance, which is different from resonances inherent to the tonearm (I assume of its tube & bearings). If you dig deeper, you can read some audiophile prose on how this is really important. But I thought here at ASR we tend not to count that prose as evidence of anything real - you can read same things about cables and so on and so on

Maybe you could explain how exactly tonearm resonances can affect signal coming from the cartridge? What kind of distortion would it introduce? How much? Can I simulate it on a computer? How could I hear in my own tonearm, when it is playing a record? A test record? The graphs from hifinews show dBs on one of the axis, what 0 dB refers to? If a resonance 'impacts the cartridge's ability to accurately read' this frequency, then what it reads instead of it? Nothing? Different frequency? If it adds harmonics, surely harmonic distortion added by a tonearm can be measured? Etc etc

It is really hard to find anything decent on the internet on this topic, that's why I'm asking. Maybe somebody has a proper technical article to share

Try to find some 80's issues of HiFi Choice 'turntable & tonearm' test books. All the tonearms were tested and the results telling... Not sure you could simulate a more 'lively' arm with software, but I feel it was audible and taken into account back then, the structurally more rigid models (Rega RB250/300/SME V/Kuzma/Zeta from memory) were criticised in the subjective fraternity for 'deadening' the sound too much, when what they were doing was reproducing the sh*t-balanced pickups we sold back then (modern descendents being the Sumiko Pearl and sadly, many Grados with falling hf response). Fitting them in the UK to a mid 80s spec Linn LP12 in full 'fruitbox' sonic mode didn't help either.

My cr'p above should be a perfect reason for so many of you lot going over to digital, disposing of your vinyl collections years ago and forgetting the whole concept of a bit of polished shaped rock, dragging along in a groove moulded in a 'bit of plastic!' Mind you, I do at my age prefer the sleeve artwork and text size on an LP jacket.

 

[restorer-john]

I never fully got on with the early Philips/Marantz '14 bit' models, finding I got a headache after 45 minutes or so.

I have to agree.

That said, I have several early 14 bit players and a few 2nd generation 14 bit Toshiba players that actually are a joy to listen to, even though their measured performance might leave a bit on the table.

 

[restorer-john]

the structurally more rigid models (Rega RB250/300/SME V/Kuzma/Zeta from memory) were criticised in the subjective fraternity for 'deadening' the sound too much, when what they were doing was reproducing the sh*t-balanced pickups we sold back then

The Rega arms were nothing special and remain nothing special to this day. They were terrible trackers in my experience with considerable bearing friction in all planes. I would take practically any Technics arm over a Rega any day of the week.

The only reason they got any traction or "reputation" was the dreadfully biased UK HiFi press.

 

[Purité Audio]

Rega are held in high regard in the U.K. , personally I can’t understand why, mind you the LP12 was held in high regard and I couldn’t understand that either, the Hi-Fi press has a lot to answer for.
Keith

 

[copperblue]

I've been using 1210s at home since the late 1980's; I could never get them to sound quite right with the stock arm/stock arm + kab damper/shrink tubing damped/o ring damped. I tried the Origin One a few years ago, didn't get on with that. The OL Alliance has removed that "haze". I'm delighted with it. Apologies for the potato cam quality of the older images

 

[DSJR]

The Rega arms were nothing special and remain nothing special to this day. They were terrible trackers in my experience with considerable bearing friction in all planes. I would take practically any Technics arm over a Rega any day of the week.

The only reason they got any traction or "reputation" was the dreadfully biased UK HiFi press.

John, sorry, but you're absolutely wrong here in my experience (I'm not talking of the Japanese made R200 S shaped arm), unless the RB arms you worked on had been damaged or not liking your climate after being shipped halfway around the world! Even the RB250 with loctited bearing races had low friction and the RB300, hand matched races to the stainless steel shafts (it's not easy to do, but I did have a go at the factory at hand-matching). Bearing friction should be below an estimated 20mg in each plane and never ever notchy. The single fixing nut of old made 'termination' with different arm-board materials tricky, but that's not for here in this thread. The only real criticism could be that the magnetic bias correction was excessive, easily solved by setting to half the suggested setting and the copper cartridge tags didn't care for fumbly-fingers. I have an as yet unused brand new RB330 here (tripod fixing) and the finish is very much improved as well over the originals I knew so well and the exit cables look far posher, even if the originals were fine really, despite looking cheap. Current versions have all but eliminated structural resonances at source too, according to HFW tests done a few years back.

The subjective press here hated them, as the lack of major resonances didn't make the 'sound' of old-fashioned pickups 'exciting' as other competing and dearer designs did. In fact, a highly bodged arm using the RB bearings but with a different tube/shell grafted on, introduced a reviewer-loving severe resonance at 450Hz or so... Other more tech based reviewers tended to respect the RB designs but never really liked them, livelier designs usually being used by said reviewers instead (the Ittok is another potential clanker over 1kHz but 'we' all loved it!).

 

[Robin L]

I never fully got on with the early Philips/Marantz '14 bit' models, finding I got a headache after 45 minutes or so. It wasn't until I heard the Meridian player mentioned above that I found a player I could use for hours at a time, although the Mission DAD 7000 and B&O CDX I could have lived with back then in my (looking back0 slightly peaky sounding system designed to partner a vinyl source of the time.

I didn't find a CD player I really enjoyed until I hooked up the Toslink out of a Rat Shack portable player (one that got some notice in the subjective audio press) to a 20-bit capable effects box, ADC/DAC. That solved most (not all) of the resolution issues. Remember, I'm listening via Stax Earspeakers. Maybe not the most High in fidelity, but certainly about as analytical as it gets.

 

[thewas]

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.

Shorter arm has always the downside of larger VTA change at changing record height since nothing is perfectly flat.

 

[JeffS7444]

All this SL1200 talk makes me want to buy one, even though I hardly listen to records anymore

If I could revisit my first-gen Sylvania (Philips) CD player, I've a hunch that I'd find it's sonics perfectly OK, but that my 1980s speakers, room and headphone setups would measure woefully, and likely caused whatever "digital fatigue" I experienced at the time.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

Love the discussion in this thread of magnesium used in the highest-end Technics tonearms. U-Turn sells turntables starting at <$300 that use a one-piece thixoformed magnesium tonearm, so let's dispense with the idea that magnesium is some sort of high-end, unobtanium finery in such applications.

Technics is gorging on the fat wallet audiophile crowd with their current offerings.

 

[J.M. Noble]

Love the discussion in this thread of magnesium used in the highest-end Technics tonearms. U-Turn sells turntables starting at <$300 that use a one-piece thixoformed magnesium tonearm, so let's dispense with the idea that magnesium is some sort of high-end, unobtanium finery in such applications.

Technics is gorging on the fat wallet audiophile crowd with their current offerings.

I checked, and these are some sample Technics prices:

SL-1300: $350 in 1975 = $2,110 in 2024
SL-1300 Mk2: $490 in 1978 = $2,465 in 2024
SL-1210 Mk2: $750 in 1979 = $3,450 in 2024
SL-1000 Mk2: $1,400 in 1978 = $7,000 in 2024

Prices found here, inflation adjustment from the BLS inflation calculator.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

I checked, and these are some sample Technics prices:

SL-1300: $350 in 1975 = $2,110 in 2024
SL-1300 Mk2: $490 in 1978 = $2,465 in 2024
SL-1210 Mk2: $750 in 1979 = $3,450 in 2024
SL-1000 Mk2: $1,400 in 1978 = $7,000 in 2024

Prices found here, inflation adjustment from the BLS inflation calculator.

It's a different world and different market place than it was in the 1970s. Nobody in the mass market would ever spend the money you note above for these machines in 2024. There has been a decades-long consumer market shift that has reset expectations downward for prices of goods. These inflation equivalency calculators are usually useless because nothing is as it was in the past.

Show me a viable market for a $3,500 SL-1210MK7 in 2024.

The only way Technics can sell their tarted up models is with supposed improvements on motor technology and fancier materials and finishes. Are any of these changes audible? Call me skeptical.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

John, sorry, but you're absolutely wrong here in my experience (I'm not talking of the Japanese made R200 S shaped arm), unless the RB arms you worked on had been damaged or not liking your climate after being shipped halfway around the world! Even the RB250 with loctited bearing races had low friction and the RB300, hand matched races to the stainless steel shafts (it's not easy to do, but I did have a go at the factory at hand-matching). Bearing friction should be below an estimated 20mg in each plane and never ever notchy. The single fixing nut of old made 'termination' with different arm-board materials tricky, but that's not for here in this thread. The only real criticism could be that the magnetic bias correction was excessive, easily solved by setting to half the suggested setting and the copper cartridge tags didn't care for fumbly-fingers. I have an as yet unused brand new RB330 here (tripod fixing) and the finish is very much improved as well over the originals I knew so well and the exit cables look far posher, even if the originals were fine really, despite looking cheap. Current versions have all but eliminated structural resonances at source too, according to HFW tests done a few years back.

The subjective press here hated them, as the lack of major resonances didn't make the 'sound' of old-fashioned pickups 'exciting' as other competing and dearer designs did. In fact, a highly bodged arm using the RB bearings but with a different tube/shell grafted on, introduced a reviewer-loving severe resonance at 450Hz or so... Other more tech based reviewers tended to respect the RB designs but never really liked them, livelier designs usually being used by said reviewers instead (the Ittok is another potential clanker over 1kHz but 'we' all loved it!).

Agreed. If there is anything that Rega is widely admired for it's their tonearms. They are well reviewed and typically very nicely priced. Rega takes a lot of flack on a couple of the audio forums that is mostly undeserved IMO.