turntable reviews?

[Phorize]

The engineering was looking at direct drives but actually the main thrust was improving the performance of less expensive units using clever engineering, Garrard had a laser based vibration measuring system in 1975.
The 401 was trickling out of the place, the magazines and hence the vast bulk of the fans had gone for the Linn marketing and our own R&D showed DD to be superior but very expensive to engineer for our production volume..

And so ended another chapter in British manufacturing I think that’s the root cause of the nostalgia around these decks, likely at least for me. I sent my 301 to Loricraft for restoration but in the process of winding down the turntable side of the business following the Cadence audio acquisition it was overlooked. As a courtesy SME ended up doing a nut and bolt rebuild. The thing looks better than new, it’s quite eerie. At the time I spoke at length to Terry O’Sullivan and found him to he as friendly as he was talkative. The history of garrard is very interesting and quite typical of that sector. I live just around the corner from the old ICL factory in Hertfordshire. Nearby is a factory that made ladies clothing until ww2 when it shifted to making parachutes and assembling the Bombe computers for Bletchley Park. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

 

[Loathecliff]

Being "rigid" is an idea based on static thinking applied to a dynamic system. Nothing is rigid over the full audible range and the grommets are actually "rigid" enough for correct function where they are placed.
The Lenco chassis is no better than the 401, I am familiar with both.
I do know that both have been in fashion for a while though, which never ceases to surprise me.

Apologies for missing the badge on the puddle!!

 

[Inner Space]

If you don't already have a large LP collection, this is a good time to avoid building one.

Best advice ever. Print it on a slip of paper and keep it in your wallet.

 

[BluesDaddy]

Best advice ever. Print it on a slip of paper and keep it in your wallet.

This is probably true, though I LOVE my LPs and find listening to LPs far more engaging than CDs or digital (and I have over 4000 albums ripped, or otherwise loaded onto, my PC which runs through my audio system). No, I don't believe LPs sound "better" than digital - I am just "engaged" more when I play LPs and confess I like the physicality of LPs. I like having records the same way I like having books. But I've been doing this for 52 years and have a fairly decent size record collection (along with LPs I inherited from my father). I just spent the most money I ever have on a single piece of hi-fi equipment buying a new turntable (though it also came with a cartridge, so I guess that may be counted as two). I hope I'm done, though depending on the phono preamps Amir reviews/tests I may not be. But this site is still a great "brake" for when I feel myself falling for the audiophoolery surrounding vinyl playback and getting sucked him by the BS. Life is about balance, right?

 

[levimax]

No matter how you slice, that aspect of LP performance is terrible. An excellent argument for digital anything.

I beleive the speed stability of a DD TT's is better than most if not all tape machines and cutting lathes.

 

[Helicopter]

Get a Technics SL-1200GR or SL-1200G with the DVD-player speed controller and call it a day. Hard to imagine anything competes on speed control.

 

[Robin L]

I beleive the speed stability of a DD TT's is better than most if not all tape machines and cutting lathes.

Doesn't matter, between low-level warps and off-center records, the speed stability of the turntable itself can only go so far. Again, the biggest problem with LP reproduction is the LP itself, the issues the discs create are unfixable.

 

[Helicopter]

Doesn't matter, between low-level warps and off-center records, the speed stability of the turntable itself can only go so far. Again, the biggest problem with LP reproduction is the LP itself, the issues the discs create are unfixable.

IDK if you can really rank cartridges and records but they are the top 2. If I put an Analog Productions 45 on my son's Crosley console, the cart is going to be way worse than the record. If I put my original Beatles pressings in VG+ on my SL-1200 with an AT-OC9XML, the record will be the constraint. Phono preamp that isn't a broken piece of rubbish is next down the totem pole, well, unless we are talking about speakers too.

 

[Robin L]

IDK if you can really rank cartridges and records but they are the top 2. If I put an Analog Productions 45 on my son's Crosley console, the cart is going to be way worse than the record. If I put my original Beatles pressings in VG+ on my SL-1200 with an AT-OC9XML, the record will be the constraint. Phono preamp that isn't a broken piece of rubbish is next down the totem pole, well, unless we are talking about speakers too.

My advice is you don't put that Analog Productions 45 on your son's Crosley console.

 

[Helicopter]

My advice is you don't put that Analog Productions 45 on your son's Crosley console.

Oh I didn't. This was a thought exercise only.

 

[Chazz6]

It has two tonearms, so maybe it is a specialized turntable for stereo playback.

 

[fieldcar]

It has two tonearms, so maybe it is a specialized turntable for stereo playback.

I've seen two tonearm setups used for comparing different heads and styluses.

 

[JeffS7444]

I'm not sure the now replaced Technics 1200mk2 was the dogs doo-dahs either really. The incredible platter torque did apparently come at a price, apparently the supply regulators injected noise or similar into the servo's (may be bullsh*t but that's what peeps were saying over here) and the mains transformer, underneath the deck plate in my 1500 but under the platter in the 1200mk2, could inject hum if an MC cartridge was used. The tonearm, rigid and massy in the mid 70's ancestor decks, was much lighter (good) but maybe more 'resonant' at audio frequencies (not so good). Bringing it up to date, the very well priced and stripped out SL1500C looks to have addressed much of this and the new motor arrangement looks very like the Pabst based one that my pushing-fifty year old Dual 701 has... All the attention is on the new 1200 models at audiophool prices, but little's been said about the better value? 1500C...

Comparing specs of the various Technics models, I see big difference in mass with the pricey -G model: 18 kg overall versus <10kg for SL1500c and SL1200Mk7, only some of which is due ot the -G's platter, and higher-line model also has much beefier startup torque specs and magnesium arm tube, and boasts of particular attention being paid to flatness and balance of the platter, but I wonder how much of a difference I'd notice..?

One downer that I can see with the SL1500C is that they've eliminated the nice helical arm height adjuster in favor of a more primitive lift-and-lock arrangement like, uh, many a costly high-end product.

 

[Inner Space]

I beleive the speed stability of a DD TT's is better than most if not all tape machines and cutting lathes.

Doesn't matter, between low-level warps and off-center records, the speed stability of the turntable itself can only go so far.

In 1985 the facility where I was working was hired by a record company to present a best-of-vinyl -vs- best-of-CD comparison. By then CDs were becoming popular and some of the suits wanted to understand what it was about the experience that people seemed to prefer. (Which I thought was encouragingly enlightened, and potentially interesting.)

We put together a great TT system and a recent store-bought big-ticket CD player, in a purpose-built listening lounge. Both systems were terrific, and very close in timbre. Both imaged well, wide and precise, throwing big, snowglobe-shaped soundstages. In every aspect except one, it would have been hard to claim jaw-dropping, night-and-day differences between them.

Except that the vinyl's soundstage snowglobe was going wide ... then narrow ... then wide ... then narrow, and a bit up ... and down ... and up ... and down. Just microscopically, and absolutely normal and unremarkable in vinyl terms, but compared directly to the CD's snowglobe, which was neat, tidy, clean and utterly and completely stable, it was a huge difference. The suits concluded that vinyl made people feel subliminally seasick, and that switching to CD took away a headache they never knew they had.

 

[Tom C]

Amir’s an exceptionally bright and talented person. I have no doubt he is more than capable of sorting the issues out. After all, this is 19th and early 20th century technology. It’s at the core relatively simple. It’s possible to control for the variables in a meaningful way. It doesn’t have to be perfect. Nothing ever is.
We all know what the master tapes sound like, right? I mean, for anything originally recorded onto analog magnetic tape, the CD or high resolution copies are indistinguishable from the originals, right? So we’ve all heard exactly what the classic recordings’ master tapes sound like. This is the crux of the BS in high-end audio. It is not possible to do better than the original master tape, and a high quality digital transfer cannot be distinguished from the original.
The claims about analog superiority are as old as the medium itself. Edison held public blindfolded tests to show his reproduction equipment was “indistinguishable” from live performance. When vacuum tube technology was introduced in the 1920’s, a diehard core of audiophiles insisted the new electrical gear was nowhere near as good as the old, acoustic only technology (!!). Truth is, in 2021, turntables, tonearms and cartridges are solved problems, and are actually quite good, even for not tons of money. Maybe not quite as cheap as DAC’s, because they’re mechanical. But I but you can get top level performance from a $1,000 cartridge (maybe a $500 or less), and a $1000 or $2,000 turntable with tonearm, and a $400 phono pre. And that is what Amir is the very best at demonstrating, and that is what makes ASR so very special!

 

[Wombat]

One still has to contend with the gem ploughing vinyl. Do these amazing rigs somehow make the inherent characteristic flaws of the record disappear, e.g. the granular nature of the grooves, groove echo, etc.

The best vinyl rigs don't need to be tested to reveal inferiority to CD. Physics and mechanics analysis has long revealed this.

 

[Frank Dernie]

Apologies for missing the badge on the puddle!!

Lost me there.

 

[DSJR]

One downer that I can see with the SL1500C is that they've eliminated the nice helical arm height adjuster in favor of a more primitive lift-and-lock arrangement like, uh, many a costly high-end product.

Not a downer at all if it's thought out right. An 'engineer's clamp' with single point holding the pillar properly is fine and better for numpties like me, the collet clamp that Notts Analogue use, as this helped otherwise fixed height Rega arms to sing better with no compromise there in my experience.

Do remember, the 1500C is a hell of a lot cheaper than the other 1200 models and where vinyl's concerned, I was trying to keep the deck as good as possible and cheap as possible (Rega for this UK bod is the preferred other option, but US Rega prices are absurd (50% or more higher?), so maybe other home grown alternatives would be better there). I mean, the Fono MM box is £200 here and better than a Mani, but over 'your way' it's $400 or so - madness!

 

[Helicopter]

Comparing specs of the various Technics models, I see big difference in mass with the pricey -G model: 18 kg overall versus <10kg for SL1500c and SL1200Mk7, only some of which is due ot the -G's platter, and higher-line model also has much beefier startup torque specs and magnesium arm tube, and boasts of particular attention being paid to flatness and balance of the platter, but I wonder how much of a difference I'd notice..?

One downer that I can see with the SL1500C is that they've eliminated the nice helical arm height adjuster in favor of a more primitive lift-and-lock arrangement like, uh, many a costly high-end product.

There is also the $1700 1200GR. That is the one to get if you want great tech, and I would recommend that as a reference TT. Made in Japan with outstanding quality. The 1200G is a $4k audio jewelery version that is a tiny bit better because it has more mass where you want it and a magnesium tonearm. It would be a great reference too, but here we are into some big diminishing returns. Might be worth it for some. I am considering one at some point. I wouldn't get any of the others since I already have 3 sl1200 TTs.The 1200Mk7 is a DJ version made in Malaysia. I am sure it is good enough, but it has plastic buttons, and it is not designed for absolute fidelity. 1500c is basically a semi auto home version of the Mk7 with a phono pre built in. It is great for what it is but not as a reference TT.

 

[JSmith]

I already have 3 sl1200 TTs

Nice mate... wish I still had at least one. We talkin' original, Mk2 or newer?



JSmith