10 DD turn table, I'm poor Technics SL1350 but it was $350 in 1973.
83 responses Add your response
Best DD for the money, Denon DP 790. Base can be tamed with soft rubber feet and with a good arm it is such a great value. I also love the Technics SL 110 (1100) replace the plastic thing at the bottom of the bearing spindle with a piece of soft teflon sheet. Like the big JVCs/Victors - QL 5 to the 101 and all between. I used the Micro DD1000 years ago and it was great (what a platter). BUT I still love my Lenco with the real suspension on the metal plinth. |
Hi, i agree with enjoy_the_music but i would include to the list: Goldmund ST4 Sony TTS-8000 Onkyo PX-100M 1. Denon DN-308 2. Denon DP100 and Technics SP-10mk3 3. Pioneer Exlcusive P3 4. Nak T-1000 (when its working properly) 5. Sony PSX9 6. Yamaha GT-2000X 7. Micro Seiki DDX1500 and Pioneer P10 |
salamon67 I really like my Teac TN-400 with SME/Oracle 345 arm and custom cabinet. |
First, I want to update the link I posted in my 12-14-05 entry (scroll up) for the famous Direct Drive site. That (old) link is dead, but all is not lost! (it is now archived.) I think I'm going to save the whole site to my hard drive, just in case ;~) The current link is Welcome to Direct Drive I'm not going to repeat my enthusiasm for the sorbothane-modified Goldmund Studietto. I have two of them now (the second one brand new). I was going to fit the second one with a linear tracking arm (not a Goldmund) but I'm too old now, and the only acceptable arm (AirTangent) is now way out of my price range, so I'll probably list it soon. If anyone has questions about my passion for the Goldmund DD tables, I'll be more than happy to offer my reasons/opinions ;~) Yes, there are other DD tables I respect (the Nakamichi self-centering Dragon, for instance, or that multi-million dollar TT that Michael Fremer has) but for sheer overall performance combined with decades of consistent and trouble-free ease of use, nothing has given me the satisfaction of my Studietto (which I bought new with an SME V arm in 1990!) People have asked me why I never coveted the (very expensive) Goldmund Reference turntable? Well, because it's a belt drive! ;~)) . |
Pani I chose the Denon's, firstly because they are excellent machines and secondly because they are plentiful, theres literarily thousands of them available, and since I do this for a living (making audio equipment) I have to have a supply. Most I get from Japan, I have a scout there helping me secure them. Once they get here they are completely disassembled, all the capacitors replaced and most of the semi conductors as well. Then installed int the wooden plinths, which we make in house, with a completely new power supply etc. Readjusted and calibrated ready for another 40 years of service :-), I only have experience with Denons, and I only do the 3000, 2000, 6000 and 80 as they have "real" motors. I have a few DP75's also, which is a lot like the 80 but with a smaller motor As mention above I just redid a Technics SP10MK2, still need to figure out how to do a good looking plinth for it, which is a lot harder to do because of the plugged together circuit cards that take up almost all the space in the square metal chassis they are built on, also the mechanical brake is an obstacle to "loosing " the metal chassis (The Denon's, 2000, 6000 and 80 have electrical brakes BTW). This is probably the reason that most of the reissue Technics plinths are rectangular, which in my mind is way too "ordinary" I do think the Technics SP10MK2 is a wonderful machine, I'm certain that the MK3 is even better. I redid a Micro Seiki DDX1500 a while back as well that turned out nicely as well, however the drive system, in my opinion, is not on par with the above Denon's or the Technics SP10 MK2, 3 I would state that all the ones you mention are probably equally good at maintaining correct speed if updated and adjusted properly, but there's a lot more to than that to making the "sound" of a turntable, plinth material, platter, record mat etc. Choose just one, thats difficult, my own super biased opinion : a GrooveMaster Vintage Direct DP6 or DP8 :-) with a Graham Phantom, SME 4 or 5, or a Kuzma 4Point (Currently building DP6, with a 4Point for the Ralston Listening Library at the University of the South in Seawanee TN), the choices are endless. Good Listening Peter |
Hi Peter, Your designs are interesting. In the world of direct drives there are few of these usual suspects which include the SP10, DP80, Yamaha GT-2000x, Kenwood L-07d and JVC TT101 to name a few. Since you have been working on DD models, whats your take ? Are any of these models equally good ? Should I be looking for any particular model, e.g SP-10 MK3 if I want top shelf performance ? Finally do you work on restoring any good DDs or are you dedicated to the Denon camp? :-) |
GrooveMaster Vintage Direct The Technics SP10 MK2 is an excellent table as well, the MK3 is even better, however most of the ones offered on eBay for an example are in need of an overhaul, which is certainly doable. Have just finished with a MK2, yet to design /build the plinth and so far I'm very impressed with the machine. Bought a Yamaha PX3 a while back to explore the possibilities - but passed on that one - simply too flimsy a drive mechanism. Do not have any experience with the GT-2000X. Best of Luck Peter |
Reviving this old thread. I am looking for a direct drive turntable for my system. I already have a TJN Reference Lenco. The DD will be to add some variety. Morever I want to test the potential of a good DD. Between a Technics SP-10 MK2 with Obsidian plinth and Yamaha GT-2000X, which one is better (purely going by sonics) ? |
"Never mind that records themselves continued to be mastered on DD cutting lathes, hmmm...." WHAT?? You mean to say that they are cutting all those lousy vibrations right into the records??? Surely you jest, they MUST be using belt-driven lathes since these units are so vastly superior, as proven above.... |
First, I wanted to let everybody know (if you don't already) that the wonderful site "Welcome at Direct Drive" is accessable again through a new link, which is: http://www.oocities.org/de/bc1a69/index_eng.html I wanted to expand a bit on Mmakshak's remarks, because they hint at something that seems to be a recurring event in the world of audio: namely that changes in the market often cause the curtailment in developing certain kinds of equipment/technologies that wind up on the back burner, sometimes for years! One such is the direct drive turntable. The belt drive took over the market because the inexpensive-to-produce version of the belt drive TT, like the original AR for example, sounded way better than the inexpensive-to-produce version of anything else. And both DD and idler drive TT's suffered from this situation -- with consumer DD's in particular getting a reputation for lousy performance -- which they deserved ;--) This is not to say that you couldn't find excellent DD's at the time, particularly from Japan, but none of them were what I would call 'consumer' products, and the companies that made them, particularly the Japanese, made a whole range of other products, and so eventually stopped developing DD's because the market wouldn't support entry-level (i.e., profitable) models. That's just the nature of free-market capitalism. But a whole generation of audio hobbyists were never exposed to DD's for that reason, and what they did hear, is that they sucked! Never mind that records themselves continued to be mastered on DD cutting lathes, hmmm . . . . As a general rule in mechanical engineering design, 'simple is better' IF one can pull it off in the actual product! With renewed interest in vinyl comes a renewed interest in TT's; and as always, new offerings start with the "Neiman-Marcus" models. But with today's advances in materials, electronic control, and manufacturing techniques, it won't be long before a $500 DD turntable hits the market that will provide the obvious benefits of this elegant solution to record spinning. My 2 cents. . |
The question of how belt-drives sounded compared to direct-drives back in the day was asked. There was a discontinuity to the sound of the direct-drives, while the belt-drives ebbed and flowed like real music. The music on direct-drives seemed cut up and had the same sound-no matter what music was playing. I clearly heard this same sound on some higher-end Denons and that Nakamichi 1000(the one that centered the disc.). It was generally assumed that because the motor was directly coupled to the spindle, that there was no way around this problem with direct-drives. Now, since that time, I have become aware of the ability to hear what people are saying about something, and, yet, to listen beyond that(like cd). I still have no desire to own a direct-drive turntable, but maybe understand why the sound might not bother people. I do agree, though, that cd was considered better sound than most turntables in use at the time of its introduction. BTW, the original Walker tt was a cheap turntable when it was introduced. |
...above I miss the Kenwood KD-750. To me one of the best, even with the standard tone arm and e.g. and AT-OC 9. I compared it to quite a number of top DD turntables by Nakamichi, Denon, Technics a.s.o., as well as to top range BD tables by Transrotor and Clearaudio. Some of them in one or another aspect better, but still, the best overall performance was provided by the KD-750, even if it was a real bargain compared to the others mentioned. Just good engineering. I also own a Micro DDX1000 with SME3012, a little more difficult in handling / adjusting, but quite rewarding. My Belt drive Acoustic Solid Small Machine, surely a good table for the money, can't really compete. Neither could my ex-players Thorens 520 and LP12. I don't miss them. |
I have the Micro Seiki DQX 1000. It sound excellent to me but in respect of what TWL said above - yes there are those although very small waves visible in the spindle rotation. But I don't know what had happened as I had bought it second hand. If it had been shipped or just carried with the platter left on that might had caused it. It could be that there was no accident. Anyway want to install a new motor . If anybody can provide information that would be much appreciated. Thank you |
Seals, The later (and better) model Studios and Studiettos, use a JVC PLL quartz-controlled motor. The other makes that T_bone mentions are every bit as good as the Goldmunds. I bought my Studietto (20 yrs. ago!) because I like Swiss industrial design better than Japanese industrial design; the Goldmund performed well, but not as well as some of the Japanese DD's (like the big Denons) until I replaced the spring suspension with sorbothane. Now its performance is truly sensational! |
I don't agree with TWL. They are some great DD tables to get. Also some high end manufacturers are still making DD tables. I own Teac TN-400 and I built 45lbs plinth around it and using it with Alphason tonearm. It sounds great. I went through many turntables like LP12, Rega tables, Avid tables etc and I found my DIY project to be as good and better than others. It is hard nowdays to make inexpensive DD since ther is lot of technology involved in it. Look at the techinics SP10, it is hard to get because there are some people who like them a lot. They are older tables and some work needs to get done on PSUs and table itself to get great results. If you compare bearing on my Teac with LP12 is like laughing someone in the face. Teac bearing is so massive and precise that I don't see any other bearing beeing better than that, oops may be some tables costong 30000 USD are having better bearing, I don't know because I would not spend 30000 on any table unless I win lottery. Getting back to DD tables. They are great tables not all of them, those plastic made tables are worth nothing but they are some mechanical and electrical marvels there made by Sony, Kenwood, and others. |
Goocher, the QLY 5F was a mid-series TT, but you can pick them up for a couple of hundred dollars (or less), and as long as it works well, it should be a decent TT (but won't knock the best listed above off their perch). The things I notice go bad on the Victors/JVCs (of all levels) more than anything else is the strobe light. Victor (=JVC) made a lot of very good tables from the late 1970s through the early 1980s, with the motor technology VERY much like the Denon DP-6000/DP-80/DP-75 motors. The higher-end Victors were the QL-A70/75/95, with the A95 being a very expensive table at the time. The motor on the QLY-5F was most likely a TT-61 or TT-71. The higher range tables had the TT-81, the TT-101, and the TT-801 (which is basically a TT-101 with vacuum hold-down) motors, better plinths, and more money spent on arms. |
Gentlemen, I must politely insist that the Series 20 (Pioneer) PLC-590 with PA-1000 carbon fiber tonearm definitely deserves to make this top 10 list. I bought mine as demonstrator back in 1980 and it is still going stong. It is a heavy piece of equipment with a heavy platter, and runs smooth and quiet, with no discernable distractions or colorations. The only upgrades I have made to it are a FURUTECH tonearm cable, Herbies mat, and AT record stabilizer weight. (Well, and an AT safety Raiser, but that is a convenience item.) This was THE turntable in the high end Series 20 line that Pioneer branched into in the late Seventies, and it is built like the proverbial tank.The high end dealer that turned me on to it also did repairs and used to joke that he made half his money on selling high end (Bedini, etc) stereo equipment and the other half repairing Pioneer and Kenwood stereo equipment. He had to eat a little crow when the Series 20 line was introduced. |
Hello all, just found this thread looking for something else, and just have to throw my 2 cents in. Back in 2000, I purchased an Aries MK1,JMW10,SDS Motor Controller, and a Grado Statement cartridge, and lived with and loved this set-up until two years ago, when one of my friends gave me his Mitchell Cotter. Its based upon the Denon DP600, and carries a Fidelity Research FR66s w silver internal wiring. He also threw in two cartridges, a Mission 773( high output version ), and a Koetsu Rosewood made by the old man. I didn't have time until about six months ago, but I have now played with every combination of cartridge on both tables to do a comparison. I of course began with the preconceived notion that the Cotter didn't stand a chance because it was direct drive and it was going up against a very good belt drive table in the Aries combo. I couldn't have been more wrong. The Cotter bests the Aries in every aspect of performance to my ears with all three cartridges. Now the Grado and Mission are not up to their best in the FR66s arm because of the compliance/arm mass interaction ( those cartridges are theoretically a better match for the JMW10 ), however they all strut their stuff better in the Cotter. The most striking difference to my ears is the complete lack of any background noise with the Cotter. I never knew there was any there with the Aries until I got the Cotter set up properly. That table base is just completely acoustically inert. The top end DD tables that have already been mentioned are all top class contenders, but all DD tables ( and I've been doing a lot of study lately) are better served with a new plinth. There's a lot of info on the Web, and if you're the least bit handy you can make an already great rig significantly better. Well, that's enough for now. Cheers, and enjoy the music. Bill |
I can also vouch for the sound quality of the Yamaha PX-2. My current turntable is the Yamaha GT 2000. This is quite simply a superb turntable.As T bone said,I can also vouch for the effectiveness of the Mag-Lev solution.I have my GT 2000 sitting upon 8 Clearaudio Magix.In order for the Magix to be optimally effective,the individual pylons need to be compressed by the same amount.This directly relates to the resonant frequency at which the isolation begins to take effect.If the pylons are compressed by grossly different amounts,they are all isolating at different frequencies which wastes the application of the pylons. Careful optimisation of this parameter of their performance elevates the GT 2000 to a stunningly good turntable. |
What does the Denon DP-80 give up to other tables? Not a huge amount after it has been re-plinthed, put on a magnetic flotation isolation platform, and set up with a good arm. It has better sound than the PL-7L, but it should. The PL-7L is "newer" but at its peak it cost the same as the Denon motor by itself. The Denon is currently in a slightly better than original (if not terribly pretty) plinth, with a decent SAEC arm (the 407/23 - which I rate pretty highly). I think the Pioneer PL-7L can be better than I have gotten it so far because it has a decent arm and arm bearing, and insulator feet which keep the thing smoother than it has a right to be at its price (all the cost in this table was spent on motor and arm, which are decent - the plinth is well-designed but cheaply made. The isolation footers are very "non-audiophile-approved" (big plastic things with a spring system inside), but they work very well. I have not put a high enough compliance cart on it to make it perform its best. I have one on order so hope to have it on next week to test it out. The Denon DP-80 is better than the Yamaha PX-2, and perhaps also better than the Diatone LT-1, because while they are very nice tables as-is, they are integrated linear trackers and would therefore be difficult to replinth (not impossible for the LT-1, but not easy like the DP-80). The Yamaha PX-1 is very nice. With an isolation platform underneath, it is very, very good. It could be tweaked to be even better (e.g. better tonearm cable, and dampening the diecast plinth might yield improvement (though might not)). I have not yet decided which I like better. Comparisons fall down against the P3 and the MS. The MS is a great belt-drive TT - huge inertia and stability, especially on an isolation platform. There is zero edginess anywhere. Sometimes I have had to check the motor to see if was running slow (never has) just because it sounds so smooth. Using the older "Japanese heyday" arms (the SAEC, the MS Max 237, the FR-64s), it benefits from tracking a given cart a bit higher/heavier than I do on other tables (by a couple tenths). The Denon 'sounds like' the P3, but so far the P3 is better (in almost all respects). Part of this is that the P3 is naturally set up quite well. The arm, motor, and isolation-damping plinth were all designed to work together, and were all designed to a very high standard - flagships are called that for a reason and so have to be able to defend the colors against all comers. The P3 is smoother, but has unbelievable torque. It is tough to beat that. My next challenge is to see if the P3 will go on the magnetic flotation platform and see whether that makes it even better (the P3 is so heavy I am not sure the isolation platform can handle it). In any case, all this talk of multiple TTs is showing me that I need to get rid of some! |
T_bone, Thanks for the info. I'll check it out further. That Denon looks and sounds like a winner! What does it give up to your other good tables? In my case the Linn Axis sits on a very heavy and sturdy solid oak table. That and my other main listening room with my biggest/best speaks (the OHM f-5s) are both located in the basement and sit on the concrete foundation above a thin but dense carpet and pad. I do not think I have vibration issues that are audible, but cannot say for certain. I can go as loud as Hades in the 12X12 equipment room and get no noticeable noise or feedback off the table. I know though that sonic vibrations can have more subtle effects on sound quality so that would be the area of less certainty for me. I may do the test where I listen in the room with the table and in the other room where the F-5s are without it and see what I might hear. I will still put this information regarding DD turntables and plinths in my hat for future reference at a minimum because my Linn Axis will surely not last forever, despite its going strong now since about 1987. Thanks! |
Mapman, if you click on my system, and look at the pics for the Denon DP-80, I can tell you that screwdriver in hand, it would take me 2mins flat to remove the TT from the plinth (assuming it has no record on it - call it another 10 seconds plus the time to put the record in the jacket if as is). The Sony TTS-8000 pic is nude (i.e. wearing no plinth) so you can see what the structure of one of these is. It comes with mounting screws which are similar to the Denon mounting screws (one removes the platter, and mounts the structure to the plinth). I have not yet plinthed that one but a simple method would be to follow the CLD-style plinth recipes as outlined in the 'Home Despot' thread (or elsewhere on the net), with a cutout designed for this particular pattern of body. As for vibrations... there are vibrations all around us. Putting a 200lb TT onto a table, which is mounted on a concrete slab, is OK. Putting a passive system like a vibraplane or similar underneath is a whole new ballgame. I cannot tell you why most of us cannot feel the whole world shaking beneath our feet, but in a a lot of places it does... |
T_bone, Please bear with me in that I am very interested in understanding the practical benefits of a more solid plinth and the effect it has on the sound. What if I just don't tap and keep the jack hammer in the closet? Can I assume that airborne vibrations due to the music playing only is the cause of concern? Also, the rigidity of the stock plinths on most of these tables has to be significantly better than a bowl of jello, so I understand the analogy but am not sure the magnitude of issues due to rigidity is comparable. Also what if the speakers are in a different room than the system compared to in the same room so there is no sonic vibrations either? I have both cases with my system. I also have similar speakers in each room so I suppose I could do some testing to see if I hear a difference in the equipment room versus the other. What work is involved to integrate table and plinth in the case where table is designed to be re-plinthed versus not? Do I have to take apart the old table somehow to put it in the new plinth? What is involved to put it into the new plinth properly? |
Mapman, as to whether sitting on a solid foundation is enough... Build a giant steel-reinforced concrete cube platform - call it 100ft a side. Put an electron microscope on top of it - however the electron microscope is sitting on a piece of plywood which is suspended on top of a giant bowl of jello. Which will matter more to the electron microscope, if a man is tapping on the side of the concrete platform? or if someone is trying to break the bowl of jello with a jackhammer. Re-plinthing a table is not difficult for those which are meant to be re-plinthed (Technics SP-10Mk2, Technics SP-10Mk3, the Denon DPs, the Sony TTS 6000 and 8000, the JVC TT-81 and 101, the Exclusive P10 (and probably the P3), the Pioneer PL70L (and lower models with the Stable Hanging Rotor system), and probably some of the Kenwoods, and probably the top Diatone). Some of the above area easier than others. In the worst case, you design the plinth and get someone to cut the wood for you. If you want to veneer it, watch a youtube video. Doing it really well on the other hand... I am not a furniture maker either, but some of the really nice plinths don't cost that much to have someone else build. |
Can sitting on a solid foundation be a reasonable substitute for having to re-plinth any of these tables? If sitting on a solid foundation otherwise, does the plinth matter as much? That might be a more digestible option for those not inclined to perform major surgery on their playback equipment. Also, how hard is it for a layman to re-plinth a table? I must say it is something that I have never even considered attempting. |
A few other great DD tables which have not gotten a mention here would be the following: Onkyo PX-100M Denon DP-80 (re-plinthed) Sony TTS-8000 (re-plinthed) Lo-D TU-1000 (might benefit from being re-plinthed) Diatone LT-1 Yamaha PX-1 Pioneer PL-1L Cdk84, with zero tweaking vs their original form, I think the top three would have to be the Exclusive P3a/P3, the Denon DP-100M, and perhaps the Sony XS-9. With new plinths and tweaking, the above-mentioned Technics SP-10Mk2/3 should be real winners, as should the ones above. The Denon and Sony have less torque than the Technics, but they have very good speed controllers onboard. I have also heard very good things about the Nak TX-1000. From people who have owned more than 2 of the tables listed, including the Kenwood L-07D and/or the Marantz TT-1000, the constant refrain I have heard is that they look cool but they just don't cut it vs the bigger boys on the list. With tweaking, any number of these would be top drawer - I think the real problem is going to be how easy it might be to get it there - and the SP10Mk2/3 is probably among the easiest to get there. I often wonder how good the Yamaha PX-1 and Diatone LT-1 could be if re-plinthed, but it would be a real shame to chop them up to see. Same with the PL-1L but they are tough to find in working condition these days and Pioneer doesn't seem to want to work on them... Chaskelljr2001, the P3 is a phenomenal table. The Denon DP-80 is also very good if properly plinthed and isolated. |
Cwlondon et al: RE: April 2 '09 post in this thread, mentioning JA Michell TTs: Wrong name! I meant WALKER TT, NOT Michell. I apologize. To explain --not to excuse-- I was tired, writing late into the night. I thought to have fact-checked, but not enough. A lot is at stake for audio designers, hence my retraction: particularly when quoting someone else, I want to be accurate. I recounted an anecdote comparing Technics SP 10 TTs, and the Walker Proscenium TT, NOT any of the JA Michell products. Cheers, David |
In my opinion??? It is ReVox, Denon and then Technics EXACTLY in that order. I put together my first system back in 1983, and that unfortunately was completed with the addition of a NAD 5255 Compact Disc Player back in 1985. Had I went the vinyl route and decided to go with a turntable back then, if it had to be a Direct-Drive, then I would've looked for a vintage Denon with a wooden plinth, the controls at the front edge of the platter, and an "S" shaped tone arm, and would've mounted a Sonus or a Grado M/M Cartridge onto it. Now.... I have a Thorens TD-165 and a VPI Scoutmaster with a JMW Memorial 9 Arm and a Grado Prestige Gold on the Thorens and a Sonata Reference on the VPI/JMW (both which are Belt-Drives). After spending time with these tables, I don't think I can go back to a Direct-Drive. Can You??? --Charles-- |
FWIW, the best times I spent with a TT was when (in the late 70's) I had a Technic's 1350 TT Quartz DD with a Grace 9E. Looked great and played records just fine. Lots of great analog nites. Then I read about high end belt driven TT's and MC cartridges and moved 'up' to an Oracle Delphi and Accuphase cartridge and it was never the same again. Spent far more time fussing with set up, etc and less time actually listening to music. I've been tempted, but someone said that 'you can never go home' so I haven't, but I do wonder. :-) |
Nsgarch From page 80 of a recent Audio Advisor catalogue: "It's no wonder so many people embraced CDs when they were first introduced. Their turntables sounded terrible! If you've still listening to an older, direct drive turntable, you've never really heard the music on your records." For me, this was a new low for AA, in a descent which began circa 2004, perhaps when they hired the business genius who also writes copy like HUGE SALE! UP TO 10% OFF ALL RACKS. Mapman "Quiet or not" is an excellent point which perhaps sums up the whole debate very nicely. My memory however is that starting with the cult like promotion for the Linn LP 12, a generation of listeners was somehow led to believe that direct drives were only suitable for basement party disc jockeys and the shame of any golden eared audiophiles. Plenty of salespeople and audiophiles made this claim. I have always found this fascinating because I loved my Kenwood KD 500, I enjoyed my Yamaha PX2, and I hated my Linn LP 12 - the worst turntable I ever had. |
