2. analog
  3. 136281-369

Technics Sp10 Mk2 vs SL-1200G - I finally did an A/B

Guys, it is payback time. I have asked so many questions here to improve my knowledge or make a good purchase. I should give back now.

This is a topic that is HOT these days. Are the new generation Technics 1200G/GAE and Sp10-R better than the vintage Sp10 Mk2 and Mk3 ? 

I have myself asked this question multiple times here. The most common reply was a resounding "Yes" in favour of the new 1200G/GAE. The 10R is still too new and not many have a direct opinion. But in general, even those who have commented on the 1200G vs Sp10 mk2, almost no one has compared them side by side. Some have written based on aural memory, some based on specs and design, and some have written based on pure subjective opinion.

In any case, most of us are very happy that Technics has done it. A very few business oriented minds might be disappointed that their business around vintage Technics DDs would take some hit due to these modern machines.

Since I was in the market for a good high resolution TT to replace my modded Loricraft Garrard 301, I took active interest in the Technics DDs. Overall I was convinced that the 1200G is the machine to look out for. It was clearly favored over the smaller sp10 and more or less compared to the bigger sp10 mk3. I got a brand new 1200G and sent it to Time-Step audio for their Evoke PSU mod. It is a very well accepted mod in the UK markets. In general the Switch-Mode PSU of the 1200G is considered its Achilles heel so this mod was a necessity.

I finally had the 1200G at my home. I won't go into the process of setting up as it was a simple and straight forward one. I used its own Technics tonearm to start with. I tried couple of platter mats but its own default mat sounded fine so it remained. I have 2 cartridges to play, the Denon 103r and Ortofon Cadenza blue. None of them are esoteric stuff, but I find them very neutral and musically "right" sounding carts.

Straightaway the 1200G revealed that it was a more transparent and higher resolution player than the Garrard. The noise floor was lower, inner details more easily heard. Soundstage more precise and layered. Great! There was an extra sparkle to the sound which was quite thrilling. More like going from HD to UHD. What felt a bit lacking was overall dynamics and scale. The 1200G sounded "Compact". The Garrard was like a full blown full scale sound. I let the 1200G run at 78rpm for many hours so that the burn-in process is expedited. I also tried both the auto and manual servo settings to vary the torque and balance of the sound. As I listened more I also realized that the 1200G does not have the fluidity that I am used to with the Garrard or other belt drive TTs I have heard. Notes bloom but die out instantly, followed by a silence before the next note. Something that joins the notes so that it all sounds related was missing a bit. In terms of dynamics, the intensity of an "explosion or a shout" was kind of controlled. That takes away a bit of that startle factor which allows us to get awestruck with our systems. Bass on the 1200G sounded a bit chopped. It did not feel very deep and powerful. I rather felt I am listening to mid-upper bass with average impact. But when it came to details it sounded like a super Cd player in a good way.

I decided to play with the tonearm at this point. I have a 47 Labs RS-A1 tonearm which has its own standing mount. One can just lift it and place it at the right distance so that the under-hang is correct and you are good to go. It is a musical tonearm. Once installed, this tonearm gave the Technics a significant jump on the performance. Especially it made the Technics sound less hifi and more musical, more fluid, more jump factor. Just plain more realistic. But then it brought the same kind of improvements to the Garrard too. I did a lot of comparison shifting this tonearm between the 2 TTs. All my above comments about their differences holds true. 

After about 2 weeks and multiple hours of comparison on all kinds of music, I decided that while there are areas where the Garrard lacks and Technics clearly shines, musically Garrard is more realistic whereas Technics is more cerebral. I knew I was going to miss that hi-rez sparkle from Technics but I could only keep one so it has to go. I sold the 1200G. But the curiosity still remained so I bought a Sp10 Mk2.

After there 1200G left my place, the Sp10 Mk2 arrived. I did not have a plinth but I had read on Audiogon that it can be used in the naked form with a suitable isolation like the Audio Technica AT-636 Pneumatic footers. I have those footers so I installed the Sp10 on those footers and used the 47 Labs tonearm with Denon 103r for listening.

In the first 10 secs it was clear the Sp10 Mk2 is a more dynamic player than the 1200G. It sounded more like a Garrard in terms of scale, dynamics and drive. At the same time it was more transparent than Garrard. I had read couple of opinions that the vintage Sp10 DDs has more torquey motor drive. Here I was clearly hearing that. If I enter the room, I would not know which player is playing simply because of the similarity in slam, dynamics and tonality. My Garrard has the audiosilente idler wheel, woodsong audio brake disc and kokomo bearings. It is also driven by a dedicated AC regenerator for a clean AC input. In effect it is a much cleaner and neutral TT than typical Garrards. The Sp10 Mk2 is a less romantic sounding TT overall but it does not feel "compact", "thin" or "bright". It sounds natural, which is a very important trait to enjoy music. It sounds big and punchy without sounding colored or veiled. I have not even installed the plinth yet. My Garrard is still the king in the system but the Sp10 is a good contender with higher resolution and lower noise floor overall.

Guys, I don't know how to put it. I am not here to spoil the party of the 1200G/GAE owners. It is definitely a very complete package. You get warranty, company support, spares and all the peace of mind with the new Technics DDs. But if you are one of those adventurous types deciding between the old school and new gen Technics TT, the old Sp10 mk2/mk3 wins it for me, purely from the sound quality perspective. New technology probably has given the new Technics a bit more refinement but the drive, excitement and immediacy of real instruments still is conveyed best by the grand old boys.

My system:
. Loricraft Garrard 301 (mods: Kokomo mk2 bearing, Audiosilente idler wheel, Woodsong audio brake disc, Funkfirm Achromat, Monarcy Audio AC regenerator)
. 47 Labs RS-A1 tonearm
. Ortofon Cadenza Blue, Denon 103r carts
. Trilogy 907 phonostage
. Berning MicroZOTL 2.0 preamp
. Audio Note Conquest Silver Signature SET monoblock amps
. Tannoy Turnberry SE speakers

P.S: I did not compare the 2 Technics side by side but it was almost back to back as the Sp10 arrived after 3-4 days of the departure of 1200G. Since it was all in my own system, I had a good hang of what they felt like.
pani
pryso
1,986 posts
 
nkonor,

Allow me to share a personal experience.  Your system looks wonderful and is comprised of tope quality components.  But I question the placement of your Technics table.

As reported a couple of times previously, my components are placed on two shelves, suspended within a 60" wide alcove along one sidewall.  Originally my turntable was placed at the right end of the top shelf.  One day I had reason to lean over the table while music was playing and I was surprised to hear the amount of bass build-up in that corner of the alcove.  Realizing my arm/cartridge lived within that affected corner I assumed the acoustic feedback was not helping vinyl clarity.  So I moved my turntable away from the corner to where the arm/cartridge would be at the mid-point of the shelf, furtherest from the two corners.  That did result in noticeably improved clarity/resolution.  I assume a right hand corner will be worse than a left hand one since that places the arc of the stylus closer to the corner itself.

Your set up appears to have limited options but if you can move your table out of the corner you might benefit.

Good luck.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Lewm
Geoff, the point is that we could hear a difference. And the difference was decidedly in favor of the cheap fuse. I don’t know why we should’ve heard any difference. I tend to discount the whole experience, except for the fact that four other people, 2 of whom you would recognize by name, also heard it exactly the same way as I did.

On the one hand, perhaps this should convince me that fuses do make a difference. On the other hand, it may also convince me that it is not necessary to spend big bucks on a fuse.

>>>>Who knows why you got the results you got. But obviously your results don’t comport with 70,000 others who have bought aftermarket fuses. Maybe directionality played a role. I tend to discount oddball results like yours since no single test should be used to draw general conclusions. 
totem395
390 posts
 
 One day I had reason to lean over the table while music was playing and I was surprised to hear the amount of bass build-up in that corner of the alcove.

Just think how the room might sound if additional 
room treatments were installed.

I might just have this engraved on my head stone.


pryso
1,986 posts
 
"if additional room treatments were installed."

Possibly true totem.  But while I have done a couple of treatments my room is very unsymmetrical so not easily done.  In fact I experimented with six Tube Traps a friend was selling but had disappointing results.

Regarding my alcove, it is 24" deep and the installed shelves are 18" deep so not much room in the corners for treatments.  Also the ceiling is 11' high so those two alcove corners are well above the turntable shelf.

My best answer is to move and have a better room to begin with. ;^)
lewm
13,777 posts
 
Geoff, You wrote, "I tend to discount oddball results like yours since no single test should be used to draw general conclusions."

This is such a puffball one-liner that I almost don't have the heart to start on it.  First, "no single test should be used to draw general conclusions", UNLESS it is a single test that supports one's own pre-existing bias. Because such single-test reports are exactly what one has to go on when it comes to most tweaks.  Second, where are your 70,000 counter-vailing reports?  Is that how many boutique fuses you or the industry sold? If so, do you know that every purchaser came away convinced in favor of boutique fuses? My general impression reading this forum and the Tweaker's Asylum is that there is at best a 50-50 split on fuses.  And of course the total of all reports in writing on forums is probably in the realm of a few hundred, pro and con taken together.  So, where are your 70,000 reports stored?  Third, if you were paying attention, I drew NO general conclusions. My report is simply an anecdote, has no statistical validity, except it does have unusual power in one respect: five (5) people were in the room, including me, and ALL FIVE of us heard it the same way.  Like I wrote, two of the 5 guys (maybe 3, now I think of it) are very much professionals in the audio business, designers and one journalist.  We were all surprised by the results, more because the circuit that was fused should not be affecting the audio at all.  This certainly has me questioning my own bias against the importance of the fuse. Fourth, I kind of expected you to bring up "directionality".  What is electrical evidence that fuses have directionality? Why would they have directionality when passing AC which is by nature bi-directional (has positive and negative phases alternating with regular frequency)?
More to discover