I've never had the opportunity to compare PL-70 and PL-70L II, so best-groove may have a point. But it's difficult enough to get either of these tables where I live.
I know that newer isn't always better. But I do wonder why Pioneer gave up on that MU-70 motor for the PL-70L II, apparently for an inferior alternative. Cost reduction is usually the reason for such alterations. But if so, why go through the trouble of also redesigning the tonearm? Not cost reduction it seems, as the newer design has interchangeable carbon fiber arm pipes similar to the P3/P10 tonearm. Unfortunately they also included an automatic arm lift, which is a feature I don't like.
Of course the P3 or P10 is the perfect solution. Their best motor and best manual tonearm combined in a much more substantial chassis. By all accounts they still compete with anything out there, both new and vintage. But alas, not for $1000......
I know that newer isn't always better. But I do wonder why Pioneer gave up on that MU-70 motor for the PL-70L II, apparently for an inferior alternative. Cost reduction is usually the reason for such alterations. But if so, why go through the trouble of also redesigning the tonearm? Not cost reduction it seems, as the newer design has interchangeable carbon fiber arm pipes similar to the P3/P10 tonearm. Unfortunately they also included an automatic arm lift, which is a feature I don't like.
Of course the P3 or P10 is the perfect solution. Their best motor and best manual tonearm combined in a much more substantial chassis. By all accounts they still compete with anything out there, both new and vintage. But alas, not for $1000......