Thoughts on moving from a 1200G to Sota Saphire or above

Weak points of the 1200G are tonearm, bearing and power supply. All can be upgraded here - http://www.soundhifi.com/sl1200/Timestep%20Technics%20EVOke%20%20SL-1200GAE%202018.htm

Same old BS.

Some companies are always happy to sell something for astronomical prices, but Technics completely rebuilt their production line a long time ago when the GAE was introduced. Companies that offered an upgrade for an old $400 Technics SL1200 series continue to sell same BS for brand new "G" series.

Technics is not REGA, Pro-Ject or Linn, for those companies buyers are a slave of constant upgrade.

There is nothing weak in Technics SL1200 G and tonearm is excellent, any better tonearm will cost more than the entire turntable!

In fact Technics tonearms are the best in the world, for those who don’t know I’d like to remind about EPA-100 mkII which was Technics top of the line tonearm and today it will be better than so many overpriced high-end toneamrs.

So it’s obvious that for better tonearm one needs a SP-10R (not SL1200G).

I’d like to admit that so many audiophile never paid attention to Technics products, they noticed Technics AFTER Mr. Fremer reviewed it when Technics returned to business with new turntables. Mr. Fremer actually compared Technics (without any mods) to one of his most expensive turntable, soundfiles were uploaded for everyone.

British companies will always push those ugly SME tonearms "as an upgrade" for everything, but you should really understand what is Technics and what is SME.

@chakster , I set up the new table to Lofgren B and I very much like it. Most modern pressings do not go in as far. Very few records go in farther than 65 mm and at 65mm Lofgren B has the same harmonic distortion it has at 90mm, 0.03% Lower than all alignments over the vast majority of the record. This is also the first time I used the SmarTractor. What a beautifully made device. I didn’t even bother with the magnifier it is so easy to read with the naked eye and a bright light. They should sell the magnifier as an option to bring the price down.

@mijostyn

I use different methods with my two Luxman PD-444 turntables and 4 different toneamrs in my main system now. I use Dr. Feickert NG protractor.

I don’t care about modern pressings, because 90% of my records are vintage (mainly ’70s).

Stevenson’s alignment method was the last of those 3, this is a modern method compared to the very old Baerwald or Lofrgen invented a long time before stereo or even before proper vinyl pressing.

In the 60’s Stevenson invented his method for CLASSICAL MUSIC and he explained very well why - to take into account that on records with classical music very often crescendos occur towards the innermost grooves.

Japanese tonearm manufacturers have been using Stevenson method ever since, it’s not mandatory, everyone can change it to Baerwald. But when I set up any tonearm I want to head with standard manufacturer settings. Some of my tonearms designed with Baerwald method (like Reed 3p), some designed with unique method (not Baerwald, not Stevenson). Some tonearms like FR-64fx are great with Stevenson and I will never change that. And I don’t listen to classical music at all.

Regarding cart @chakster, I appreciate the feedback. I’ve kind of built my system to accommodate the low output of the Cadenza Black and would like to stay in that performance range. To compare, I may order a cart from a place I can return if it doesn’t best the Cadenza.

1) How can you return a new cartridge after it’s been opened and used?

2) Who will give you this option and why ?

3) Are they gonna sell your used cartridge again as new or they will burn over $1k+ this way just for fun ?

I believe no one will give you "return" option for any cartridge if this cartridge is not a factory defective unit (warranty issue only).

@lewm, you are probably right. I used the term "harmonic distortion" as that is what it is called in the link I posted above which I believe is actually another way of expressing tracking angle error. Harmonic distortion is a misnomer. Thanx for pointing that out.

@chakster , if we are to believe the graphs in the link Stevenson is lowest right at the edge of the label (60mm). Very few old records go in farther than 65mm. In the middle of the record Stevenson is handily worse. Just from a look at the graphs I can't understand why anyone would use Stevenson. I must say that I have not tried to compare alignments from a sonic perspective because it is so difficult to do in a way that one could have confidence in the result. Angle error is a very simple issue to measure. I am sure we all agree that optimum is an angle error of zero and that the farther away from zero ones gets the worse the result will be. Whether or not this is something you can actually hear is another issue. I do not share your taste in tonearms but a lot of other people do. 

Very few old records go in farther than 65mm.

If you want to know there are at least about 10mm of music on the record surface on most of the 45 rpm (’7 inch) singles, the song ends at 53-55mm from the spindle (not as far as 65mm). On average ’7 inch single pressed in the ’50s/60’s (I just measured some of mine) the last 10mm before lead out groove is 1/3 of a song and there is music.

Mr. Stevenson was a mathematician, I can’t explain why till the present day Japanese tonearm manufacturers prefer Stevenson (or very close to Steventon) geometry. There must be a reason, right ?

I do not share your taste in tonearms but a lot of other people do.

Of course they do, because you will hardly find any better tonearm than boron/titanium Technics EPA-100 mkII or Fidelity-Research FR-66fx. You have never tried them yet @mijostyn