TECHNICS SL1200 MKII.......THE REAL FACTS

Its hard to discern that the original table is one of the best when so many custom tweaks are needed to deliver the bomb in performance.


Whenever a device is modded and a performance difference results, its now a different beast.

PErhaps these old DD tables are just good fodder for mods in that they are old and relatively inexpensive these days in their stock form.

If I were brave enough, I could probably come up with custom tweaks to many modern SOTA tables to make them better, or at least meet my expectations better also, however I would have to be quite brave or rich to do that given the economics involved with these things.

I am not so brave in general. Any tweak I do is generally easily reversible if needed. THings like aligning or changing/better matching carts, adjusting settings, etc. These are my kind of (easy) tweaks that usually pays dividends.

02-23-12: Mapman
Its hard to discern that the original table is one of the best when so many custom tweaks are needed to deliver the bomb in performance.

Whenever a device is modded and a performance difference results, its now a different beast.

It depends on how you look at it. When they were still in production, you could get an SL12x0 TT for $400-500, a high precision transport with nearly unmeasurable wow and flutter, dead-on speed accuracy, and a S/N ratio you rarely see in "audiophile approved" turntables under $5K. Given such a low entry level and its naive lack of other vibration and resonance control features, it practically begs to be modded to bring out its best. Get an armboard from Origin Live or Sound Hi-Fi and swap in a Rega RB303, JA Michell, Jelco or SME tonearm and you'll have an astounding turntable for under $2K, possibly under $1K.

I'd love to do the tonearm upgrade, but in the meantime, my tweaks cost me a grand total of $250 (fluid damper, Sumiko headshell, sorbothane mat, Vibrapod feet), plus a butcher block as an isolation platform. That $750 got me a turntable with speed accuracy you can't buy (new) otherwise.

The customary price/performance ratio of turntables would be far different today if the British TT industry had embraced the Japan-sourced DD mechanism and built their turntables around it rather than foisting over-the-counter AC synchronous motors and rubber bands as a "superior" drive system.

FUnny, I used to sell many Japanese turntables back in their 70's heyday, both belt and direct drive.

For whatever reason, I was never swerved to actually buy or own a DD model myself. I think because they tended to be more expensive and I did not hear a difference in general. ALso the stroboscope devices on many of these never seemed to indicate DD had better speed control than belt and I was not convinced that DD tables isolated against motor noise well.

In the mid 80's, as vinyl was dying and CDs the rage, I bought my Linn Axis that I use to this day. Its British and belt drive. It blew away the Japanese tables for the most part back then, at least that was my impression. With the right setup and cart (I am sold on the Denon DL103R), it still sounds spot on to me and I feel no compulsion to tweak or change.

I do notice that to get good quality turntables new these days that seem to be built well enough to compete with the better ones from days yore, the cost is probably at least 3-5X what it used to be, probably more.

There is always something to be said about buying a cheap fixer upper and doing it right your way compared to something all ready to rock and roll at the gate. Only for those who have the means and knowledge to do it right though I would say.

Well, I say leave well enough alone. How much improvement do these tweaks really give you in performance?

02-24-12: Mapman
FUnny, I used to sell many Japanese turntables back in their 70's heyday, both belt and direct drive.

Funny, so did I. I would say that the DDs didn't come in to blow away the belt drives, they blew away the idler drive turntables. Within a very few years, Garrard and BSR were gone and Dual had migrated to belt drive and direct drive. The idler drive 'table was DEAD.

I worked at the oldest audio chain in SoCal in 1975-6. We carried Garrard, Dual, Rabco, Philips, & Beogram. I remember that on FM stations I could actually hear the rumble of their idler drive turntables. The DD turntables were much quieter than those (unless you know how to plinth them) while still having that strong torque which BDs lack.

Some of the highly regarded BDs of the time were flaky. My sister bought two Philips BDs that didn't work right and took them back. She bought a Pioneer DD in frustration and it still works. And it's no doubt that when the Micro-Seiki's hit the market they were a force to be reckoned with.

Still, I think the virtues of BDs and the vices of DD are mis-identified. Yes, the Linn and AR TTs were belt drive, but they were also suspended. When you plinth and/or platform a DD turntable, the noise attributed (wrongly IMO) to the drive mechanism disappears. On the Technics DD 'table, the upper midrange glare is (wrongly) attributed to the 3.5 Khz servo, whereas damping the hollow aluminum tonearm makes *that* resonance disappear.

After 1985 or so, turntables didn't really fit into Panasonic's business model anymore, but they had to keep the 12x0 series in production because the dance club scene continued to keep them viable in the marketplace for another 25 years. Still, it marked the end of additional R&D expenditures related to audiophile playback. And that's all that's wrong with the SL12x0 series--other other audiophile turntables have 25 more years of development in noise, vibration, and resonance control, but they never improved on the torque or speed accuracy of the 12x0 series.