turntable deal 26th & 27th

[BRANDONH]

Hmmmmm, I hardly know where to begin. I'm well aware of the SL-1200's history, and the fact that it's been around since the 70's. It's development had nothing at all to do with Quadraphonic sound, as has been claimed.

Cartridges capable of tracking the 40KHZ multiplexed carrier signal on CD-4 quadraphonic discs generally tracked at forces well in excess of 2, or even 3 grams. This really wasn't that big a deal, as the tracking force was spread over a much wider area of the record groove wall with the "Shibata", or "Quadrahedron" stylus used. Still, most enthusiasts rejected the very idea of using such high tracking forces. the ONLY cartridge capable of playing CD-4 records at a tracking force of one gram was the Pickering XUV-4500Q, a truly outstanding product that had the misfortune of being introduced practically simultaneously with the demise of the quad business. And, both the high-tracking Shibata-equipped cartridges (mostly those from AT) as well as the Pickering XUV-4500Q worked just fine in the SL-1200.

As for "rubber band" turntables, you may want to check out The Needle Doctor, or other such sites, and look into ultra high-end turntables. You'll find something quite startling: not a one is direct drive. ALL are "rubber-band" drives. The most expensive turntable in the world is made by ClearAudio, and guess what? It too uses a "rubber-band."

The ultra low-mass tonearm of the CS-5000 will track at exceptionally light forces with those high compliance cartridges that can do so as well. It's tonearm geometry, and overall design also provide amazingly clear and distortionless sound from the innermost grooves of an LP too.

I don't doubt that the tonearm on the SL-1200 is capable of tracking at 1 gram, but I know from my own personal experience that the sound from it, and other Technics and Denon, JVC, Pioneer etc. models with "S" shaped arms, doesn't come close to the transparent, effortless sound from the CS-5000.

The ONLY reason the SL-1200 is still around is due to its overwhelming popularity in the DJ business. Technics has long wanted to discontinue the item, as it's not a particularly profitable item for them, but the DJ business has kept it alive.

It's a good turntable. The CS-5000, and others with straight, low-mass arms and with belt-drive platters (the CS-5000 is the only belt-drive I know of that's also quartz locked) just sound better.

I'll take you don't or have not owned a 1200.
And yes the 1200 will track at 1 gram I have the Shure V15VxMR which tracks at 1 gram perfectly although it is not my primary cartridge.
well I want to add Kevins at http://www.kabusa.com comments because I just dont have all the ammo to argue all the technical aspects I went to him with this and here is his reply.

It is rarely worth arguing with people about this.
This is the best synopsis I can put together. Maybe it will be helpful.

most mobile dj's getting into the business are all digital, the bulk of 1200's are being purchased by those doing professional work or House systems and audiophiles.

Everyone has their own take on the historic development of direct drive. I stand by mine.

discrete quad could only be mastered at 1/2 speed and at that time no systems existed to do it.
JVC and Masu s h i t a developed direct drive for that purpose, it had the precision and control to maintain the 30KHZ subcarrier.
the first pro players followed sp10. then the 48 pole motor was redesigned into a 12 pole consumer design and introduces in pro players sp15 and 25 and all the derivative sl models.

the simple fact that the 1200 arm is such a sensitive gimbal design should give some insight that it was not designed for the nite club. it was designed for serious precision playback. the fact that it has not changed shows that Technics is aware of the multiple markets for their 'table. The issue of tracking force below 1 gram just shows the distance technics would go to be sure the table met all market demands. the precision bearings, alignment optimized for the end of the groove, the precision of direct drive and the non resonant plinth are all aspects the speak to detail retrieval. Quad was just one driving factor, higher compliance stylus suspensions were another.

And while it may be true that the factory that makes the 1200 marvels at the continued demand for the table, to suggest that it is made at little profit to the parent is silly.

Finally, the reason there are so many belt drives is simple:
1. easy to do with low overhead and up front cost.
2. no one measures them so there is no standard to live up to.

if a simple wow and flutter limit of 0.05% were imposed on serious playback, all of the belt drive tables, sans a few, would be barred form the market overnight.

The dual CD5000 was the last belt drive made, to my mind, that had a drive system specifically made for a turntable.
a 4 pole brush less motor with linear feedback. It is indeed very good.
but like all belt drives it cannot read the stylus activity and so suffers from dynamic stylus drag.
you need a 20Lb platter or more to avoid this, and that is basically a brute force approach.

engage lcrim on audiocircle.com if you like. he has both a 1200 and a CS5000

much of the trouble with todays belt drives is that there are no application specific motors available that can produce low W&F.
and the few that are are very very expensive.

the direct drive system of the 1200 can read dynamic stylus load and compensate. it does this carefully and rationally with a time constant delay of approx 30ms, which lets it work in harmony with the flywheel affect of the platter mass. It does not make sudden adjustments. the result is a very pure tone delivery. for those sensitive to that, there are few substitutes.

there are lots of other points, and I address them on the website.

The hobby is heavily fractured into groups now, and just like politics there is little swaying one side to the other.
Epiphany's occur on a personal and private level, not in newsgroups.

[E-Stat]

I'll take you don't or have not owned a 1200.
And yes the 1200 will track at 1 gram I have the Shure V15VxMR which tracks at 1 gram perfectly although it is not my primary cartridge.

I owned the heavier SL-110 with an SME arm back in the 70s. Nice table. Not as good sounding, however, as the Ariston that replaced it.

I use a M97 with the Ariston/SME combo today. You *can* track it at 1 gram, but will not get optimum results.

rw

[emaidel]

I'll take you don't or have not owned a 1200.
And yes the 1200 will track at 1 gram I have the Shure V15VxMR which tracks at 1 gram perfectly although it is not my primary cartridge.
well I want to add Kevins at http://www.kab.usa.com comments because I just dont have all the ammo to argue all the technical aspects I went to him with this and here is his reply.

Good Lord! Kevin's comments make as little sense as some of yours, but at least I now see where you get your mis-information from.

I DID own an SL-1200, and thought it was fine at the time, but I've since moved on to better units. I'm sure that the person I sold it to loves it, and that his great grandchildren will be able to love it too, as it will probably outlast all of them.

I'm sorry but all of the comments about no other turntable able to sustain various ultra-low, or ultra-high frequencies, and their suffering from a non-existent defect called "stylus drag" are sheer baloney, as is any statement that the SL-1200 was designed primarily for "discrete" quad records. And, Technics made a lot of money on it, and their other models when records were king, but today, it's a very costly product for them to produce, especially considering the amount of raw materials it takes to produce one, and the much, much lower rate of sales.

I have to ask you two questions: first, were you even alive during the quad era? And, second, do you have over 30 years working experience in the audio industry as I do?

[BRANDONH]

Good Lord! Kevin's comments make as little sense as some of yours, but at least I now see where you get your mis-information from.

I DID own an SL-1200, and thought it was fine at the time, but I've since moved on to better units. I'm sure that the person I sold it to loves it, and that his great grandchildren will be able to love it too, as it will probably outlast all of them.

I'm sorry but all of the comments about no other turntable able to sustain various ultra-low, No or ultra-high frequencies, and their suffering from a non-existent defect called "stylus drag" are sheer baloney, as is any statement that the SL-1200 was designed primarily for "discrete" quad records. And, Technics made a lot of money on it, and their other models when records were king, but today, it's a very costly product for them to produce, especially considering the amount of raw materials it takes to produce one, and the much, much lower rate of sales.

I have to ask you two questions: first, were you even alive during the quad era? And, second, do you have over 30 years working experience in the audio industry as I do?

Yeah I had a quadraphonic when they were brand new.
but Kevin is speaking of the reason the Direct Drive was established is pretty clear to me and the ability of the clunky S shaped tonearm.
And I don't know if you have 30 years or 30 minutes of experience so many here on this site make all kind of brilliant claims.
and it is typical of those with all this so called audiophile experience slam the 1200 with their belt drive straight arm glory.
Typical of this site.

I leave it at that with Kevin's last comment...

The hobby is heavily fractured into groups now, and just like politics there is little swaying one side to the other.
Epiphany's occur on a personal and private level, not in newsgroups.

OH if it makes you feel better telling people after they purchase 1200 that they made a mistake that they and should have bought something else or could have done better then be this forms guest.

[emaidel]

Have a wonderful day!

[BRANDONH]

Have a wonderful day!

Thank you and have a great weekend.

[hifitommy]

the SL1200 is a good starting point and one can have a great time listening to music on this easy to use workhorse. yes, good sound can be had here.

HOWEVER, more refined sound can be had elsewhere. whether belt or dd (VERY expensive to do right) there are any number of choices new or used. the tonearm is the weakest link but i DO like detachable headshells. hence my ownership of the mmt arm.

when the novelty wears thin, some careful shopping and listening will yield greatly improved sound. is it worth it to go there? the same question asked about going away from compact disc. it depends how important the better sound is to you. staying with the 1200 may be just the answer for YOU.

denon and marantz electronics may be fine for you, OR audio research and VTL. there ARE differences.

lest you think i havent been there, or at least part way, i owned a SL120/grace 707 setup for a long time. also, a kenwood kd500/707 which has found its way back into my hands. it will take its turn as my backup table after i get the dustcover situation (a bad Agon seller) resolved and when i receive the cardas arm wire onsite.

[dean_martin]

the SL1200 is a good starting point and one can have a great time listening to music on this easy to use workhorse. yes, good sound can be had here.

HOWEVER, more refined sound can be had elsewhere. whether belt or dd (VERY expensive to do right) there are any number of choices new or used. the tonearm is the weakest link but i DO like detachable headshells. hence my ownership of the mmt arm.

when the novelty wears thin, some careful shopping and listening will yield greatly improved sound. is it worth it to go there? the same question asked about going away from compact disc. it depends how important the better sound is to you. staying with the 1200 may be just the answer for YOU.

denon and marantz electronics may be fine for you, OR audio research and VTL. there ARE differences.

lest you think i havent been there, or at least part way, i owned a SL120/grace 707 setup for a long time. also, a kenwood kd500/707 which has found its way back into my hands. it will take its turn as my backup table after i get the dustcover situation (a bad Agon seller) resolved and when i receive the cardas arm wire onsite.

High Tommy. I'm generally aware of your expereince. I try to read your posts, particularly re: analog and music, when I see them. I don't see the SL-1200 as a stopping point. Unfortunately, I'm stuck in a process of taking several small steps rather than taking a single giant leap. I've been wondering for a while now why I've never taken the same approach with my 2-ch system that I learned while being taught music for almost 10 years. In band, I was taught the importance of a good foundation. Bass and baritone notes should provide a solid foundation. The result should take the form of a pyramid with low notes at the bottom and the highest treble at the top. Obviously, there are less "blocks" across the top of a pyramid than there are at the bottom. I wasn't getting that foundation with my analog setup because the entry-level table I was using just didn't allow for bass extension. So far, the Technics has provided that foundation, but perhaps at the expense of the effortless, airy quality in the treble of a better direct drive or good belt-drive. But I'm not done experimenting with cart setup yet. (Also, I haven't determined whether the Technics is as quiet, yet. The level of background noise, if any, may be a factor.)

Nevertheless, the pyramid model may not be as relevant to music re-production as it is to live performance. Almost everything written about audio today focuses on the "all-important midrange." And, there's always that subjective factor that varies with each end-user.