Technics v Vestax

[jollyfix]

Whilst visiting an old pro DJ friend the other day, i told him that there are loads of hifi people into using technics turntables. I also said that during the 1990's most DJ's had technics turntables, but all hankered after Vestax ( pdx?) turntables. My friend said it was because of the motor, some also liked the short arm for scratching (:doh:), but mainly the motor, apparently it was/is so much better.
I remember seeing a vestax , and for me the techie beat it on looks.
My question is, why dont we see/hear of any modified vestax turntables? I may be wrong ,but the thing people like about the techie is the motor. All other things seem to get replaced etc.
Maybe the vestax cant be modified like the techie?

[Wakefield Turntables]

Thats becaue technically it is extremely hard to replace the motor and thats why everything is replaced instead. :)

[jollyfix]

Hi Andrew, so if the motor could be replaced with ease, would it be replaced too? So what is it about techies then? Have i got it wrong about the motor being good?

[Yomanze]

The Vestax PDX-2000 has much higher pitch adjustment & much higher torque (with a CPU control for better 'reaction time'), which means that turntablism fans (people doing more than mixing) can have a preference for the more 'tricked out' Vestax.

Of course some prefer the simpler & more rugged SL-1210.

[Beobloke]

Ah, Vestax!

I've been a huge Vestax fan for years ever since the day I needed a second turntable urgently for my DJing duties to sit alongside my Technics SL-1210. Well, the only thing that came along was Vestax PDX-A1 with the short straight arm, and I bought it for a good price, intending to use it for the 3 gigs I had booked and then probably sell it on to fund a second Technics. Intriguingly this never happened as the Vestax proved just as durable, torquey and convenient to use as the Technics but, more surprisingly, sounded far better than it, even with that aforementioned short, straight arm!

When I was at Hi-Fi World we did do a feature on testing the then-new PDX-2300Mk2 Pro and then Noel took the screwdriver to it and fitted an RB300, which worked very nicely. The problem was that, by this time, a good deal of the componentry on the two or three control PCBs was surface mount and the PCB interconnections were very fine pitch ribbon connectors, so we felt that this might have been a DIY step too far, so the proposed re-plinth never happened.

However the motor in that deck was astonishing. It's digitally controlled by a 32-bit CPU and has presets for start and stop speed. It is often said that if you put your hand onto an SL-1200's platter it's very hard to slow it down but if you did it to the platter of the PDX-2300 then the strobe markings would take your fingetips off! Sadly the deck's main failings were that the cabinet was cheap and plasticky, rather than the nice wood of the earlier types and the short, straight arms were prevalent. It looks like their current range comprises just the PDX3000 Mk2 withthe straight arm, but they did an s-shaped variant until fairly recently, called the PDX-3000Mix.

As to their previous models, they are as follows:

PDT-4000
S shaped arm. Basic version of the PDT-5000. Fine deck but not very common

PDT-5000
S shaped arm. Fairly common, good basic deck with 33 and 45prm and great analogue VU meter for speed indication!

PDX-A1
Painted wooden plinth. Analogue-controlled motor. 33 and 45rpm
Mk1 had an S shaped arm
Mk2 had an s shaped arm originally, then the PDX-A1Mk2s came along with the short, straight, ASTS arm (confusingly, the 's' on the end of the model number is for 'straight', not s-shaped!)

PDX-A2
Painted wooden plinth. Same as the A1 but deck orientation rotated through 90 degrees to take up less space and put the arm out of the way for scratch use. Funky red armtube!
Mk1 had an S shaped arm
Mk2 had an s shaped arm
Mk2s had a straight arm

PDX-D3
Painted wooden plinth. Digitally controlled motor with more torque and faster start/stop time than A1/A2. 33, 45 and 'hidden 78' rpm. Pitch bend and adjustable 3/6/12% pitch range. Digital LCD display
Mk1 had an S shaped arm
Mk2 had an s shaped arm
Mk2s had a straight arm

PDX-8000
Posh version of the D3 in metallic red. Short straight arm only but very high-tech and on a suspended sub-chassis (bearing housing looks suspiciously similar to that used on the Yamaha GT-750 turntable). Not common as it didn't really offer much over the D3 but cost twice as much!

PDX-2000
Replaced all the above decks and used plastic plinth for the first time. Short straight arm only.
Mk2 added a lower platter and an arm with spring-loaded tracking force.

PDX-2300
Development of PDX-2000 that added digital display and further control options. A conventional J-shaped arm was re-introduced on the PDX-2300Mk2 PRO

PDX-3000
Replaced PDX-2000 and PDX-2300. 'Mix' version has S-shaped arm

There was also the PVT-E2 which was similar to PDX-A1 but comes on a cradle that allows it to be operated at an angle of up to 72 degrees from horizontal. It was an answer to a question no-one asked and also doesn't really work much above 45 degrees! Basic deck is fine, though.

In summary, the motors are superb and if you want one for a project I'd recommend the one from the PDX2000 or 2300 (I have a very knackered but fully functional PDX-2000 tucked away awaiting my attentions in this manner!). Go for the Mk1 versions as the Mk2's motor was recessed into the plinth to allow for the different platter and if you tried to put this into a new wooden plinth, it would stick out a bit oddly. Also the Mk2 and Mk1 platters are not interchangeable and the Mk1 platter is nicer.

If you fancy a complete deck to try out as standard, then look for a Mk2 PDX-D3 with the S-shaped arm. I loaded mine up with an Achromat and an Ortofon 2M Black and was rather surprised by how good it was!

As a final thought, don't be taken in by the alarmist comments that the short, straight-armed versions will "destroy your records". Use a decent cartridge with a spherical (NOT elliptical) stylus within the manufacturer's recommended tracking weight and they'll be fine.

[Oldpinkman]

I think the answer is the motor is pretty good (not so exceptional it means only the Techie has a motor that good) but pretty good.
There are loads of them available
Someone noticed a market for modifying them and started manufacturing platters, bearings, power supplies and other bits
That makes it easy to modify a Technics, whereas it would be a brand new innovating thing to do to modify say a Sony or Pioneer DD
It becomes a virtuous circle.

:)

[Wakefield Turntables]

Wow what a reply. In answer to your question, of course it would be modified. Paul Hynes has made some mods on the 1210 for better power regulation but that's as far as things have got.

[RobbieGong]

Dont know about the other motors / drive system but do know that the Techies is said to be very good indeed. That along with it's legendary solid build makes it a modders dream. It is in fact that motor thast makes the Techie worth modding the way we do. When the weaker parts are removed and replaced with better parts (bearing, arm, platter, external psu) It really feeds back to you just how good the motor is and how good the deck can sound in my experience.

[Yomanze]

It's more than the motor surely as the Vestax motors nearly have twice as much torque as the Techy ones... Ease of modification and overall popularity of the Technics, and the Vestax decks look like decks that DJs take on spaceships. ;)

[RobbieGong]

It's more than the motor surely as the Vestax motors nearly have twice as much torque as the Techy ones... Ease of modification and overall popularity of the Technics, and the Vestax decks look like decks that DJs take on spaceships. ;)

Most definetaly more than the motor Neil, yes, but it's quartz locked dd is very good, build and yes ease and availability / choice of modifications etc etc. I also think the Techie is a nice looking deck that looks even better with the stock platter replaced for a Mike New ETP or Funk and some Isonoe feet - in my not so important opinion of course ;)

[Marco]

In terms of a hi-fi context, you can actually have too much torque, so don't think that the T/T with the most torque will automatically give the best sound, as that would a big boo-boo! The trick is to have just the right amount... ;)

Marco.

[Oldpinkman]

In terms of a hi-fi context, you can actually have too much torque, so don't think that the T/T with the most torque will automatically give the best sound, as that would a big boo-boo! The trick is to have just the right amount... ;)

Marco.

Really? The thought had never occurred to me. Why is too much torque a problem? :scratch:

[Joe]

Really? The thought had never occurred to me. Why is too much torque a problem? :scratch:

Anyway, torque's cheap.

[Marco]

Hi Richard,


Really? The thought had never occurred to me. Why is too much torque a problem? :scratch:

The theory that some direct-drive T/T motors can have too much torque, for high-end hi-fi purposes, has been adopted by the likes of Brinkmann in the design of their Bardo and Oasis D/D turntables, see here: http://www.brinkmann-audio.de/main.php?prod=bardo ,noting in particular this:


Many of the known direct drive turntables were constructed for studios and radio stations where it was necessary to have very quick start-up times of less than a second which was achieved with high torque motors that speed up and stop the motor very rapidly. This caused heavy cogging effects accompanied by high wow & flutter numbers. To avoid this, we worked long on a proprietary motor control that transfers just enough energy to the motor for it to remain at constant speed.


Now, it should be said that I certainly cannot hear any of these "heavy cogging effects" with my Technics SL-1210, and the W&F numbers are exemplary, but clearly Helmut Brinkmann (a respected audio designer) considered that there was sufficiently something in it for him to design his turntables around the principle of having 'just enough' torque to do the job, which in this instance is not super-quick start up times in a radio station.

Interestingly, I've heard both the Bardo and the Oasis, in direct comparison with my modded SL-1210, both of which, to my ears and those of the chap who owned the Brinkmanns, were outperformed by my T/T, therefore I'm not sure exactly where that leaves the torque theory...

Marco.

[Oldpinkman]

Interesting as you say. I can't say I notice cogging on the sl1200 either. However i have to blame a heavy cold for forgetting arthur designs belt drive tts with high speed dc motors for that reason among others. Promise you won't tell him - I get the piss taken enough as it is.:doh:

[FunkArt]

Interesting as you say. I can't say I notice cogging on the sl1200 either. However i have to blame a heavy cold for forgetting arthur designs belt drive tts with high speed dc motors for that reason among others. Promise you won't tell him - I get the piss taken enough as it is.:doh:

I can't shoot a man when he's down...It'll be a different matter once your cold is over though.

Still, the whole torque - stability issue is an engineer's dream and it is been fun developing new decks side by side against the 1200 and the way that too is evolving.
I gather one or two people have started to rumble at stuff that will hit the market Denver time, which Funk has adopted as its usual launch date.
The point Marco makes re over-torquing has merit as it relates to a higher overall power supply driving a circuit that readily dumps that power to the motor and then has to control platter inertia.
You either want a high power supply / control circuit driving a very low inertia platter or a low power motor with a high inertia platter.
In either instance, the platter sees very little influence from the control circuit, whilst at the same time benefitting from a high energy reserve to minimise ripples (cogging). Optimising the power load ratio for each system is key.
From that starting point one goes on refining improvements and addressing other aspects and thereby to create a balanced and pleasing design.
So, Marco, does that fit in, sort of, with your findings?

[Oldpinkman]

I can't shoot a man when he's down...It'll be a different matter once your cold is over though.

Still, the whole torque - stability issue is an engineer's dream and it is been fun developing new decks side by side against the 1200 and the way that too is evolving.
I gather one or two people have started to rumble at stuff that will hit the market Denver time, which Funk has adopted as its usual launch date.
The point Marco makes re over-torquing has merit as it relates to a higher overall power supply driving a circuit that readily dumps that power to the motor and then has to control platter inertia.
You either want a high power supply / control circuit driving a very low inertia platter or a low power motor with a high inertia platter.
In either instance, the platter sees very little influence from the control circuit, whilst at the same time benefitting from a high energy reserve to minimise ripples (cogging). Optimising the power load ratio for each system is key.
From that starting point one goes on refining improvements and addressing other aspects and thereby to create a balanced and pleasing design.
So, Marco, does that fit in, sort of, with your findings?
Bastard. Wait till you need a tax return...:eyebrows:

[Qwin]

I think an obvious point is being overlooked here.

I had not even heard of Vestax till reading this and wouldn't have a clue where to get parts for one.

The big plus for the sl-1200 is that you can still buy virtually every part as a new spare and there is an abundance of used parts as well.

When considering a Direct drive turntable and I looked at quite a few options, parts availability was a major factor in my decision.

I knew I would be buying an older TT and would probably need to replace worn or damaged parts, the Technics is a great starter deck and can be improved along the way. Not knocking the Vestax, I 'm not familiar with it, but there are practical considerations in any purchase.

[mike1210]

I have a Vestax pdx2300 still.

Out of the box I actually thought it sounded better than a sl1210, clearer mid range for sure. This was using Ortofon Nightclub Elliptical carts into a Pioneer DMJ600 mixer, I could compare them side by side using the same record.

Didn't use it much as I was convinced the pitch wasn't holding correctly. Might have just been me but.....

I soon put a Goldring 1006 on my Technics as I was paranoid about DJ carts killing my records. 3-4 grams of force anyone?:mental:

Build quality not as good the Technics but very quick start up and the like. From what I remember at the time Vestax were producing the only main rival to the sl1210 as other options were cheap and nasty belt drive DJ decks. A total no no for beat mixing.

[freefallrob]

I used a cheap £30 Numark DD at scalford a few years ago with a RB301 attached to it, it sounded very good, but needed a lot of work to stiffen/damp the VERY poor plinth/base which was basically a hollow box of thin plastic, speed was fine once adjusted but the platter was out of true and I had issues getting the VTA somewhere near...

It sounded good though, better than a Rega P2/P3 and the like.