Updating a Pioneer PL-71 turntable [Archive]

The Mighty Quinn

05-01-2014, 15:44

Greetings Everyone,

My father recently gave me his Pioneer PL-71 direct drive turntable. He was the original owner and took exquisite care of it. It still looks new and the speed is rock solid stable. It also still sounds pretty good with the original Shure V15 type III cartridge installed.

I read through Speedy Steve's thread on his PL-71 experience, as well as other PL-71 threads on other forums, and it seems that I am better off keeping the original mat and tonearm, but that I should consider getting a new cartridge. Is this the general consensus? Any advice on a cartridge and whether or not I should replace the head shell?

I brought the PL-71 down to my local hi-fi shop that does turntable repairs and tune-ups, and the guy there was did not seem overly impressed with it. He is recommending an Ortofon 2M Red, which seems a bit on the entry-level side. I think that the PL-71 is worthy of a good cartridge and I am prepared to go with a higher-end cartridge if it will be worth while.

I plan for the PL-71 to be the centerpiece of a dedicated analogue system. At present this system consists of a Rotel RC-850 pre-amp and Adcom GFA-835 amp with Paradigm Mini-MK3 speakers. I hope to upgrade these components in the next few months. I just listened to a PrimaLuma integrated tube amp with PSB Synchrony One speakers this weekend and was blown away. I hope to demo my PL-71 with this combo after I finish updating it.

Thanks in advance for your advice. Any other opinions and/or suggestions about the PL-71 are certainly welcome.

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

05-01-2014, 17:08

The Mighty Quinn

05-01-2014, 19:04

My experience and tweaks for the PL-71

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?3183-A-new-toy-PL-71&highlight=pioneer+pl-71

Its a very fine deck. Mine is a bit of a Frankenstein but sounds very good. If yours is 100% original I'd be tempted to leave it well alone especially if the speed is stable, however, keep in the back of your mind the deck dates from the mid 1970's and at some point the capacitors, adjustment pots and maybe micro switches will need replacing...

The arm is a good 'un don't change it, it works well with the deck. The 2M black seems to be the favorite at the moment and I think the arm is good enough to take it.

Thanks Neal! That is a great thread on your PL-71, and nice photos as well.

I'm actually really happy that you are recommending the 2M Black. I have been lusting after one of these ever since reading about them. I was concerned that it would not be appropriate for the PL-71, but after a little searching it does indeed appear that people are using this combination. If I go with the 2M Black, would you recommend keeping the original head shell as well?

Thanks again

twotone

05-01-2014, 19:08

Clive of this parish was selling a 2m black in the classifieds.

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?29830-FS-Ortofon-2M-Black-Cartridge-NEW

The Mighty Quinn

05-01-2014, 21:15

Clive of this parish was selling a 2m black in the classifieds.

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?29830-FS-Ortofon-2M-Black-Cartridge-NEW

Thanks Twotone!

Unfortunately, his post states "UK ONLY". I live in the "other" Cambridge, the one in Massachusetts, US.

I know that there are plenty of forums in the US, but after lurking for a few months on several forums, I just found AoS to be a better fit for me, which is why I chose AoS to be the one forum to become a member of.

Besides, with all due respect to my fellow countrymen, I think that you guys in the UK tend to know analog (oops, I meant "analogue") better. You see, us yanks can't even spell it right :doh:

The other downside of being in the US is that I won't be making it to many of your "bake offs".

Cheers!
Quinn

NRG

05-01-2014, 22:45

Hi Quinn, you may not need a new head shell although I use a Sumiko as it adds mass for the Denon 103r I use, the 2M black would probably be OK with the stock item..there no harm in trying though just be aware the standard counter weight may not be able to balance out the arm if you go for a suer heavy alternative.

Macca

06-01-2014, 00:05

I live in the "other" Cambridge, the one in Massachusetts, US.

I suppose that back when they were thinking up names for the colonial settlements no-one thought of the confusion it would cause 400 years later. A sad lack of foresight IMO. On the plus side at least they were smart enough to change New Amsterdam to New York, thus saving that fine city from a continual and overwhelming influx of drunken scousers on monumental stag do's. ('There's a new Amsterdam? Lets go there!')

Clive197

06-01-2014, 09:52

Thanks Twotone!

Unfortunately, his post states "UK ONLY". I live in the "other" Cambridge, the one in Massachusetts, US.

I know that there are plenty of forums in the US, but after lurking for a few months on several forums, I just found AoS to be a better fit for me, which is why I chose AoS to be the one forum to become a member of.

Besides, with all due respect to my fellow countrymen, I think that you guys in the UK tend to know analog (oops, I meant "analogue") better. You see, us yanks can't even spell it right :doh:

The other downside of being in the US is that I won't be making it to many of your "bake offs".

Cheers!
Quinn

Hi Quinn

If you are interested in my 2M Black, I would be happy to send it to you in the good old US. I put the UK ONLY bit in because I included postage. If you want to PM me, we can talk about the extra £5 ($8) it would add to the postage.

Clive

Gromit

06-01-2014, 09:59

From having owned a few 71's over the years, I wouldn't put a 2M Black in it (stunning cartridge though it is) as you won't get the best from either the arm or the 2M. The Pioneer arm is nicely massy - approx 18g without headshell - and just loves cartridges like the DL103 or even an Ortofon SPU.

A Sumiko HS-12 headshell is also a good option if you're using an MC cartridge as it adds rigidity over the std Pioneer shell.

Another good cartridge which I've found works well is a Denon DL-110 - about £150 I think these days. Doesn't do much wrong and suits the PL71 nicely.

Yomanze

06-01-2014, 10:01

My experience and tweaks for the PL-71

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?3183-A-new-toy-PL-71&highlight=pioneer+pl-71

Its a very fine deck. Mine is a bit of a Frankenstein but sounds very good. If yours is 100% original I'd be tempted to leave it well alone especially if the speed is stable, however, keep in the back of your mind the deck dates from the mid 1970's and at some point the capacitors, adjustment pots and maybe micro switches will need replacing...

The arm is a good 'un don't change it, it works well with the deck. The 2M black seems to be the favorite at the moment and I think the arm is good enough to take it.

Interesting thread, are you still using the Reson Reca? It's what I use with my PL-71.

The general advice does indeed seem to be to leave the PL-71 stock save for some cap changes and switch changes. :)

NRG

06-01-2014, 17:42

Yomanze

07-01-2014, 17:12

I use a re-bodied 103R with the Sumiko headshell and extant balance weight. The PL-71 can be improved over stock. It responds very well to a clean 18v supply and replacing the motor with the slightly better spec PL-55 one also helps...I've also recently had success in replacing the stock feet with a combination of Oak wood cones and squishy sorbothane 'pucks'. I've recapped the motor as well but only as a precaution when I had the deck apart...

Interesting, thanks. Think the springy feet are pretty useless, may well replace these. Don't want to modify the deck, but I do have a little hint of speed instability according to the strobe, tiny, but probably down to the switches.

NRG

07-01-2014, 19:17

Yes, I've been experimenting with some Russ Andrews Jumbo Oak cones as feet only and the difference is quite marked over the stock feet, I think these will be staying!

The Mighty Quinn

08-01-2014, 01:06

Hi Quinn

If you are interested in my 2M Black, I would be happy to send it to you in the good old US. I put the UK ONLY bit in because I included postage. If you want to PM me, we can talk about the extra £5 ($8) it would add to the postage.

Clive

Wow Clive, that is really great of you. However, I think that I am going to go support my local hi-fi shop and purchase my cartridge there. They claim to have 40 years of experience installing and aligning cartridges, which is certainly much more than I can say for myself. At one time I attempted to do this myself on an AR turntable that I rebuilt in college. I recall that rebuilding the turntable was a lot of fun, but that properly aligning the cartridge was days of frustration. Of course, this was pre-internet and I was following the meager instructions that came with the protractor, weight gauge and a few other items that I purchased through mail order, and there was nobody around to help because all of my friends had switched to CDs. At the end of the day, I never really felt that I got the cartridge truly aligned, and I swore that I would leave this to professionals in the future.

Thanks again for the offer!

Cheers,
Quinn

The Mighty Quinn

08-01-2014, 01:21

Gents

Thank you very much for all of the great information. To summarize, it sounds like there is a general consensus that a Denon DL-103 or DL-103R would work great on a PL-71. Given that there is a bit of mixed opinion on the 2M Black, and that the later is quite a bit more expensive, I am tempted to go with the 103 or 103R.

What are your opinions of the 103 versus the 103R for this application?

Thanks again for your help and advice.

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

08-01-2014, 12:59

The Mighty Quinn

09-01-2014, 02:50

The 103 is a MC so you'll need either a MC capable phono stage or a Step Up Transformer fed into a MM phono stage. The 103 likes mass so go for a Sumiko headshell or similar. You'll need extra weight for the counter weight to balance the arm...it maybe best to keep to MM if any of this sounds daunting....

Good points Neal. While I am not opposed to an MC cartridge, I would like to minimize the modifications required to the tonearm for now, so it sounds like the 2M Black with the stock headshell is going to be the way to go.

By the way, I saw your previous response in this thread regarding the wooden cone feet and sorbothane mats. Can you elaborate more on this modification? e.g. what are the dimensions of the cones, what does your turntable sit on, what were the differences in sound that you heard? exactly how are the sorbothane mats used (between the cones and the stand or the cones and the turntable), etc... A few photos of your setup would be terrific. I have always thought that the springy feet on the PL-71 were one of its few weak points from a design standpoint, and a simple modification that corrects this problem would be fantastic.

Thanks again!

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

09-01-2014, 08:43

Hi Quinn, the deck sits on top of an Apollo rack on a Torlyte type board fitted with 4 Russ Andrews cones. For the PL-71 I'm now just using the RA Jumbo Cones:

http://www.russandrews.com/product.asp?lookup=1&region=UK&currency=GBP&pf_id=4225&customer_id=PAA0938010314264NGJLFLGOQCVMHFKH

These are available in packs of three or four...

The Sorbothane 'pucks' smeared the sound I found. The Cones measure 52mm Dia by 28mm High so very nearly the same as the stock feet and fit into the bottom metal frame of the deck neatly. (can't take a picture just at the moment). I level the deck with shims under each cone.

The sound has better tonality and separation of instruments and voices, I can hear more going on in the mix. It also sounds a little more relaxed and natural the Bass seems to be more dynamic with greater impact and the slight upper coarseness of the 103 is smoothed out a bit.

This is all in my system though and your milage may vary...

PS: Saw this over on PFM, maybe worth considering instead of the 2M Black....

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=149815

The Mighty Quinn

10-01-2014, 00:24

Gents

The 2M Black is being installed and aligned as I write this. I hope to be listening to it by Saturday afternoon after I take care of my professional and domestic responsibilities.

I have a bit of a side question for you all that is a bit off topic: how are you cleaning your albums? When I left the hobby back in grad school I was using a Discwasher with a homemade solution consisting of deionized water, analytical grade isopropyl alcohol and Triton-X114 wetting agent. I still have my father's Parastat (Manual Model MK11A). What are you guys using in 2014?

The Mighty Quinn

11-01-2014, 20:36

Greetings Everyone,

I brought home my PL-71 from the shop where the new Ortofon 2M Black was supposedly "professionally installed". Upon getting it home I checked the VTF and found that it was 1.95 g on both of my Shure force gauges. I called the hi-fi place and was told that they set the force to 1.5 g, and that it probably changed when I moved the turntable. I think that it is unlikely that the force would change that much, so now I am questioning these guys ability to properly align a cartridge.

How would you go about checking the proper alignment on of this cartridge on the PL-71 with a stock headshell? I was looking at protractors on Vinyl Engine but am uncertain as to which I should use.

Thanks again everyone!

Cheers,
Quinn

Macca

11-01-2014, 21:16

I have a bit of a side question for you all that is a bit off topic: how are you cleaning your albums? When I left the hobby back in grad school I was using a Discwasher with a homemade solution consisting of deionized water, analytical grade isopropyl alcohol and Triton-X114 wetting agent. I still have my father's Parastat (Manual Model MK11A). What are you guys using in 2014?

Hi Quinn

You should consider getting something like this Moth wet/vacuum RCM I am guessing about $700 your side of the pond. Quick and easy and will bring your records up like new with no nasty residues left:

http://i903.photobucket.com/albums/ac233/Macca_photos_2009/rca001.jpg (http://s903.photobucket.com/user/Macca_photos_2009/media/rca001.jpg.html)

NRG

12-01-2014, 10:45

Yup, a good wet n vac RCM is the way to go if you are serious about your vinyl. I use a nitty gritty machine and just before playing a Hunt EDA MK6 dry cleaning brush...

The Mighty Quinn

12-01-2014, 15:49

Greetings Everyone

Thought I would give a quick update on my ongoing PL-71 adventure.

Yesterday I posted that upon getting the turntable home from having my new Ortofon 2M Black "professionally installed", I found that the vertical tracking force was way off. This prompted me to dig out the original PL-71 manual and check the other alignments to the best of my ability. I used the overhang checker (part of the 45 adapter on the PL-71) and found that it was off scale. I readjusted it to the proper 14.5 mm according to the manual. I then printed a "stupid" protractor from Vinyl Engine and did my best to tweak the alignment at the null points, and finally set the tracking force to between 1.5 g and 1.6 g using two separate Shure stylus force gauges. I am pretty confident that I have the tracking force, overhang and null point alignment set properly now.

However, I have absolutely no confidence that I have the vertical tracking angle and anti-skating set properly. Actually, VTA confuses me the most. With respect to the VTA, I adjust this by raising and lowering the tonearm, correct? I have been reading that the only way to adjust this properly is to use a digital microscope and measure the VTA directly, otherwise it is just trial-and-error. Am I missing something? The PL-71 manual simply says to adjust the tonearm height until it is parallel with the platter, but it seems like this would produce a different VTA for each cartridge. How do you guys adjust and measure the VTA?

With respect to anti-skating, should I simply trust the dial on the tonearm and set the anti-skate to the same numerical value as the VTF? I think it is probably too much to hope that the anti-skate dial is accurate after 40 years. How are you guys setting the anti-skate? I just ordered the Hi-Fi News test record that is suppose to have a good test method for setting the optimum anti-skate, but I would love to hear about other methods, and their pros/cons.

I have a copy of the Shure Audio Obstacle Course Era III and checked the tracking on all four trackability tests (bells, sibilance, bass drum and violin). I heard no tracking problems through level 5 on the bells, bass drum and violin tests. I think that I might have heard a slight distortion at level 5 on the sibilance test. I'm hoping that I can get the sibilance to improve once I figure out how to get the VTA setup properly and the anti-skate set properly.

It's probably not fair to offer opinions on the sound of the system because I am not convinced that the anti-skate and VTA are set up properly, but I am going to give you a few first impressions anyway. Take it with a grain of salt.

I now have about 5 hours on the 2M Black post re-alignment, and so far it is kind of boring. The high end started pretty harsh, but seems to be smoothing out a bit. The "S" sounds are emphasized but not distorted, and this may be because I don't have my VTA and/or anti-skating properly aligned. Otherwise the sound is sort of flat.

I would appreciate any thoughts you have regarding the VTA and anti-skating settings.

By the way, I am definitely going to need to recap the PL-71. I can get the speed to be rock solid stable for 10-20 minutes, but once in awhile it will audibly change. It is almost as if I can hear those old electrolytic capacitors crying out "we just can't do it anymore!".

Cheers, and thanks to all of you for the great advice you have given so far. It is so good to be back into my vinyl!

Quinn

Magna Audio

12-01-2014, 17:49

Usually VTA is good when the arm is parallel with the record whilst playing. This is a bit hit and miss as if you are not 100% inline when you look it will look off a bit.
Trial and error around that by eye alignment is then done.
Is the rear of the tonearm is up too much the treble can sound spitty / siblanty. Lowing it will cure and if go too far make things too far the other way.

If you fit a taller cart then you have to change the VTA. Pretty much all carts like to see the record at the same angle.

Record thicknesses vary quite a lot, so unless you are the kind of person that changes VTA for every disc (there are a few out there), then set it to be good on what you listen to most and enjoy it:)

For antiskate you usually set it at the same as the VTF. So if 2g then 2 on the scale. You can try a bit either way and see how that changes things.
Also with med to high compliance carts you can see looking from the front of the cart if the cantilever is vertical whilst playing.

I've see carts where the cantilever is permanently off to one side when not playing - presumably due to countless hours and hours on the wrong or no antiskate.

The PSU recap is easy. The motor board is pretty tight but I did it no problem.

NRG

12-01-2014, 17:49

Hmmm, I use the Baerwald alignment and it seems to give good results for me, thats an inner null of 66mm and outer 120.9mm.

With regard to VTA its trial and error Im afraid, start with the top of the headshell / cartridge parallel with the record and tweak the arm pillar up or down until it sounds best....a dull sound could be a little too low. It does alter with different cartridges and also record thickness! But, I wouldn't get to hung up on it, I find Ortofon cartridges have the SRA more or less correct so a parallel cartridge is probably correct.

Anti skate is also a bit of trail and error, I used a test record and found the anti skate dial more or less the same as the tracking weight! I may have just been lucky.

Also make sure the cartridge azimuth is correct by using a small mirror placed on the platter mat, the reflection should vertical.

The Mighty Quinn

12-01-2014, 19:58

Thanks Neal and Steve!

I lowered the tone arm by approximately 2-3 mm and it made a HUGE difference. All I can say is WOW! I really wish that the tonearm height was a bit easier to change, or even measure reliably, but I finally feel like I am starting to get control of the alignment on this turntable.

Neal: I did indeed use the Baerwald alignment protractor that I downloaded from Vinyl Engine.

I am listening to Crosby, Stills and Nash right now and the vocals sound amazing. The harshness on the high end is gone and the emphasis on the "S" sounds is gone. I also noticed that surface noise is greatly reduced. I might have gone a bit too far because the bass is not as crisp as I think it should be. I would not go as far calling it "muddy", but I think it is on that side of the alignment. I am going to leave the VTA alone for a few hours and listen to some more albums before I attempt to make a correction. I also want to let the 2M Black break in a bit more before do too much more tweaking.

Neal: how long did it take before your 2M Black was through the break in process?

As far as the anti-skate is concerned, I have it set as close to 1.5 as I can with the dial. I am going to leave this alone until I get the Hi-Fi News test record later this week.

Thanks so much for your help guys!

Cheers,
Quinn

The Mighty Quinn

12-01-2014, 20:04

You should consider getting something like this Moth wet/vacuum RCM I am guessing about $700 your side of the pond. Quick and easy and will bring your records up like new with no nasty residues left

Yup, a good wet n vac RCM is the way to go if you are serious about your vinyl. I use a nitty gritty machine and just before playing a Hunt EDA MK6 dry cleaning brush...

Hey Gents,

Do you clean your records with a machine every time you play them, or do you only clean them with the machine once and use brush before playing to remove surface dust?

Cheers,
Quinn

6L6

12-01-2014, 20:08

RobbieGong

12-01-2014, 20:53

Hi Quinn, Hope you get set up sorted. You have a superb cart there in the 2M Black which needs to be set up right so that it does it's magic. Personally I've always found the sweet spot through doing vta last.
All the best :)

NRG

12-01-2014, 21:10

Hi Quinn, good to read you are getting somewhere with the deck. I don't use a 2M Black, I have a rebodied DL103R.

Re the RCM I only use it to clean a record if it needs it ....normally just the once and from then on use the Hunt brush just before playing...

keiths

12-01-2014, 22:44

Re the RCM I only use it to clean a record if it needs it ....normally just the once and from then on use the Hunt brush just before playing...

Yes - same here: a wet clean before the first play (even if it's a brand new record) and a new inner sleeve, then just the occasional dry brushing.

The issues in the bass may be due to slightly excessive vtf rather than incorrect vta, so maybe try backing off the tracking weight a little?

NRG

12-01-2014, 23:27

Having grown up with a -71 I can suggest a few simple modifications;

1) Remove the transformer from the chassis and put it in it's own box. Getting rid of the vibrating humming chunk of iron from the chassis makes an incredible difference in the overall sound. More than you would ever expect. (Yes, really...)

2) Lose the old rubber ringed mat. I really like the Acromat from Funk Firm, but just about anything will be better the the 40-year old original.

3) Wall rack.

Keep on with the tweaking of the alignment, it seems like you are on the right track!

I've not found it necessary on the PL-71 to remove the Tx, mine doesn't hum and is isolated and located well away from the cartridge. I found the Acromat poor TBH, the stock rubber mat is fine and you can add other material mats on top of it if you want to tweak but as always YMMV. A wall rack would only be necessary IME if you have a footfall issue or some LF breakthrough upsetting the deck, mine is mounted on top of an Apollo rack with Oak cone feet onto a wood board, the floor is concrete...so far its the best I've heard it sound.

Gromit

13-01-2014, 09:11

I found the Acromat poor TBH, the stock rubber mat is fine and you can add other material mats on top of it if you want to tweak but as always YMMV.

I'd agree - especially where the PL-71's concerned. I found it did something rather odd with the bass, causing what sounded very much like a suck-out at certain frequencies. Listening to acoustic piano (which I do a lot of) it removed some of the natural body resonance, the energy contained within what should be a very dense sonic structure. It also didn't help the deck's natural flow.

Supports-wise - yes, I've found the 71 will work in a number of places just fine. However from my own experience it really sings on top of an Audiotech table. The difference is marked, to say the least.

6L6

13-01-2014, 13:23

I've not found it necessary on the PL-71 to remove the Tx, mine doesn't hum and is isolated and located well away from the cartridge.

I bet you a pint of your favourite that if you were to remove the transformer from the chassis you would be gobsmacked at the improvement. The transformer vibrates. All of them do. A record player is a fantastically good, by design, seismograph. All you would need to do is remove 2 screws and splice in 4 wires...

Give it a go, I'm sure you will be impressed.

The Mighty Quinn

13-01-2014, 13:46

2) Lose the old rubber ringed mat. I really like the Acromat from Funk Firm, but just about anything will be better the the 40-year old original.

Hey 6L6

Thanks for the recommendations. I am surprised that you did not like the original mat because several others on AoS have the opposite opinion. I have heard that the PL-71 came with different mats for the US and UK versions, but have not seen anything definitive on this. I believe that Speedy Steve's PL-71 came from the US, I after reading his thread on the PL-71 I was under the impression that the stock mat was almost magic. But swapping mats is a pretty easy thing to try, so I will look into this after I get the cartridge aligned to the best of my ability.

Thanks again for the suggestions!

Cheers,
Quinn

Magna Audio

13-01-2014, 16:57

I certainly would not change my stock US mat. I use it on my SP-10. It's not a simple rubber. There is some rubber in the mix but also quite hard compounds of something, the result is a hardish plasticised rubber:)

It matched the hitherto best mat I'd heard on the SP-10 (a 5mm Copper job). The Cu ones cost as much as the whole PL-71 back when I bought mine...

Hey 6L6

Thanks for the recommendations. I am surprised that you did not like the original mat because several others on AoS have the opposite opinion. I have heard that the PL-71 came with different mats for the US and UK versions, but have not seen anything definitive on this. I believe that Speedy Steve's PL-71 came from the US, I after reading his thread on the PL-71 I was under the impression that the stock mat was almost magic. But swapping mats is a pretty easy thing to try, so I will look into this after I get the cartridge aligned to the best of my ability.

Thanks again for the suggestions!

Cheers,
Quinn

Yomanze

13-01-2014, 17:04

I think some PL-71s had a more rubbery mat vs. the one that I have being a harder plastic compound.

CableMaker1

13-01-2014, 18:15

I found the Acromat poor TBH, the stock rubber mat is fine and you can add other material mats on top of it if you want to tweak but as always YMMV.

I don't have the PL-71 turntable in question here, although it is a very beautiful DD Turntable that deserves recognition from the era of the Golden Age of Audio. My turntable is the SL-1200MK2 which has been hot-modded - which I do use an Achromat on top of the platter. I find the Achromat to bring records to life.

Before ditching the Achromat off of your PL-71, let me make the suggestion that 6L6 suggested - to remove the transformer from your TT and locate it in its own external shell. This should make a sonic improvement on your turntable. Try listening to it with the Achromat on it and see how it sounds then.

Good luck on your journey to audio nirvana!!!

NRG

13-01-2014, 18:22

I bet you a pint of your favourite that if you were to remove the transformer from the chassis you would be gobsmacked at the improvement. The transformer vibrates. All of them do. A record player is a fantastically good, by design, seismograph. All you would need to do is remove 2 screws and splice in 4 wires...

Give it a go, I'm sure you will be impressed.

LOL! OK, I'll give it a shot Jim at some point but not just yet, too much on at the moment unfortunately...

Gromit

13-01-2014, 20:02

I have heard that the PL-71 came with different mats for the US and UK versions, but have not seen anything definitive on this. I believe that Speedy Steve's PL-71 came from the US.

Cheers,
Quinn

I've seen PL71's from both the US and the European (ie UK) and their mats were identical, and as Steve says they seem to be made of a hard, almost brittle form of plasticised rubber. I've owned 3 of the decks now - UK ones - and the mats were all the same. All I'll say beyond that is that the standard one works bloody well on the deck. By all means try others - that's part of the fun - but having tried alternatives myself I just kept coming back to the original one.

Ammonite Audio

14-01-2014, 16:55

All of this is very useful, since I am shortly to become a full member of the PL-71 Club!

The Mighty Quinn

16-01-2014, 03:32

Greetings Everyone

It's been a few days, so I thought I would give you all an update on where I am at with the 2M Black alignment on the PL-71.

I have been playing with the VTA for the last couple of days. Adjusting the VTA is kind of tough on the PL-71 because there is no "scale" on the visible shaft. I spent some time coming up with a reasonably simple method of measuring the height of the front and rear of the tone arm to within about 0.5 mm accuracy so that I wasn't stumbling around blindly. I spent about four hours getting the VTA set to where I think it should be, and I think it was time well spent. One thing that somewhat surprised me is that the tonearm height adjustment has a lot of travel, I would say about 1.5 cm. I explored nearly the full range of this travel, and ultimately landed on a height that results in an arm that is about 0.5 mm lower at the first bend in the "S" compared to the point where it goes into the headshell. This seems to be a compromise height between thicker, 180 g pressings and standard thickness albums. For thinner albums, I think it would be better to lower the arm a bit, and with the thicker albums an arm that is perfectly parallel to the plinth seems optimum.

The final result is really, really good. I used two separate albums for this effort, listening to one full side of each at each VTA setting unless it was apparent at the beginning that the arm was too high or too low. The first is a 180 g pressing of Pink Martini's Hey Eugene. The second is a first pressing of the Who's Quadrophenia (one of my father's pride and joys...came with the PL-71).

So right now I am quite happy with the results; however, I have to say that this 2M Black is not very forgiving of bad pressings. After getting the VTA adjusted to the point where I felt things were pretty much optimal, I pulled out a brand new lp of Adele's 21. I cleaned it to the best of my ability (sorry guys, no machine yet) and dropped the needle. My initial emotion was horror. All of the original harshness of the 2M was back, but worse. I could hardly stand to listen to the first track, and I pulled the album after the third track finished as I was starting to get a headache. As I sat there trying to figure out what the hell happened, I did a web search and found that numerous people have had issues with the quality of Adele's 21 on vinyl in the US. I crossed my fingers and put on Tori Amos Little Earthquakes, an lp that I had bought and played a few times right before I left vinyl 20 years ago. Fortunately, the sound quality was back and good as ever.

I still have some work to do. I have not touched the azimuth or the anti-skate yet. I have two test records arriving tomorrow: Hi-Fi News and Cardas. My understanding is that there are tracks on these records that will help me adjust the azimuth and anti-skate properly. I will then probably play with the VTA a bit more to see if there is any further room for improvement. I'll play with these and hopefully write another update on Saturday.

Thanks again for all of the great advice. This is a fun project and I couldn't do it without you guys!

Cheers everyone,
Quinn

NRG

16-01-2014, 10:34

We'll done Quinn, new vinyl can be a bit of a shock to the system, you wonder what the guys where thinking or hearing during mastering.... Sometimes its even intentional :doh:

You can set azimuth with a small mirror, the test record will require you to monitor the output from you phono stage with an oscilloscope or some other device to check for even output from both channels.

Audioman

16-01-2014, 11:07

Quinn. The UK Adele 21 actually sounds OK. Better than I would expect from a modern compressed pop recording. I would suggest a cartridge a little more tolerant of surface imperfections but those I would suggest are MC rather than MM. (Dynavector 20XL / AT33EV)

The Mighty Quinn

16-01-2014, 21:35

We'll done Quinn, new vinyl can be a bit of a shock to the system, you wonder what the guys where thinking or hearing during mastering.... Sometimes its even intentional :doh:

Wow, you ain't kidding! I ordered seven new albums and have now listened to all or part of most of them. The Adele "21" is the worst, but there are two others that are almost as bad. On the flip side, Pink Martini's "Hey Eugene" and Yes's "90125" (both 180g vinyl and pricey) are amazing. Hanging out in the middle is Lang Lang's "The Chopin Album", which is an EU pressing (doesn't say which country). This is probably the topic for another thread, but I thought that quality of vinyl would be much better now than in the golden age of vinyl. Is this a problem with the pressing of vinyl, remastering, or both? I cannot recall ever getting a record that sounded as bad as that Adele "21" back when I was listening to records twenty years ago, but maybe my new 2M Black is just letting me hear all of the deficiencies along with the musical detail. Or is there just a lot more bad quality vinyl out there now?

You can set azimuth with a small mirror, the test record will require you to monitor the output from you phono stage with an oscilloscope or some other device to check for even output from both channels.

I attempted to check the azimuth with a mirror. I used an old alignment protractor on a mirror that is approximately the thickness of an album. I set the anti-skating to zero and lowered the needle onto the surface of the mirror. I think that I understand conceptually what I am looking for. If the azimuth is off and I look at the stylus straight on from the front of the cartridge, I should see the reflection making a slight angle less than 180° on one side and greater than 180° on the other side, correct? In reality, it looked pretty much dead on at 180°. In addition, I started to explore how I would change the azimuth if indeed it was wrong, and honestly I cannot see how one would do it. I don't see any way to rotate the tonearm, and the cartridge is keyed so that it only goes in one way. I can loosen the headshell and rotate it VERY slightly, almost imperceptibly so, but I cannot imagine that this would be nearly enough adjustment. The only way I can think to align the azimuth would be to use shims between the headshell and the cartridge, but there must be a better way. What am I missing?

Also with respect to azimuth, it was my understanding that if the azimuth was off that you would get cross-talk. In other words, if you had a track that only contained information in the left channel, that you would be able to hear some of that information coming from the right channel. I thought I was being smart and put on the Shure Audio Obstacle Course Era III record that contains separate left and right channel tracks. I put it on the left channel track and unplugged the left channel of the turntable from my preamp. I turned up the volume and listened for the sound to come out of my right speaker, and I didn't need to turn up the volume much. A lot more sound was coming from the right speaker than I thought there would be. Same thing happened when I reversed the setup and listened to the left speaker while the right channel track was playing. This seems to indicate that I am getting cross-talk from someplace, but unfortunately I cannot narrow it down to the cartridge. I realized that the cross-talk could be coming from my phono stage, the preamp or my amp...or possibly the recording on the Shure lp is not perfectly silent on the "dead" channel. I hooked up a CD player to my system and put on a test CD and repeated the experiment. The cross-talk was definitely there, but not as much as it was with turntable. But that only means that the phono-stage in my preamp could be adding more cross-talk. Either way, I cannot conceive of a way to separate cross-talk in the cartridge from the rest of the system by ear.

So I think that I understand why one needs to use an O-scope when adjusting azimuth: you need to eliminate all other sources of cross-talk in the signal. Is my understanding correct?

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

17-01-2014, 13:29

The Mighty Quinn

18-01-2014, 00:38

With regard to the 2M Ive just read some interesting stuff over on PFM with regard loading, it seems the typical MM stage loading causes a spike in the response of the 2M Black that could be a cause of the brightness you are experiencing. Apparently it prefers a low capacitance loading of no more than 200pf and about 37~39k ohm loading, this flattens the response. Unfortunately if your MM stage is not adjustable then you are stuck unless you are prepared to perform some internal surgery on your phono or can find somebody to do it for you.

Neal, that is really very interesting information. My Rotel RC-850 definitely does not have an adjustable MM stage. Input impedance on the MM stage is 47 kohm. I have a new PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium integrated amp coming in a couple weeks, but that doesn't seem to solve the impedance problem since it has an input impedance of 50 kohm. I don't see the capacitance loading specified for either the Rotel or PrimaLuna MM stages. Hmmm, maybe I will contact PrimaLuna and see what they have to say about this.

Regarding Azimuth, the adjustment is performed at the headshell but it depends on what headshell you have, if it's the stock one then that's not adjustable, the likes of the Sumiko have a small grub screw that can be undone to allow the head shell to rotate in relation to the arm. If the cartridge reflection is fine using the mirror then I wouldn't worry about it any further. Cross talk normally refers to signal breakthrough from say one source device to another. IE when signal wiring is run parallel to other signal or power wiring. The Azimuth adjustment is for getting a L/R balance and forming a strong central image between the 'speakers.

I played the azimuth test track on the Hi-Fi News test record today. The balance between the two speakers seems pretty good, but the cancellation when I went to mono was not perfect. I guess I will just live with what I have for the time being and consider getting a Sumiko headshell in the future.

Thanks again Neal. I am definitely going to look into the MM stage capacitance and input impedance issue!

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

18-01-2014, 01:22

Post #90 bottom of this page:

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=150185&page=6

Post #94 same thread, follow the link...

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=150185&page=7

The Mighty Quinn

18-01-2014, 02:04

Greetings Everyone,

I received my Hi-Fi News Analogue Test LP in the mail yesterday and have spent several more hours tweaking. I have to say that this test record was the best $40 I have spent on this turntable. Prior to getting the Hi-Fi test lp, I was getting pretty happy with the sound from the PL-71/2M Black combination, so you can probably understand why I was appalled that my setup failed EVERY tracking ability test on the Hi-Fi News record, as evidenced by an audible buzzing sound in either one or both speakers (for reference, these tracks include Bands 6, 7, 8 and 9 on side one and Bands 1 and 5 on side 2). Being completely amazed at the apparent poor alignment job I did on the 2M Black, I pulled out my trusty Shure Audio Obstacle Course Era III record and confirmed that I was passing all of the tests.

So my alignment was good enough for the Shure record, but was failing miserably on the Hi-Fi News test record. wtf?

This is where I was late last night before going to bed: miserable and feeling very defeated. Today I brought home a small hand held microscope from work so that I could take a closer look at the stylus. What I discovered was very illuminating: despite my confidence, my overhang was NOT set at 14.5 mm, which is the ideal overhang for the stock arm on the PL-71. It was actually set a shade less than 14.0 mm. It turns out that I was looking at the end of the cantilever and not at the actual stylus tip. Amazing what even a 10X magnification will show you. I adjusted the cartridge to the proper overhang, realigned to the Baerwald protractor and adjusted the VTF to the manufacturers recommended 1.5 g. Afterward, I played the Hi-Fi News test record and there was a very noticeable improvement, but there was still audible buzzing in both channels. Somewhat out of desperation, I decided to align the cartridge to the Loefgren protractor, which I already had printed out with the Baerwald. Amazingly, this made a HUGE difference. I tinkered further with anti-skating, lowered the VTA a hair and increased the VTF to 1.6 g ... and like magic it all fell into place. I still get the buzzing on Band 9 of Side 1, but as the instructions say, this is "...a real torture track!", being recorded at +18 dB.

For reference, my anti-skating is currently set at about 1.9 with a VTF of 1.6 g. If I lower the anti-skating to 1.6, I get an audible buzzing in the right channel on the +14 db track (Band 7 Side 1) of the Hi-Fi News record. So for those of you with PL-71s, you might want to play with the anti-skating a bit and not just follow the manual and set it to the same value as the VTF.

Interestingly, after all of these modifications to the alignment, I still pass all of test tracks on the Shure Audio Obstacle Course Era III record. I guess this means that the old Shure test record is more of a leisurely stroll along the beach instead of an obstacle course for modern cartridges. :-)

But of course the real test is the music! I listened to my two original alignment albums (180g Pink Martini's "Hey Eugene" and first pressing of the Who's "Quadrophenia") and I was blown away. I am currently listening to a 180g pressing of Crosby, Stills and Nash and the vocals are smooth and balanced. I finished listening to 180g pressings of the soundtrack for the movie "Once" and Heart's "Little Queen" earlier, and was equally impressed. The detail is fantastic but without the over-bright high-end. It just keeps getting better and better.

Everyone warned me that the 2M Black was a fickle little thing, but I honestly did not anticipate just how sensitive this cartridge is to proper alignment. Quite frankly, I am not convinced that I have perfected the alignment, but as I sit here listening to CSN, I can find very little to fault in the sound quality. I think that I am going to leave well enough alone for the time being until I get my new PrimaLuna integrated amp (Dialogue Premium arrives in just 3 weeks! Whoo-Hoo!) and just listen to some music! Besides, my wife gets back from a week-long business trip this weekend so I won't have any time to tinker!

Cheers Everyone!
Quinn

Ammonite Audio

18-01-2014, 07:08

I have long since given up trying to get my various cartridges to track the HFN test record tracking test tracks without buzzing; and am convinced that a MC will never track these, whatever you do. Any alignment method has compromises, so you simply choose how and where those compromises lie. At the end of the day, set up the arm and cartridge properly, set VTF mid-way between the manufacturer's minimum and maximum settings, then find the best settings VTA and bias largely by ear.

A good physical alignment gadget, like the Clearaudio one that I use, is a good investment allows you to set the cartridge position and alignment correctly and very quickly. Dr Feickert and others do similar gadgets for less money.

The Mighty Quinn

18-01-2014, 13:29

Greetings Gents

I have been playing around with some of the calculators on Vinyl Engine and I have a quick question: how in the world do I measure my offset angle?

Thanks!
Quinn

NRG

18-01-2014, 15:02

Your alignment has been bugging me Quinn!

I can't see how an overhang of 14.5mm meets any of the alignment settings. I've spent a few hours today checking mine, I use a long-out-of-production Townshend Elite gauge that lets me plot the tracking distortion right across the record rather than at just to spot points and it doesn't tally.

The manual states effective length is 224mm with 14.5mm overhang so a pivot to spindle distance of 209.5mm (mine actually measures 208.5mm), I measured the offset as 23deg more or less using a protractor on the headshell with the center point in the middle of the adjustment slots and the 90 deg mark running up the center of the headshell. Taking a 12" rule and aligning it on the protractor centre point and the arm pivot point it read 23 deg...I check a number of times and it was consistent.

Using these figures for the Vinyl Engine Overhang Offset calculator I got the results shown in the attached figures.

The default 14.5mm causes waaaaay too much distortion, changing the overhand to 16.5mm seems to get you on the money. Unless I've measured the offset incorrectly 14.5mm is wrong.

If the offset is 22deg then 14.5mm makes more sense but even then you get a better result with 15 or 15.5mm!

11364

11365

The Mighty Quinn

18-01-2014, 22:08

Neal,

You are absolutely correct!

I set the overhang to 14.5 mm at the beginning of my alignment process. I never re-checked the overhang after aligning to the Baerwald protractor (66/120.89), and then finally the Loefgren (70.29/116.60). I just checked the overhang after reading your post and sure enough the overhang is somewhere between 15.5 mm and 16 mm!

I am still curious as to how you measure the offset angle. What protractor are you using on the headshell?

Thank you very much for taking the time to do this analysis. I was just looking at these calculators today but had no way of knowing what my offset is.

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

19-01-2014, 17:51

Promise not to laugh! :)

Its not very sophisticated and not that accurate. In fact you can calculate the offset angle from the null points and effective length, see attached spreadsheet. What I actually measured above was the headshell angle not the offset as I thought. The offset changes depending on the cartridge overhang / arm mounting distance etc.

Anyhow see the two attached pictures, I've remeasured and moved the protractor center point to be directly above the stylus and not in the centre of the adjustment slots, it reads 23 deg and when in the centre of the headshell slots just over 23deg....all this assuming the cartridge is parallel to the headshell.

I think I'm going to tweak my settings to null at 66 and 120.9mm which would mean an overhang of 18.33mm (try measuring that!) and twist the cartridge in the headshell....

https://db.tt/0i4WdlNK

11367

11368

The Mighty Quinn

19-01-2014, 18:37

Promise not to laugh! :)

I promise!

Oh, I see that you are actually using a REAL protractor. I assumed that you were using one of the alignment protractors. Ok, that makes a lot of sense now, and thanks for the excellent photos. I need to post a few of my own one of these days!

Speaking of photos, I see a non-stock mat on your PL-71. What are you using?

Ok, now I have to ask a serious question about the PL-71 setup as described in the manual. It clearly states in the PL-71 manual to align the cartridge with a 14.5 mm overhang. I did some more tweaking last night (I guess I simply cannot leave well enough along after all), and my overhang is measuring somewhere between 16.0 and 16.5 mm using the PL-71 45 adapter gauge. I took a quick look at that spreadsheet that you linked to in your previous post (by the way, that is a GREAT resource...THANKS!) and it calculates that the overhang should be 19.109 mm for an effective length of 224 mm and aligned to Lofgren B (which is what I am currently doing), and 18.58 mm aligned Baerwald.

So how in the world could an overhang of 14.5 mm possibly be correct, and why is it recommended in the PL-71 manual?

Thanks again Neal. Let us know how your new alignment works for you.

Cheers,
Quinn

The Mighty Quinn

20-01-2014, 15:24

NRG

20-01-2014, 20:37

Greetings Everyone

I have been playing with the spreadsheet that Neal linked to a few posts ago in this thread. I find that I am a bit confused by the term "effective length" of the tonearm. Looking at the diagram made by Seb on Vinyl Engine, the effective length is defined as the distance from the tonearm pivot to the stylus. Based on this definition, the effective length changes with cartridge overhang, correct?

Yes, EL is the pivot to stylus distance and also pivot to spindle plus overhang

So I am confused by this spreadsheet because it requires a user input for effective length, and then calculates the overhang. For example, if I input 224 mm for the effective length of my PL-71 tonearm, the spreadsheet calculates an overhang of 19.1 mm for Lofgren B using IEC groove limits. But if the specified effective length of 224 mm assumes an overhang of 14.5 mm, wouldn't the new effective length be 228.6 mm? So the input is actually a function of the output in the spreadsheet, which has me really confused. Are the curves plotted for an effective length of 224 mm or 228.6 mm? It seems like the input should be independent of the output. For example, why not use pivot to spindle distance instead of effective length?

Am I making any sense? Do you guys understand my confusion?

Yes! Been there! OK typically there are two common ways to make adjustments, either you move the arm pillar in relation to the spindle or you move the cartridge in the headshell and the spindle to arm pivot stays the same.

So, as we can't change the arm position on the PL-71 do the following to use the spreadsheet; Change the Yellow effective length field until the Green pivot to spindle figure matches the PL-71, lets say its the published figure of 209.5mm. Setting the Yellow EF to 227.5 get us just about there.

You can now update cell A3 with the EF of 227.5, update cell B3 with the Green Angular offset and Cell C3 should update with the Green stylus Overhang figure. The graph should now redraw and your actual Null points will be displayed in Light Green Cells F and G

You can make Cells A3 and B3 autoupdate with =I3 and =O3 respectively, I think C3 already auto updates....in fact reading the blurb it seems they should already autoupdate and it mentions how to change the cells it in the text.

I ended up with an overhang of 18.5mm, EF 226.5 and offset 24.4 deg...using the Baerwald protractor on the inner Null I twisted the cartridge slightly to line up parallel with the protractor marks and hey presto it also lined up with the outer Null!

You need to get an accurate arm pivot to spindle measurement for this to work correctly. HTH

The Mighty Quinn

21-01-2014, 15:36

Thanks Neal, very helpful indeed.

I was surprised to read that your pivot to spindle is measuring 208.5 mm rather than the spec of 209.5 mm. I took a ruler and there is no way that I can make that measurement within +/- 1 mm accuracy. How did you measure this on your Pl-71?

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

21-01-2014, 22:11

Hi Quinn, I used a small engineering 6" rule stuck to the back of a 12" rule at a right angle protruding by about 25mm at 209.5mm almost like a set square. It's then easy enough to put the 0mm of the 12" rule on the arm pivot point and see if the edge of the 6" rule lines up with the center of the spindle. If not, slide the 12" rule along a bit until the edge of the 6" rule lines up with the spindle centre and read the error / difference at the arm pivot.

Or you could simply buy a pair of 10" engineering dividers and use them to measure the distance...

Forgot to add the 12" rule needs to be parallel with the platter...

Yomanze

22-01-2014, 09:49

Does anyone have experience of arm board changes on the PL-71? Whilst I understand the existing Acos arm offers a great synergy I would still like to try my 10" Helius Scorpio 4.

NRG

22-01-2014, 13:20

The arm board isn't separate, it also houses the trim pots and speed switches etc Don't see how you could replace it without major work. I don't think there would be much benefit and it would alter the looks of the deck.

The Mighty Quinn

26-01-2014, 15:52

Greetings Everyone

I have been traveling on business for the last week so there is not much update to give on the PL-71. I did go ahead and realign the cartridge using the "Tonearm Alignment Calculator Pro" on Vinyl Engine as a guide. Once I learned that there was nothing magic about the 14.5 mm overhang specified in the PL-71 manual, I felt justified in playing around a bit more. My current alignment is based on a pivot-to-spindle distance of 209.5 mm (from the manual specs) and uses the Lofgren B alignment. The overhang is now around 18.7 mm, or at least as close to 18.7 mm as I am able to get using a decent ruler.

The setup still sounds fantastic, but I honestly did not get much of an audible difference by moving the overhang out to 18.7 mm. I am still not quite happy with the highs. They are certainly not harsh or distorted, but perhaps a bit too edgy. I don't know if this is my turntable setup or my Rotel pre-amp, but based on what Neal was saying in a previous post about pre-amp capacitance and impedance affecting the FR of the 2M Black, I am leaning towards the phono stage in my Rotel as being the problem. I guess we will find out when the new PrimaLuma arrives in two weeks!

Cheers everyone.
Quinn

NRG

26-01-2014, 16:32

Good progress Quinn. I've been using very similar alignment to yours and for me it's proving to be better than my previous setting. The tracking seems more secure, the 103 seems unflappable now: before on some highly modulated tracks there was a bit of audible distortion and on others a touch of sibilance...but not anymore. Very please with it.

Yes, it's interesting about the 2M Black, if your new phono stage has switchable capacitance settings then set it for the lowest value.

The Mighty Quinn

31-01-2014, 14:12

Looks like I am going to get a chance to try out a Pro-Ject Phono Box RS phono stage next week. It has adjustable impedance and capacitance so I should be able to determine if the accentuated high end that I am experiencing is due to the phono stage in the Rotel or something else. I am optimistic that the phono stage is indeed the problem. The high end in my setup is smooth and sounds wonderful...but it is simply too loud. back2vinyl reports a 2.5 dB hump in the 2M Black's frequency response at around 10 kHz using a standard loading of 47 kohms and 220 pF, which totally jives with what I am hearing.

I also have a record cleaning machine on the way!

Amazing how much money this "free" turntable is costing me.

Cheers everyone,
Quinn

The Mighty Quinn

07-02-2014, 14:01

Greetings Everyone,

Well, the Pro-Ject Phono Box RS arrived last night. After I ordered it I realized that the impedance is only adjustable for the MC stage, and fixed at 47 kOhm for the MM stage. I was initially disappointed because the frequency response analysis conducted by back2vinyl here (http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/ortofon-2m-black-frequency-response-charts.312499/) showed that with a 47 kOhm impedance and typical capacitance in the 300 pF range (including tonearm and interconnect capacitance) gives you a hump in the frequency response around 10 kHz, and that dropping the impedance to 33 kOhms smooths this out.

So my new phono stage is not going to let me try out 33 kOhms impedance. However, as I read more I learned about resonance and how the resonance frequency is a function of the cartridge inductance and total loading capacitance (tonearm, interconnects and phono stage). In fact, there is a really nice write up on this, along with a resonance calculator, on the Hagerman Technology website (http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html).

I have no idea what the capacitance of the phono stage in my Rotel RC-850 is (it is not listed in the specs), but I would assume that it is 220 pF, which seems pretty typical. My interconnects from the turntable to the pre-amp are 1 meter long Monster, which I have read have a capacitance of around 60 pF per foot, so I have an additional 180 pF in my interconnects. Neglecting tonearm capacitance, I figure that my cartridge sees around 400 pF. The 2M Black has an inductance of 630 mH, and using the Hagerman calculator this gives me a resonance of 10 kHz, which is totally consistent with back2vinyl's frequency response measurements.

What I learned from the Hagerman website is that you can push this resonance to higher frequencies by reducing the capacitance. So I ordered a 1 foot length of low capacitance audio cable (12 pF/foot) from Blue Jeans Cables. So I figure my interconnect capacitance dropped from 180 pF to 12 pF. My new Phono Box RS is set to 100 pF, which gives me around 112 pF ignoring the tonearm contribution. Plugging a capacitance of 112 pF into the Hagerman calculator gives 19 kHz for the resonance, which is probably far enough out there that I won't hear it. I'm not sure how much the tonearm will contribute to the total capacitance, but I think that removing close to 300 pF from the effective loading of this cartridge should be a very good thing.

Ok, enough of the numbers. Let's talk about the sound.

Right out of the box, the Phono Box RS sounds spectacular. I did not do a true apples-to-apples comparison because I switched out the interconnects at the same time I hooked up the Phono Box RS. Whether it is the lower capacitance or some other quality of the Phono Box RS I cannot say, but the high end is finally tamed. Also, I've finally got some decent bass, which I definitely attribute to the Phono Box. I have read that the Phono Box RS requires some break-in time to really achieve its potential, but the sound quality is so much better than what I had before, I don't really care if it not broken in yet. That being said, I am going to do my best to break it in over the next few days. :-)

Wow, I cannot believe how much I learned in the last few weeks. Thanks for all of your help gents! This has been a really fun project, and I'm definitely not done yet. Those e-caps need to be replaced, and while I'm at it I might as well re-wire the tonearm. Now that I have a good phono stage, I'd also like to try out a nice MC cartridge, perhaps the Denon 103R, which means a new headshell.

But that is work for another day. Today, I am happy to sit back and enjoy listening to this gem.

Cheers,
Quinn

loo

10-02-2014, 20:49

Hi Quinn , congrats on the Project RS it is an absolute bargain, I have been lucky enough to have an extended period with a complete RS set up and my feelings are that Project have really excelled themselves with the RS range , they are all superb sounding products and really move things on for their modest outlay, I could happily recommend any of the range and as a complete fully balanced system they are without completion at their price point ,very nice fit and finish too.
Enjoy your RS and when your ready for a cart upgrade don't let the RS' price influence your choice as it will happily bring out the best in cartridges costing 5x its own price .
you made a wise choice
enjoy
Paul

NRG

11-02-2014, 17:20

Going back to alignment, I thought I'd double check my Pivot to stylus distance using a pair of engineering protractors instead of my make-shift set square made out of two rules...I was out by 1mm :doh: Not that it makes a huge difference but best to be accurate.

What prompted this was finding this very useful protractor generator over on VinylEngine:

Thread: http://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=16849

Program: http://www.conradhoffman.com/chsw.htm

Putting in my settings for an IEC inner/outer groove radius and printing off the protractor I found a small error on my 103R but my SA was spot on. Its a great tool, essentially you forget about overhang, you just need an accurate pivot to spindle measurement and selection of IEC or DIN and you preferred alignment.

The Mighty Quinn

25-02-2014, 13:37

NRG

25-02-2014, 14:16

209mm, I've checked it many times now. I've had the motor unit out a few times in the past so there's probably some play in the mounting holes that accounts for the slight difference.

The Mighty Quinn

25-02-2014, 14:19

Greetings Everyone,

I thought that I would give a quick update on my journey with the PL-71.

I replaced the stock headshell with one by Sumiko. This made a big improvement, and it made VTA and azimuth alignment much easier. Since the top and bottom surfaces of the Sumiko headshell are co-planar, I was able to use a bull's eye bubble level to set the VTA and azimuth to make the top surface of the headshell (and therefore the top of the cartridge) co-planar with the surface of the record surface. Obviously you need to reset the counter weight to account for the weight of the bubble balance on the headshell, but the stock counter weight had just enough travel to make this possible. This method got me very close to an ideal VTA setting, and it turned out that the azimuth was right on (at least as far as the cartridge is concerned) with no adjustment necessary.

I am really pleased with the sound quality I am getting with the PL-71 combined with the Ortofon 2M Black and Sumiko headshell. On good quality pressings, the detail is amazing, the high end is smooth and the bass extension is very good. I am not currently getting the tight bass "punch" that I would like, but I think that this has more to do with my integrated amp than with my source. I will say that the 2M Black is not very forgiving when it comes to surface defects and seems to pick up every little tick and pop. Many of the used records in my collection are nearly unlistenable with the 2M Black, despite my best efforts to clean and re-clean them with a VPI HW-17 RCM.

A couple more items of interest:

1.) I purchased a Denon 103R to compare with the Ortofon 2M Black. As this comparison is a bit off topic, I will start a new thread to post my opinions. I will say that the 103R sounds wonderful and is far more forgiving to surface defects in the vinyl, but it doesn't have the detail of the 2M Black.

2.) I finally received my PrimaLuna Dialogue Premium integrated amp. I can sum up my opinion with "WOW!" I'll start a new thread on this guy also.

One quick question for you guys that have re-capped your PL-71: do you have a parts list for the capacitors that need replacing? I might have a day this coming weekend when I could re-cap my PL-71, but I need to have all of new capacitors ready to go.

Cheers,
Quinn

NRG

25-02-2014, 16:53

On the PSU board replace the ‘lytic caps with Panasonic FR or FC (lower ESR)

For C101, the main smoothing cap I went for a 1000uF / 50v cap. This improves the smoothing lowering the ripple voltage by a fair bit.

For C102 and C103 I went for the same value replacements both at 35v, 50v versions would also be fine.

Check the lead spacing on all the caps I can’t recall what they are, 5mm I suspect.

The other caps to replace are all the motor caps, you’ll have to take the motor out for these and note down the values as they are not listed on the schematics. Its quite a bit of work and if the motor is holding speed and torque OK probably best left until something goes wrong.

Another thing you could do is replace the rectifier diodes on the PSU with some 100v 1A schottky diodes.

The Mighty Quinn

26-02-2014, 14:10

NRG

26-02-2014, 14:52

Yes, those are the ones...

The Mighty Quinn

08-03-2014, 22:27

Thanks Neal.

I replaced the C101, C102 and C103 capacitors last weekend.

For future reference to those thinking about recapping the PL-71 speed controller, here are the capacitors that I used:

C101: Panasonic EEU-FC1H102L 1000uF / 50V (http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&KeyWords=P11263-ND)
C102: Panasonic EEU-FC2A330 33uF / 100V (http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?WT.z_header=search_go&lang=en&site=us&keywords=P10771-ND&x=0&y=0&formaction=on)
C103: Panasonic EEU-FC1H101 100uF / 50V (http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?WT.z_header=search_go&lang=en&site=us&keywords=P10323-ND&x=0&y=0&formaction=on)

The replacement capacitor that I used for C101 was just a hair too tall and it touches the fiber board bottom panel, but I didn't have to force it into place, so I am leaving it alone. Also, the lead spacing for the stock C101 is 7.5mm, whereas the stock C102 and C103 have a lead spacing of 5mm. I replaced C101 with a capacitor with a lead spacing of 5mm without much difficulty, but were I to do it again I would replace C101 with Panasonic EEU-FC1H102 (http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/EEU-FC1H102/P10333-ND/266342), which has the proper lead spacing and has nearly the same height as the stock capacitor.

It may also be helpful to note that the C101 capacitor was glued to the circuit board, so those of you planning to re-cap the PL-71 should be aware of that and be ready with something like a hobby razor or utility knife to cut through the glue.

All in all, recapping my PL-71 was quite easy, extremely cheap, and it made a HUGE difference on the speed stability. The first time I turn it on each day, I have to tweak the speed adjustment a bit to set it, but once it is set it stays stable for hours and hours. I also noticed that once the speed is set properly, the little orange squares on the platter are so stable that they literally look painted on. Previously, I could keep the orange squares from walking if I kept the deck running for a long time, but even then they "pulsed", for lack of a better term. After recapping, no more pulsing, no more drifting, just rock solid stable speed.

Hope the above information helps anyone planning to re-cap the PL-71 in the future.

Cheers,
Quinn

Yomanze

09-03-2014, 12:01

Thanks Quinn my TT is in need of the same!

6L6

14-12-2014, 16:32

2) Lose the old rubber ringed mat. I really like the Acromat from Funk Firm, but just about anything will be better the the 40-year old original.

I've recently acquired a PL-71 (Kinda sorta by accident... more explanation in my upcoming thread...) and I was interested in why those who have it really seem to prefer the stock mat.

My initial findings:

http://youtu.be/zxbj0a-AzuI

6L6

15-12-2014, 20:45

This thread will be for the documentation of the restoration and (probable) modification to a Pioneer PL-71 turntable.

Why the PL-71? A couple of reasons:

1) It's a good example of pre-PLL direct drive. The motor is very quiet and it's bearing structure are good.

2) It has a wonderful tonearm made by Acos.

3) The turntable is generally considered to be a good example of "better than the sum of it's (quite nice) parts".

4) It's the turntable I grew up with, and 5) I didn't actually expect to win the auction.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2428.jpg
Here it is in the condition I recieved it. The wood is a bit dry, there is a general light yellowing of all the metal parts indicative of it living in a smoker's household at some point, but other than that, it's in very nice shape.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2431.jpg
And here it is after a thorough cleaning. The yellowish tint is off the metal, the wood has a coat of Danish oil, and generally it look much, much better.

I didn't take any photos as I was cleaning it, just imagine a bunch of paper towels, cotton swabs, alcohol, wood oil and the like all strewn about. It took approximately 1.5-2hr of scrubbing, dabbing, cleaning, wiping, brushing and elbow grease.

I still need to treat the mat, it's clean, but the rubber needs something to restore a bit of moisture to it.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2433.jpg

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2435.jpg
The dustcover is is great shape for it's age. I'm very pleased.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2436-1.jpg
The bottom cover is very 1973. But the metal chassis bottom is a neat piece, making a metal interface for the sprung feet into the wood chassis that makes up the rest of the table.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2437.jpg
Here's the up-skirt shot.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2448.jpg

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2441.jpg
A few things worth mentioning, the tonearm is rigidly coupled into the chassis, and with the tagboard and jacks easily removed, would be a good candidate for a continuous rewire or conversion to DIN if that's you kind of thing.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2439.jpg
This board is mainly for AC distribution.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2438.jpg
DC rectifier and 'regulator' (Really just a zener-referenced cap multiplier.)

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_24401.jpg
The power/speed selector switches and speed trim pots.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2442.jpg
These little screws holding the motor cover were a royal pain to remove.

The power transformer is mounted on rubber feet. Remarkably quiet. Of course it would benefit from being in it's own external case, and I may try that. It also has a universal primary and voltage selection with one of those neat plug thingys.

The motor is rigidly coupled to the chassis and the control board is under the black cover.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2445.jpg
Cover removed showing the motor control PCB. The 38yr-old capacitors need to be replaced.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2446.jpg
Not too bad of a job. There are a number of wires that got the the motor windings on the other side of the PCB that seemed to be in the way, but other than that, it's straightforward. No values changed

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2443.jpg
The regulator board also got a set of fresh capacitors. The filter caps are a bit bigger than stock, but the can size is still the same. :cool:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2447.jpg
Dead soldiers.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2450.jpg
I replaced some screws that hold the strobe to the chassis, over the years 3 of the 4 screws had fallen out. I had to scrounge for hardware that fit, but now it's solid.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2451.jpg
Lastly I added some secret lubricant to the bearing, I got it from a kindly old Dutchman who horse-swapped it from a Polar Bear named SY. I have little idea what's actually in it, other than it was made for low-heat, high-pressure interfaces, specifically TT bearings.

In my opinion, all I did was to get the 38-yr old table back in a condition similar to when it left the factory. So far it's just a tune-up, no hot-rodding, no mods.

Yet.

:)

walpurgis

15-12-2014, 21:17

Interesting stuff.

I have the forerunner PL-61 waiting for attention (tidy, but the arm is not quite right). That one is belt drive and has a whopping hall effect motor on the removable separate TT assembly (bit like a hefty Micro Seiki MB-300). It was top of the Pioneer TT range until the PL-71 came along. The arm has more in common with the PL-12D arm than the PL-71 item.

Canetoad

15-12-2014, 22:57

Hi Jim,

Can you give me the number and value of the caps in the motor control PCB? I've already replaced the caps in the regulator but am still to do the motor in mine.

Nice work by the way and great photos! :)

struth

15-12-2014, 23:05

Very Good Walkthrough and great pics too...

NRG

15-12-2014, 23:15

might be worth re-posting this link of my updates to the PL-71 in case you want to try them Jim or come up with some better ones....

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?3183-A-new-toy-PL-71&highlight=pioneer+pl-71

6L6

16-12-2014, 03:27

Can you give me the number and value of the caps in the motor control PCB? I've already replaced the caps in the regulator but am still to do the motor in mine.

Nice work by the way and great photos! :)

Bernie,

Thanks for the kind words. :D

The caps removed from the motor board were:

(1) 100uF 25V
(1) 100uF 16V
(2) 10uF 16V
(4) 4.7uF 25V

My replacements were all Panasonic 25V, and all smaller than the ones removed. :)

Canetoad

16-12-2014, 05:12

Excellent! Thanks Jim. :)

6L6

17-12-2014, 23:40

Neil, what did you finally decide on for cartridge alignment? I'm playing with mine and am completely stumped...

NRG

18-12-2014, 08:45

Hi Jim, I went with Baerwald / IEC using Conrads protractor generator program: http://www.conradhoffman.com/chsw.htm

The program runs on windows and will produce a protractor of your choice. You need a few things for it to work; a Windows system to run it, a printer(!), accurate measurement of the spindle to pivot distance, a headshell that allows you to twist the cartridge and accurate cutting of the spindle hole in the template, a square cut out inside the printed spindle circle works well.

I found the OEM recommended alignment to be quite poor.

6L6

21-12-2014, 00:49

I ordered a new cartridge for this table, an Audio-Technica AT100/E.

I suspected that me spare cartridges were all worn out, and with the new one to compare, yes, they were.

Onto another round of playing with alignment... :) :( :)

6L6

21-12-2014, 17:11

Ok, simple answer...

My old "keep them around for a rainy day" cartridges were all worn out. I guess I didn't realize how bad they had gotten. :(

Putting the new cart in the stock headshell sounds really quite wonderful. Alignment is plain Baerwald set with my Geodisc.

Sorted.

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/gallery/data/500/IMG_2478.JPG

Dizastical

21-01-2018, 23:54

Hey guys. Great info in here on the PL-71. I just picked up a ortofon 2m bronze to replace my 2m blue. I've been learning all the cartridge alignment tricks as I go thanks to this forum. I really want to nail the sweet spot for alignment. I'd like to use an arc protractor because they seem the most accurate. Can you guys please recommend the best alignment procedure to get this new cart to sound perfect? I do not know all the tech lingo or what most of the programs want for info to generate the proper template for my pl-71. My pivot to spindle measurement is 209.5 and right now I have overhang at 18.5mm. I used the 2 point protractor that came with my hi hi news test record. I set vta so the top of the headshell is tail down ever so slightly. I'm using a Pro-ject Signature headshell in the polished aluminium option and I have the azimuth perfectly level. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I feel like I could definitely improve the sound if I could just nail down the cart alignment a little better. The highs are a little too sharp and bass is lacking a very tiny bit for my taste. I run vtf @ 1.7 and using the test record I found the sweet spot to be about 1.5 on the anti skate.