View Full Version : Any Technics SL-1200GAE Owners here?
Just wondering if any forum members have bought the SL 1200GAE? If so please post your impressions.
I guess the answer is no?
There were only 1200 of them for sale globally and they weren't cheap so it is pretty unlikely.
Good ponints, Macca. OTOH, I know of no other deck on the market offering this level of technical performance at this price, so this deck should have a certain degree of market appeal.
daytona600
31-07-2016, 07:02
heard it twice at recent audio shows nice sounding deck but $4000 + then fit decent arm , external PSU , Cartridge etc
you are in $6000+
Looking at the measurements in the July 2016 issue of HFN, the hum & noise are lower than than SME 15's, so there should be no need for an external supply.
Yes, your figures are not unreasonable. OTOH, an arm and cartridge would be needed with any other deck too. The GAE arm measures well, so it might not necessarily need changing.
Looking at the measurements in the July 2016 issue of HFN, the hum & noise are lower than than SME 15's, so there should be no need for an external supply.
Yes, your figures are not unreasonable. OTOH, an arm and cartridge would be needed with any other deck too. The GAE arm measures well, so it might not necessarily need changing.
I haven't seen the review but I read on some other forum that according to Paul Miller who did the measuring for that review, the SL-1200GAE was pretty much the most technically impressive turntable to ever enter his test bench, or some such. He thought the arm measured really well too. Measurements don't necessarily translate to good sound, but I find the pretty common thinking that you'd have to change the PSU + arm right out of the box pretty odd. I'm sure there are better arms around if you're willing to spend the dough, but there's no reason why the stock arm shouldn't be very good and I'm not sure what the issue with the PSU is supposed to be.
The PSU allegedly puts noise into the signal. At least in the old sL1200 that was the theory although I don't recall the exact details of how it happens.
daytona600
01-08-2016, 15:53
I haven't seen the review but I read on some other forum that according to Paul Miller who did the measuring for that review, the SL-1200GAE was pretty much the most technically impressive turntable to ever enter his test bench, or some such. He thought the arm measured really well too. Measurements don't necessarily translate to good sound, but I find the pretty common thinking that you'd have to change the PSU + arm right out of the box pretty odd. I'm sure there are better arms around if you're willing to spend the dough, but there's no reason why the stock arm shouldn't be very good and I'm not sure what the issue with the PSU is supposed to be.
SL-1200 GAE’s internal switch mode with an external linear PSU
Technics SL-1200 GAE deck.
Technics SL-1200 GAE turntable £2,700
SME IV tonearm £1,860
Tonearm mounting plate (allows fitting of any 9” SME tonearm) £90
Audio Technica AT-33PTG/II MC cartridge £419
Timestep PSU £495
Total cost of fully finished turntable package (as above, plus £200 fitting cost) £5,764
http://hifipig.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Timestep-EVOke-1.jpg
http://hifipig.com/timestep-modified-technics-1200-gae/
Ammonite Audio
01-08-2016, 16:16
I haven't seen the review but I read on some other forum that according to Paul Miller who did the measuring for that review, the SL-1200GAE was pretty much the most technically impressive turntable to ever enter his test bench, or some such. He thought the arm measured really well too. Measurements don't necessarily translate to good sound, but I find the pretty common thinking that you'd have to change the PSU + arm right out of the box pretty odd. I'm sure there are better arms around if you're willing to spend the dough, but there's no reason why the stock arm shouldn't be very good and I'm not sure what the issue with the PSU is supposed to be.
I think the 'issue' with the standard switching PSU is that, like most of these things, it injects a whole load of HF noise into everything connected to the same mains supply and probably to the signal too. Apparently it is possible to design a really good, clean SMPS, but inevitable these things are large and expensive, so not really feasible to fit into a relatively slim chassis. Nick Gorham kindly put me straight on the facts relating to SMPSs a while back, so this is not my conjecture here! The Technics' tonearm measured well in the HFN test in terms of suppression of resonance, but that is only one element of tonearm design, and not the sole indicator of musical stardom. I'm sure someone paying many times this amount for a new Grand Prix Monaco turntable might argue that theirs has better speed stability in every sense than the new 1200, but Technics have clearly created something quite special here. It's quite logical that Timestep have improved the bits that would have increased the deck's RRP by a colossal amount if designed and fitted from the start; and in the greater scheme of things the end result is not stupidly expensive.
I SCORED ONE!! I came into a windfall of cash, tracked down a guy that bought one and made him an offer he couldn't refuse :eyebrows: I took extra care in setting it up and pulled out some of my favorite albums to try it out. I carefully put the vinyl on the platter, lowered the needle and listened for the first notes. Wait, something's wrong! There are no chimes in this song! WHAT, CRAP, it's my alarm clock :doh: Sigh, it was only a dream...
I think the 'issue' with the standard switching PSU is that, like most of these things, it injects a whole load of HF noise into everything connected to the same mains supply and probably to the signal too. Apparently it is possible to design a really good, clean SMPS, but inevitable these things are large and expensive, so not really feasible to fit into a relatively slim chassis. Nick Gorham kindly put me straight on the facts relating to SMPSs a while back, so this is not my conjecture here! The Technics' tonearm measured well in the HFN test in terms of suppression of resonance, but that is only one element of tonearm design, and not the sole indicator of musical stardom. I'm sure someone paying many times this amount for a new Grand Prix Monaco turntable might argue that theirs has better speed stability in every sense than the new 1200, but Technics have clearly created something quite special here. It's quite logical that Timestep have improved the bits that would have increased the deck's RRP by a colossal amount if designed and fitted from the start; and in the greater scheme of things the end result is not stupidly expensive.
Yeah, like I said good measurements don't necessarily translate into perceived good sound, but writing the tonearm off as default still seems a bit silly to me. Now if it's based on personal experience with the said arm then it's possible to actually form an informed opinion on the matter, but so far it seems mostly based on the assumption that the original SL-1200mk2 arm wasn't that good so the new one must not be either, even though it's a completely different arm.
What would be interesting is someone spending some good time with the deck in stock form and then trying different arms and PSU upgrade etc. and assessing the performance and perceived differences, but I suppose it's too early for that still.
Yes, I've heard this too. Not convinced it matters, even if it true. The capacitors in the power supply filter the mains AC and convert it to DC. The higher the frequency of the incoming AC - RF being an example - the better the filtering.
As for radiated RF adversely affecting sound quality, I would like to see some data. You'd be surprised to see how much background RF is present anyway in a typical home, with WiFi routers, cordless phone, computers, etc
The PSU allegedly puts noise into the signal. At least in the old sL1200 that was the theory although I don't recall the exact details of how it happens.
Yes, again, I agree that the purchase price is high by traditional Technics standards. My point is that the bare deck, even ignoring the freebie arm, is cheaper than most of its bare bones direct competitors.
Now, whether or not a $4k deck is a sensible purchase in the first place is an altogether different discussion.
SL-1200 GAE’s internal switch mode with an external linear PSU
Technics SL-1200 GAE deck.
Technics SL-1200 GAE turntable £2,700
SME IV tonearm £1,860
Tonearm mounting plate (allows fitting of any 9” SME tonearm) £90
Audio Technica AT-33PTG/II MC cartridge £419
Timestep PSU £495
Total cost of fully finished turntable package (as above, plus £200 fitting cost) £5,764
http://hifipig.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Timestep-EVOke-1.jpg
http://hifipig.com/timestep-modified-technics-1200-gae/
Yes, I've heard this too. Not convinced it matters, even if it true. The capacitors in the power supply filter the mains AC and convert it to DC. The higher the frequency of the incoming AC - RF being an example - the better the filtering.
As for radiated RF adversely affecting sound quality, I would like to see some data. You'd be surprised to see how much background RF is present anyway in a typical home, with WiFi routers, cordless phone, computers, etc
I agree that there are issues with that explanation, however the overwhelming subjective experience of upgrading and/or moving the power supply out of the deck is that it improves sound quality to the extent that it is worth the effort/expense.
Unbiased evaluation of sound quality by means of subjective non-blind tests is virtually impossible. Any assessment of sound quality under such conditions is specious at best.
I agree that there are issues with that explanation, however the overwhelming subjective experience of upgrading and/or moving the power supply out of the deck is that it improves sound quality to the extent that it is worth the effort/expense.
Mike_New
14-08-2016, 04:32
SL-1200 GAE’s internal switch mode with an external linear PSU
Technics SL-1200 GAE deck.
Technics SL-1200 GAE turntable £2,700
SME IV tonearm £1,860
Tonearm mounting plate (allows fitting of any 9” SME tonearm) £90
Audio Technica AT-33PTG/II MC cartridge £419
Timestep PSU £495
Total cost of fully finished turntable package (as above, plus £200 fitting cost) £5,764
And you still only get the same old bell shaped light die cast aluminium platter.
Unbiased evaluation of sound quality by means of subjective non-blind tests is virtually impossible. Any assessment of sound quality under such conditions is specious at best.
I don't disagree but in the absence of non-subjective blind tests for this modification it is all we have to go on. Plus whilst I agree there is a psychological barrier to performing ones own subjective assessment I don't agree that it is insurmountable. On this site we take subjective appraisals into consideration. That may be not be scientific but this is the 'Art' Of Sound forum, not the Science Of Sound. (Although that might make a good title for a sister forum ;) )
Unlike some audiophiles on this site I do not posses unlimited funds. Hence I am very cautious when buying new gear. Before laying out the equivalent of several hundred dollars on an 'upgrade' I'd need more than just subjective opinions. Subjective opinions, by their very nature, do not transfer well. One audiophile's 'lush full bodied' sound may be another audiophile's 'heavy plodding bass and where are the highs' sound.
I don't disagree but in the absence of non-subjective blind tests for this modification it is all we have to go on. Plus whilst I agree there is a psychological barrier to performing ones own subjective assessment I don't agree that it is insurmountable. On this site we take subjective appraisals into consideration. That may be not be scientific but this is the 'Art' Of Sound forum, not the Science Of Sound. (Although that might make a good title for a sister forum ;) )
Fair enough but then a blind test won't be any use either, no matter how scientific, unless you are the participent. I'm as careful with my audiophile dollars as anyone but sometimes you just have to take an (educated) punt.
We need to establish if there is a difference in the first place. I'm willing to bet, based on past experience, that many of these so-called subjective improvements will disappear in blind testing. However, in the unlikely event that some of these differences are shown to be real then, of course, personal preferences will be significant as you point out. Over on PFM (I trust it is OK to mention other fora) there is a thread titled Measuring what sounds good. Have a look at my posts there.
Fair enough but then a blind test won't be any use either, no matter how scientific, unless you are the participent. I'm as careful with my audiophile dollars as anyone but sometimes you just have to take an (educated) punt.
We need to establish if there is a difference in the first place. I'm willing to bet, based on past experience, that many of these so-called subjective improvements will disappear in blind testing. However, in the unlikely event that some of these differences are shown to be real then, of course, personal preferences will be significant as you point out. Over on PFM (I trust it is OK to mention other fora) there is a thread titled Measuring what sounds good. Have a look at my posts there.
Yes I have read the thread and re-watched the lecture. Toole is a good speaker and makes his points clearly and without waffling. But with regard to blind testing I would argue that it is unnecessary providing the subjects are aware of their potential bias and take it into account. I'd also make the point that just because you found little difference between some very similar amplifiers when blind-testing it doesn't automatically follow that you will achieve the same null results with other components, or indeed with amplifiers that have greater differences in design topology and build quality.
The thing with reproducing recorded sound is that small differences do matter, maybe not when listening to 30 second excerpts in a blind test, but over a period of many hours of listening for pleasure. Subtleties that may be missed in the test could actually be make or break for whether we can live with that sound for recreational listening, or whether we will grow dissatisfied with it quite quickly.
I'm not dismissing blind testing as it is a useful tool and also as a means to demonstrate that unconscious bias exists, but it is by no means some ultimate and flawless arbiter.
I've heard enough modded Technics turntables to accept that at least some of the modifications do make a significant improvement to the quality of the sound produced. Quantifying them would require more dedicated back to back comparisons with the stock deck, using the same cartridge. I agree it is possible that some of them do not make a significant improvement*. To say 'many' or to put money on it is, I would suggest, being a little over-confident.
* By significant improvement I mean one which is considered worthwhile for the cost, not a 'night and day' improvement. I'd suggest that the quality of the phono stage and cartridge would over-ride any of the possible mods, and that it is here that the money should be spent first, assuming the budget has a limit.
I'm afraid that we human beings are what we are, and bias in a sighted test is impossible to ignore or eliminate. As I have written elsewhere a sighted test is like sitting for an exam with the answer sheet in full view.
There is no restriction on listening time in a blind test. It is likely that many, if not all, of the 'subtleties' detected in sighted tests are due to visual cues and biases. IME, we audiophiles are prone to listening with our eyes.
Note that I am not asserting all amps sound alike or anything like that. What I am saying is that before we launch into a long discussion of why item A sounds better than B, we should ascertain definitively that this is indeed the case. I do not see a non-blind solution for this.
My night and day comment was related to the opinions held in certain high end circles where price and brand name are considered to indicators of sonic quality. I'll never forget the time a good friend showed up with a Krell integrated amp and predicted that it would blow away my modestly priced Tandberg integrated. Needless to say, he was unable to tell them apart under blind conditions. Speakers were quad 63s.
Don't forget too that having FUN is a crucial part of both achieving system satisfaction and, most importantly, musical enjoyment from our audio hobby - thus it is *essential* we're doing that (and feeling relaxed) when assessing equipment and making important choices, as that way we perform and behave more faithfully as humans... I also dislike any form of rigid dogma.
In that respect, having carried out many such tests, blind-testing audio equipment, in an appropriate controlled environment, is about as much fun or relaxing for most people as sticking a rusty pin up your Jap's eye! Now, when that's the case for most of us (excluding the white coat-wearing lab geeks), how can the results obtained be anything other than flawed? ;)
That's why BOTH blind and sighted testing *is* fundamentally flawed, but simply in different ways. Therefore, there is no universal 'one true path' for assessing the sound/personal suitability of audio equipment: simply choose the method that works best for YOU, and if that involves keeping your peepers wide-open, then so be it!
:exactly:
Marco.
P.S What does the 'A' stand for? I presume Al? :)
I'm not dismissing blind testing as it is a useful tool and also as a means to demonstrate that unconscious bias exists, but it is by no means some ultimate and flawless arbiter.
Precisely; as I've just highlighted :)
Marco.
Fair enough but then a blind test won't be any use either, no matter how scientific, unless you are the participent. I'm as careful with my audiophile dollars as anyone but sometimes you just have to take an (educated) punt.
Indeed. Gut instincts, judiciously-derived through experience, can be huge assets when building a hi-fi system. It's how 90% of my system was built - and you've heard the results! :)
Contrary to what 'measurists' think, good/correct decisions can be arrived at in this hobby, in the absence of readouts on test equipment ;)
Marco.
Note that I am not asserting all amps sound alike or anything like that. What I am saying is that before we launch into a long discussion of why item A sounds better than B, we should ascertain definitively that this is indeed the case. I do not see a non-blind solution for this.
My night and day comment was related to the opinions held in certain high end circles where price and brand name are considered to indicators of sonic quality. I'll never forget the time a good friend showed up with a Krell integrated amp and predicted that it would blow away my modestly priced Tandberg integrated. Needless to say, he was unable to tell them apart under blind conditions. Speakers were quad 63s.
You can't really use a blind test to work out which is 'better' since that is totally subjective. The purpose of a blind test is to determine if there is a difference perceived between two or more items that is not due to unconcious bias.
To my mind if the difference is so small that it cannot be picked up on a blind test then it probably isn't worth worrying about in any case. If differences are obvious then you don't need the blind test.
I'm sort of between the two camps as I think you can tell quite a lot about what something will sound like from the appropriate measurements, if you have them, and if you have experience of hearing similarly designed/measuring kit in the past.
In your example of the Krell/Tandberg comparison I don't think any experienced enthusiast would be surprised that there was little/no difference between them. I wouldn't need a blind test to demonstrate that, although your friend obviously did ;)
Of course any amplifier comparison relies on both amps being able to drive the given speakers at 100%. I'd expect the Krell to do better with a really difficult load.
I'm was lucky to get my hands on a GAE, and what an experience:). I never thought I ever bring a DD into my house, but have always loved the pace an attack of a DD. But....
My Wilson Benesch Circle is not missed at all. All the DD virtues, but with a smoothness and refinement of a good belt drive.
The G model is now on sale, and here in Norway the G is about £300 more expensive that the GAE. Is it the same in England? I think the anticipation was that the G was going to be considerably cheaper than the GAE
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.