fletchdirect
09-01-2017, 16:42
Hi
The forum has been a great read and I have certainly found what the elements of the Technics that need upgrading are.
What is a little more intriguing and harder to completely understand is the background to these elements, and the engineering flaws that seem to exist in the mk2 etc. E.g. What is it about that arm that is criticised so much, and sparks the need for an upgrade? After all, Technics have not changed the fundamental design of the arm for the new 1200G....so what this just pure laziness on their part????
So, starting with the arm - it's well specified but what are the flaws? is it the j shaped tube? Is it the material? Not sure what my mk2 arm is made from, the tube feels like plastic or very lightweight metal. Is it the headshell? Is it very susceptible to vibrations????
The PSU I think I understand a bit more - I guess we are talking electrical interference making their way through to the cartridge, as the transformer is sited underneath the platter. But, why are the better external power supplies better than just putting the external one in a separate housing
Yes, I agree that the platter can ring - again would love to know what negative impact it is having? Is it carrying vibrations that may be coming from the speakers or from people walking around in the room?
Rubber mat - why is this mat criticised? It seems to be heavy and rubber and ideal to mitigate any platter induced vibration. What is the issue wit the stock mat - is it the thickness, the grade of rubber, the rubber itself?
The feet and bearing upgrade are more easily understood as much have been written about them. I am just very intrigued on the items above, and why the suggested replacements are better and why they correct the issues the stock parts seem to be causing.
My stock mk2 clearly does not sound as good as my mk2 with the rb250 arm, which in turn does not sound as good as my sp10/sh10b3 - so I appreciate the differences changes can make, I am just more interested in why these parts are causing the slightly thick and dense sound of the stock mk2. It's also a bit perplexing why technics didn't change the arm altogether on the new model, apart from the armtube material.
Many thanks
Julian
The forum has been a great read and I have certainly found what the elements of the Technics that need upgrading are.
What is a little more intriguing and harder to completely understand is the background to these elements, and the engineering flaws that seem to exist in the mk2 etc. E.g. What is it about that arm that is criticised so much, and sparks the need for an upgrade? After all, Technics have not changed the fundamental design of the arm for the new 1200G....so what this just pure laziness on their part????
So, starting with the arm - it's well specified but what are the flaws? is it the j shaped tube? Is it the material? Not sure what my mk2 arm is made from, the tube feels like plastic or very lightweight metal. Is it the headshell? Is it very susceptible to vibrations????
The PSU I think I understand a bit more - I guess we are talking electrical interference making their way through to the cartridge, as the transformer is sited underneath the platter. But, why are the better external power supplies better than just putting the external one in a separate housing
Yes, I agree that the platter can ring - again would love to know what negative impact it is having? Is it carrying vibrations that may be coming from the speakers or from people walking around in the room?
Rubber mat - why is this mat criticised? It seems to be heavy and rubber and ideal to mitigate any platter induced vibration. What is the issue wit the stock mat - is it the thickness, the grade of rubber, the rubber itself?
The feet and bearing upgrade are more easily understood as much have been written about them. I am just very intrigued on the items above, and why the suggested replacements are better and why they correct the issues the stock parts seem to be causing.
My stock mk2 clearly does not sound as good as my mk2 with the rb250 arm, which in turn does not sound as good as my sp10/sh10b3 - so I appreciate the differences changes can make, I am just more interested in why these parts are causing the slightly thick and dense sound of the stock mk2. It's also a bit perplexing why technics didn't change the arm altogether on the new model, apart from the armtube material.
Many thanks
Julian