KAB-modified SL-1210 vs. Slatedeck SP10 - a review
First a bit of background:
I've always hankered after a 'serious' built-like-a-brick-shithouse direct-drive turntable such as an SP10, EMT, or one of the big Denons sold in the Japanese market, because the sheer levels of engineering are a sight to behold and their sonic reputation is legendary. I also have a love of high quality broadcast and professional analogue equipment. The good stuff in my experience completely outperforms most domestic hi-fi gear.
However practical issues, namely where to put the bloody thing (as any T/T I use would have to fit on my Mana rack), concerns about reliability (with older gear), and having to source discontinued parts on the second-hand market should anything important go 'pop', cooled my enthusiasm and made me search for a viable alternative which could offer similar performance but was less of a statement of mass engineering. SP10 users tend not to worry about malfunction, and for good reason because the units are very reliable, if you get a good one, but when it comes to T/Ts with so many moving parts together with internal components in use, many of which are now obsolete, I would rather have one that's in current production and easily serviceable.
To cut a long story short, I scoured the Internet and discovered KAB with their modified SL-1210s after reading about them on a US audio forum. The comments I read there were so positive, and intriguing, that I carried out very detailed research on both the KAB modifications (and KAB as a company) and the SL-1210 in general. I discovered that the SL-1210 was actually a serious bit of kit that was originally designed as a hi-end audiophile turntable for the Japanese market in the 1970s (and not a cheap 'DJ deck' as it's condescendingly referred to today by the uninitiated) with a quality of engineering far in excess of modern belt-drive turntables, and indeed shared similar genes with the legendary SP10. The KAB modifications also appeared to raise the performance of a stock SL-1210 quite significantly, so I took the plunge and bought one direct from KAB, fully modified, and the rest as they say is history!
From using the deck (for just over a year now) and marvelling at its outstanding sound quality I'd often wondered how it would compare to the SP10, which is legendary amongst audiophiles, and whether or not the old SP10 actually deserved its cult-like status; 'romance' and aural memories fading with time can often sway the accuracy of people's opinions of classic equipment.
Last year I had the opportunity to listen to Guy Sergeant's SP10 (fitted with a hi-end AudioNote MC cartridge and modified SME V arm) at the London hi-fi show, and then again at the Manchester show earlier this year in the same system, and I was highly impressed. It quite simply trounced the Bel Canto CDP which formed part of the same demonstration system. It was just leagues apart in the way it handled music.
What was very interesting though was that I could quite clearly hear a familiar sonic signature - Guy's SP10 had that solid, weighty, 'assured' sound that in my experience one only gets with a good direct-drive mechanism, or perhaps something like a Garrard, but I wasn't 'blown away' by the performance of the SP10 in the way that I was I expecting, certainly in terms of its legendary reputation, probably because my ears had already become attuned to hearing a similar type of presentation at home with my KAB 1210. Perhaps it had a touch more bass drive and some greater clarity and finesse from the AudioNote cartridge compared to my Denon 103 Pro but that was it. This was very encouraging because it appeared that with my modified 1210 I had pretty much obtained the SP10's sonic performance but in a much more practical package - result!
However, I also knew this was a show, and also an alien system, so it would be stupid to form any definitive conclusions. Therefore I left it at that. Then some months later I was up at Nick's place with Ian Walker getting his EAR 509 monoblocks 'tweaked' and I had the opportunity to listen to Nick's SP10, then in his home-made plinth, but crucially this time it was fitted with one of the cartridges I use (a DL-103R) and an arm that I'd owned and was very familiar with (a Hadcock GH-242). Again it was very interesting. It sounded so close to my KAB 1210 that it was almost impossible to distinguish any differences. However I still got the feeling that it had a smidgen more 'heft' in the bass. But everything else about the sound was pretty similar, allowing as best as I could for differences in equipment used in Nick's system and mine.
Anyway, that was three times now I had heard an SP10 and didn't feel short-changed with my KAB 1210, so it seemed that what I was hearing was genuine, not imagined, as it had happened too often now for it to be an accident. However, old experiences die hard and I still knew deep down that the only way to form a definitive conclusion was to hear an SP10 in my own system against my KAB 1210, or next best, in a proper A/B/A comparison in identically the same system even if it wasn't my own, preferably with others present who were not naturally biased towards the 1210.
Fortunately I got this opportunity at the recent Chesterfest... :)
Towards the end of the evening a few diehards and I (Nick, Andrew, Colin, Al, and a few others) decided that we'd heard enough digital nonsense and it was time for some proper music! Also I wanted to get my head properly around what I'd heard earlier in the T/T demonstration, which Nick has already accurately described on the Chesterfest thread. So I took my 1210 (fitted with a Denon 103R) off its Mana support and put it directly in front of Nick's Slatedeck SP10, fitted with his Hadcock and 103R, on the same table and connected it to the system being used. I think some Frankie Goes to Hollywood was being played on the SP10 at the time.
We then played the same track on my KAB 1210 and sat back and listened...
The sound had similar drive, pace, and a sense of solidity and security, as with the SP10, and that wonderful lack of 'wavering' on instrumentation and voices associated (and easily heard) with low-mass belt-drive T/Ts due to issues with speed stability, manifesting itself as a slurring of pitch and making for a ponderous type of presentation that quickly makes music 'thick' sounding, uninteresting and boring. Instead music on the KAB 1210, as with the SP10, was 'locked' into focus with little sense of stylus tracking vinyl groove and one was swept away in a tide wave of musical drama. Tonally, it was almost identical to the SP10, but lacked some of the visceral impact in the bass present with the SP10, and there was also a congested quality to the midrange making Frankie sound like he was suffering from the flu, and just a general lack of conviction in the overall sound giving the impression that the band were 'out of sorts' during the day of the recording. In short, the musical presentation lacked the joie de vivre and 'life' which had been there in abundance before with the SP10 at the helm. There was also a slight bit of distortion present making vocals sound a tad shrill.
Thinking to myself that this wasn't right, and suspecting what the problem was, I brought the Mana rack over from the other side of the room and plonked it on top of the same table that was being used before. I also adjusted azimuth on the 103R, which was out, so it must have taken a slight knock in transit.
I then played the same track again and we sat back and listened...
What a difference. Now the distortion was gone, and the 'life' and excitement factor was back with a bang! Listening to the music now there was almost no difference whatsoever between the two turntables either in the way music was presented or tonally, however, as before to my ears there was still a smidgen more authority in the bass with the SP10 than with the KAB1210, and I would put this down to the torque of the respective motors. Although the motor units are similar, I'm certain that the one in the SP10 is bigger and more powerful and this quite clearly to me gives it some extra 'heft', but that's about the only difference when both decks are identically set-up (Slatedeck plinth aside) in the same system.
Andrew made the comment that a "DJ deck" had no right to sound that good. I of course quickly pointed out to him that it wasn't one! :eyebrows:
One other thing that's worth noting is that the rewired and fluid-damped Technics tonearm didn't appear to be outclassed by the Hadcock. If it had it would surely have been noticable - tonearms, in my experience, play a big part in the sound of a turntable. This should send out a message to the misguided who constantly deride the Technics tonearm. Once 'sorted' in terms of internal wiring, better headshell, etc, it's a top-notch piece of kit; indeed as clearly indicated by the quality of its bearings.
It should also be remembered, and indeed stressed, that I've spent quite a bit of money on KAB modifications (and others) and *ONLY* by doing this will an SL-1210 compete with an SP10. If anyone out there is under the illusion that logging on to Ebay and buying a cheap second-hand stock 1210 will result in them getting SP10 performance on the cheap then forget it. The standard SL-1210, whilst good, is just not in the same league.
With regard to the Slatedeck plinth, this obviously makes a big difference to the SP10 as firstly Nick's deck sounds much better than it did when I heard it before in his old plinth, and crucially, the SP10 had a clear advantage over the KAB 1210 when both decks were just sat on the table. It was only when the Mana support entered the equation with the 1210 that the playing field was levelled, which shows that the Slatedeck plinth was doing its job very well. It also shows how fussy turntables are about what they're placed on, and that plonking them on any old bit of furniture seriously hampers their performance. Equipment support critics should listen up! ;)
And so what are my conclusions?
I would still like to hear an SP10 in my own system before totally finalising my opinion - perhaps Nick would bring his over some time? I'm sure that would be interesting.
What seems quite clear though is that there appears to be little real difference between an SP10 (even in a Slatedeck plinth) and a fully KAB-modified SL-1210, apart from perhaps a little more bass authority. Other differences may become apparent in a different system to the one used at Chester; as usual with hi-fi there are too many variables to make any observations totally conclusive.
However, this report shows that the KAB modified SL-1210 is a serious turntable and fully deserves to be mentioned in the same context as the legendary SP10. Potential buyers of SP10s may wish to bear this in mind when contemplating the purchase of second-hand units with internal mechanisms that are now over 30 years old, together with practical considerations of sheer weight and bulk, when put in a suitable plinth, and weigh up the pros and cons of buying one against a brand new KAB-modified SL-1210 which is in current production, easily sited on conventional racks, and can be serviced quickly and easily. I know what route I'd take...
Marco.
