I love the look of that TT - the wooden finish gives it real class. That must have been a real high-end player in Pioneer's range. I've not seen one like that before (not that I'm an expert! ;)).
Printable View
I love the look of that TT - the wooden finish gives it real class. That must have been a real high-end player in Pioneer's range. I've not seen one like that before (not that I'm an expert! ;)).
The deck is especially beautiful, very much something that gels with furniture and real rooms.
If you get around to putting a Terminator on it it'll be interesting to find out whether the existing arm is adding something to the sound that makes you like it the way it is or whether a (probably) more "accurate" arm is a step backwards or forwards for your ears.
The looks of a Terminator on such a deck may clash but you can't be sure until you try it. A Terminator will tend to suit the looks of Techie more as it's more technical looking, form follows function kind of look.
Clive, I can't see how adding the Terminator wouldn't add something very positive sonically, but aesthetically, it would be akin to putting the Mona Lisa into a clip-frame: some things you just don't do... ;)
'Classics' should always be improved on sympathetically, if 'improved on' at all.
As an aside, I've just read this rather thought-provoking comment on pfm (where this thread is being linked to) in reference to the LP12:
Hear hear! A most interesting observation and one I concur with wholeheartedly; indeed I've said this many times before. If you like how the LP12 (and some other 'low-mass' belt-drives) colours the sound, that's fine, but don't call it 'musical', because it isn't...Quote:
Quite a lot of people who love their LP12 (and I love mine, even if it's not my first choice and is gathering dust at the moment) find that when they listen to more modern turntables they say they sound "flat", "clinical", "lifeless." The SME decks often get this abuse. Probably because they are better, and don't add anything.
A record player should play at the right speed (including drag), preferably more than one of them, be level, introduce no vibration whilst doing so, limit external vibration, provide a flat and stable mounting for an arm that can be likewise free of vibration. And nothing else.
Marco.
I agree with the above, but with an addition...
When I had my Linn chip installed back in 1982 :D one of the things we were shown is how well the LP12 could hold a run of notes, unlike the Rega 3, which tended to smear them together by comparison. The Lp12 was also good at "playing tunes," which sounds ridiculous, but to someone like me who usually sings along with the music (and follows the sequences on mid-seventies Tangerine Dream......) it was a revelation.
My session with Ivor and Charlie Brennan (now head of Arcam) was with the then new rep for Naim - Paul Stephenson, who's come a log way to the top of Naim's tree - and his then wife, Sally, who started the Chord Company shortly after.
By comparison, an inappropriately sited and supported Japanese direct drive really would have sounded flat, two dimensional and lifeless by comparison. The best balance of virtues at the time coming from the likes of the big EMT decks, which apparently sounded very musical, clear and "rhythmic" in a "true" sense to the master recording.
Once the late eighties came around and I'd been exposed to the wonderful qualities of Notts Analogue decks, I came to question the whole Linn "thing." Richard Dunn has been most emphatic about the damage caused in the eighties, but I tend to take a slightly different stance myself. The better quality supports that had become available benefitted the UK issue "direct drive" era decks no end and with better cartridges, the best of these showed what they could really do. Fortunately for the club scene, Technics still had the tooling to continue with large batches of the SL1200mk2 and once ken Kessler (HiFi News) had been genuinely surprised by a "gold" 1210, the deck's future as a truly valid HiFi source was assured.
Remember though Marco, that the 1200 series available today has substantial rubbery loading inside to attempt to add mass and damp out vibrations. My SL150 and its brethren are empty inside, apart from the motor and switching, although the 150 coped better for some reason...
I've heard the SME 30 and also the 10 and found them very precise in sound. The 10 had one of the dull, "analogue" and coloured Ortofon MC's fitted (one of the Kontrapuncts) yet still the precision came through, the Lingo'd LP12/Akito 2/10XV sounding messy and bland by comparison (I hate the Akito with a vengeance and the LP12 had been carefully set up). The 30 was lovely, but not at that price (three times the cost of an NAS Dias, another wonderful product IMO).
lastly, LP12 lovers have a wonderful excuse for any negative comparisons with other better turntables - the LP12 setup is wrong! Maybe in the early eighties, but not today.........
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco
It would be interesting sometime to hear a 'heavyweight' solution of Jelco 750 with Denon 103 or Shure M3D like yours, compared with a 'mediumweight' solution of Jelco 250 with AT33PTG like mine, based on the 1200. I would love to hear the different emphasis and how they compare into the same phono stage.
I suspect that your 1200 and mine are otherwise at a very similar level of modification.
Dave,
Perhaps that would have been the case, but there's no *automatic* reason to presume so without listening first and comparing. And even if that were definitely the case, then it's rather blinkered to assume that the same would be true now.Quote:
By comparison, an inappropriately sited and supported Japanese direct drive really would have sounded flat, two dimensional and lifeless by comparison.
It's this ingrained and dogmatic absolutism some people have that gets me. Just because they once heard a Jap direct-drive turntable sound 'flat', 'two dimensional', or 'unmusical' once in 1978, or whenever, doesn't mean that today’s decks suffer from the same problems, especially with the fantastic modifications which are available now for the likes of the 1200/1210 that transform it into a genuine 'hi-end' contender and makes many of today's designs sound fundamentally broken.
The PL-71 was largely 'right' from the off, in terms of its genuine 'hi-end' credentials, (plus it was never modified for the DJ market) and so requires less tweaking than the Techy in order to compete at the highest level today.
Some people need to take the blinkers off, open their minds (and ears), do some listening again, and leave their old prejudices behind where they belong. I think some are scared they might get a shock. I guess there's nothing more unsettling than having your long-held and deeply-ingrained beliefs shattered!!
Martin,
You're absolutely right. Your deck has been modified to pretty much the same level as mine - the only slight thing being you haven't got the KAB threaded clamp (although you have a record clamp), the effect of which is significant but not *massive*.
"Heavyweight" vs. "Mediumweight" - I like that!
I too would love to hear the difference in presentation, both sonically and musically, between your deck and mine in the same system. Perhaps that's something we should do at some point soon? You would be most welcome to bring your deck to any forthcoming bake-off that is arranged :)
Marco.
Marco, the huge problem in the UK was that Ivor shouted loudly, VERY LOUDLY in the mid to late seventies and in the UK at any rate, the better direct drive models ceased to be imported. Also, because many non-Linn dealers didn't feel turntables affected the sound so much, and because so many high-compliance cartridges were still being used in the UK, decks like the PL71 were sidelined and discontinued before they could even begin to get a foothold, as they weren't too happy tracking V15's, 681EEE's and the better Empire models for example. The only direct drives that thrived were the Technics ones, plus a couple of others (JBE, Sony PS8750/Micro DDX1000 etc and we sold a good few direct drive Duals like my 701). We were selling plenty of ADC XLM's, AKG P8ES's, Micro Acoustics and were among the first to savour the Fidelity Research, Dynavector and Ortofon's updated MC's.
I have actually compared quite a few turntables with the Linn over the decades (since 1976 in fact). In the early days, the LP12/Grace 707/Supex 900E didn't veer too far away from neutrality, the heavy platter and well sorted suspension giving the deck some more isolation than many of the popular direct driven decks. Most of the jazz-rock LP's from this time didn't have any bass on them to speak of (I'm playing a good few right now) or the upper mid was boosted to give more attack (another story, another thread). The audible comparison of above Linn combo with a Techie SL150mk2/arm and cart of choice usually gave the Linn a little more "expression," although a BBC engineer found it a bit "cupped hands" in colouration compared to his beloved EMT system.
As the years went on and the Ittok appeared, the LP12 went to pieces, the bass going all over the place. Over the next five years, Linn, to be fair, worked incredibly hard to get the plinths better, glue the sub-chassis and change the arm-board. The bearing was improved too. By the mid eighties and the large corner fillets on the plinth, the LP12 had stabilised into a much easier deck to deal with. There was still too much vagueness in the sound and having ballistic cartridges like the Karma, Troika and the truly dire Klyde didn't really help over-much. Naim then came along with the ARO and 'Geddon and in a stroke the LP12 was back to 1977 in a good way - light, fresh with loads of "texture."
To summarise my essays above, I really would say that the best direct drive models, like many solid-plinth decks really need a sympathetic support to work at their best and minimise acoustic feedback, which many of them did all too easily. I should also add that the difference in "sound" of these decks compared to the LP12 were never huge, fifteen minutes of constant comparison and they all sounded the same to me.............
P.P.S. is it just the Dual 701 motor or do any of your DD's need some running to "warm up?" Mine needs an hour or so and the whole soundstage opens up and reverb seems clearer. This is irrespective of system this deck has been used in... When switched off, the power supply is totally disconnected.
The PL-71 had some speed stability problems - quickly diagnosed as something to do with the 33/45 speed change switches.
Fiddling with them I could induce speed change and then fix it - leaving it and listening it wandered off on its own every now and then.
Others say they have recap'd the PSU and motor board where necessary - only a handful of 10p components (standard values) so no hardship.
I tried some switch cleaner spray - no dice…
Pulled out the two micro switches and low and behold neither was giving constant closed circuit - moving around by quite a few ohms.
Hard wired her up so that the power was permanently on and only the 33rpm pot contact was made - perfect pitch and no fluctuation at all. Pot adjusted the speed nicely.
Maplin do exact replacements for the micro switches (standard part) for £1.49 so off there on Sat pm for them, the caps & two 1Kohm pots (speed adjusters) just in case - spend £6.50.
Home and fit. Duh, no power. I read the positions of the contacts wrong. Put that right and then checked her with the platter off as she was still upside down - hmm only rotates the spindle 1/4 or 1/2 turn at a time? Dooh - had I buggered up the motor PSU or control board by shorting the two control wires by mistake on the speed micro switch? Can't have I thought - there was no juice cos' the power one was connected wrongly (open circuit) or was there?
Had a poke around and could see nothing wrong with the voltages. PSU made stable 19.5V DC. Speed controllers made around 18. something and 16.something V. It was late and I went to bed not to happy :-(
Sunday morning, put the Techi deck and parallel arm on for fun while trouble shooting the PL-71.
The Techi / parallel arm is very precise and clean. It shows the music all bare. I tried loading up the carrier with another 36g (another carrier angle piece on top of lateral mass). That made the bass MEGA and a little less top endy. Ran out of time on different weight choices.
Back on the PL-71 I read the voltages off again - still the spindle doing it's 1/2 turn thing. Aha the speed control voltages are mV not V - even less likely to have fried anythign then... Read the meter wrong when was tired the night before.
By passed the micro switches again as before - still no change. Thought what the hell have I done? Turned her over and whacked the platter on in dis-comprehension.
Perfect 33 1/3 RPM. So the motor is supposed to only fire every 1/2 or so turn :-). I am a DD TT newbie Muppet.
Put the switches in properly this time and ALL is well. Have power on/off and speed change and NO fluctuation.
Put the 33 PTG cart back on the PL-71 and gave her a spin.
Aha less precision and more charisma, character and charm. Very musical and timing is great.
Now I am being very honest here and admit that the Techi deck / parallel arm is stunning in it's way... and the PL-71 does things a bit differently. Which one, you prefer is down to ones ear of course.
Might try loading the headshell / adding more mass to the counterbalance as there is def something in getting the arm mass balanced with the cartridge compliance.
I don't understand the maths - but lugs will out.
The SP10 does the motor spinning jerkily thing if you leave the platter off. Basically the missing weight buggers up the servo operation. There's a warning in the manual about not doing it, so it ay not be good for it. Steve, you should pop round!
Promise not to run it without the platter ever again...
Yes I must pop over Piotr - name a date...
I need to hear those GRF's of yours... I've got Steve Clarke coming over on
Sat for a listen of the Techi / air arm and of course the PL-71. He's not heard my DPA Enlightenment either - much to catch up on.
You would be welcome over too.