technics tt advice wanted

[The Vinyl Adventure]

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=160340607944

anything likely to be wrong with this one based on what he says?

[NRG]

...The shocker for me is how good an old Kenwood KD-770D DD deck that I picked up in Germany is, when fitted with the Tecnoarm. There's a long line of Kenwood DDs that use the same corian-block DD motor unit, but in different plinths and with different arms. The most sought after are the ones with a cast alloy spider chassis; however mine is chipboard and it sings like the proverbial angel! Even more so with a Paul Hynes PSU fitted (which is back with Paul for the moment for some adjustments). It is a concert pianist to the Technics' Pianola.

So, for anyone wishing to have a bit of fun fiddling with DD decks, the Technics is the safest bet and the most easily procured (eg new), easily tweaked and upgraded, if not in my view the best overall value. Many are entirely happy with the Technics, but do look at other Jap DDs which are probably better value. I rate the Kenwoods, and there's a growing Pioneer PL-71 Appreciation Society. Of course, the Technics is very easily sold on for little or no loss, which is nice.

What we need is a good Jap DD bake-off, and I may even host one myself, if only to prove Marco wrong about Rega based arms!

Indeed! I read good things about the Kenwoods before and now have a KD750 in transit along with a (current 'rave') PL-71...should be interesting if they arrive in one piece to compare against my SP10 and Lenco...

[twelvebears]

Hamish.

I'd say that it looks like an ideal starting point if you can bag it for less than say £200?

As for the headshell, it has a series of fixed headshell mounting holes and I wasn't convinced that I could get it aligned properly, but Dave C (who knows far more than I) seems to think that it's fine so it's probably just me.

PM me, as this isn't the place for discussing sales and such.

[The Vinyl Adventure]

neal, please accept my apologees for such a sh1ty message this morning, i was not my usual self and i apreciate you wereonly trying to provide a usefull opinion

[DSJR]

Hamish, before you start believing chapter and verse about "the stock arm and especially the headshell are crap!" line, just stand back and look at things from the 1200 tweakers here.

When I picked up my bits and bobs recently, I was offered the bits of a 1200 arm. It's extremely light in weight, as is the supplied headshell. Fine for decent mm's of the Ortofon and AT variety and possibly the DL304 as well, but Marco and others use DL103's and siblings which need something heavier.. The OC9 and 33PTG should be a great match to the standard arm I reckon (£25 for a Sumiko headshell is peanuts in the wider scheme of things).

My experience as a one-time dealer for the old Fruitbox still tells me that the turntable mods and upgrades (mats, feet, supplies etc) will further improve the standard arm until it's ready to be replaced. To be honest, if you stick with an AT MC cart, you may not need to change the arm at all. if you wish to use a Denon 103 (or heaven forbid, an M3D then a massier arm would be essential). Replacing the ouput cables would be a good idea, although I'd be very surprised if the internal wires are truly rubbish - I understand the latest version (mk6) of the deck has better internal wiring..

Regarding using a Rega derived arm on an Sl1200 series, I'm wondering if an MDF or fibreboard "plate" might not be better than metal in this application, as it may just dissipate energy travelling down the arm.

[twelvebears]

Personally I agree with Dave, I don't think the standard arm is crap (though I do think the headshell is poor, just a look at the rough casting is enough), but the stock wiring (especially the trailing phono leads) isn't great.

To prove the point, J7 at Audio Origami (who knows a thing or two about tonearms) was actually quite complementary about the level of engineering in the standard item, which is why I've stuck with it for the time being.

To use J's words, the bearings (in my arm at least) were 'spot on'. Which doesn't sound totally hopeless.

I certainly won't be changing it until I can go for a Terminator arm.

[DSJR]

The arm bearings of better Technics arms have always been decent quality and well adjusted, having low friction and no slop. Using a very low compliance cartridge will raise the main resonance up into the lowest bass region and this will affect the sound badly.

[Marco]

Mmmm... I think I'm going to have to differ here slightly regarding the Technics arm.

Ok, first of all, Dave and Steve are right - the bearings are very good, so no worries on that score, but the problem is that the armtube is quite resonant and not terribly well damped (resulting in a 'peaky' quality to midrange frequencies - most noticeable on female vocals, etc), although this will be less of an issue with an MM cartridge. The headshell is crap for use with anything else other than a Stanton DJ cartridge, the quality of the internal wiring and tonearm cable are not the best, and the counterweight balance is not optimised for use with MC cartridges.

The only way to get good performance from the stock Technics arm when using a moving coil is to have it completely rewired by KAB or Audio Origami, fit the KAB fluid damper, a Sumiko headshell (or similar), and have J7 make up a custom-made brass counterweight balance to suit the mass of the cartridge/headshell combo you're using.

Trouble is, after you've paid for all that lot, you're about three quarters of the way to buying a Jelco, which has none of those problems!

Furthermore, either of the Jelco arms which Dave sells murders the Techy arm even when fully modified as above. So my advice, as far as the stock arm is concerned, is only to keep it if you're using an MM cartridge, where it will perform very well, as that is what it was designed to be used with. There are some very good MM cartridges currently on the market; the best of which IMO are the new range from Nagaoka. These are quite superb. Some of the Pickerings available are also very good.

Hamish, to answer your question, the AT MG-10 that Steve's got is ideal for the OC-9 because it has less mass than the Sumiko (weighing 10g, as opposed to the 12g of the Sumiko). The OC-9 doesn't like heavy headshells, as using one affects its 'light and airy', punchy, dynamic presentation, making it instead rather 'leaden' and 'thick' sounding. Also, the MG-10 is constructed from Magnesium, which IMO is the best material for headshells due to its high damping factor and vanishingly low levels of resonance. The SME V tonearm is not made out of Magnesium for nothing...

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=160340607944

anything likely to be wrong with this one based on what he says?

If he sends it packed like his photos show, its likely to arrive smashed....

Most people don't know how to disassemble and pack any TT......

I had a look down my local Cash Converters, still only pairs with mixers .....patience...patience. If I get one and thats a big IF, I will put a Graham 2.2 on it. How would that work Marco ?


Regards D S D L

[mulane]

Hi Marco, have you ever had a look or listen to the Mk5's magnesium armtube? Is it solid magnesium or just mag-plated? Is it an improvement on the std arm in any way? (no-one seems to mention it much...)