Shuggie's SL-1210 Blog Revived

[DSJR]

My biggest experiences regarding supports have been with the LP12. Back in the eighties, the Sound Org table and wall shelf was the way to go, the springy top board adding a further "musicality" to the sonic picture. Linn, who should know about these things, having the masters to compare, used to recommend the Ikea Lack table instead (especially with the lower laminate carefully cut away). Later on, as the LP12 corrected itself in the bass, the Audiotech support was preferred and I must admit to very much liking this neat little wall shelf...

The NAS decks spoiled me though, as HiFi Dave will testify as he conducted my "initiation" away from the "Terrible Two." The LP12 was carefully set up on the correct support and the Spacedeck just sat on a wide melamine shelf along with a NAS Omega Point, a Rega and a Gyrodeck. Both decks had K9's and the Spacedeck/RB300/K9 annihilated the LP12/Ittok/K9 in all the things Linnies hold so dear and the base that was supplied with nineties onwards models were there as much for show as anything else IMO.

Dunno about the Techie though, although everyone who's fettled one has replaced or modified the footing arrangements, as I shall do with my 150 when funds permit (or I can find a fourth Audioquest Sorbothane jobbie to mate with the other three I found...

I'd definitley say that all 70's DD's will need VERY careful siting and consideration of mats, as decent isolation and record support wasn't part of the deal back then - Technics supporting their decks on cotton threads suspended from the ceiling to get their rumble specs, rather than improve the feet and load the plinths at first..

[DSJR]

Re KD750 arm... HIFi Choice found it less resonant than many of the detachable headshell alternatives, although they found the horizontal friction higher than average. I have one in need of restoration (and a ball or two in the races - there's "hundreds...") and a counterweight re-think. I love the easily lockable "chuck" which holds the arm at the correct height.

The KD750 arm used a large rubber bushing for the counterweight within which was a piano wire like tie between the bearing housing and rear stub. Mine has long gone, so any restoration will have to entail a bolt and washer through the centre of the bushing as everyone else does. The service manual goes into HUGE depth as to the arms concentricity of bearing races and the effect on arm/cart resonances with this method of counterweight decoupling. I'd send mine to Jonny at Audio Origami, but the R200, which is in far better condition, takes preference at the mo...

You'll have to get the service details from Vinyl Engine as the file is too large to upload, but pages 27 to 38 go into the arm in incredible depth and most of it seems to make intelligent sense to me...

[WikiBoy]

I'd definitley say that all 70's DD's will need VERY careful siting and consideration of mats, as decent isolation and record support wasn't part of the deal back then - Technics supporting their decks on cotton threads suspended from the ceiling to get their rumble specs, rather than improve the feet and load the plinths at first..

The PL-71 is a different fettle of kish, it has sprung feet that are quite compliant and you can rotate them to get the springs in sync bounce, which Gromit is convinced makes an audible difference. Well I haven't heard that difference so his ears must be better than mine. But I can tell you if the springs are removed or shorted out by spikes it kills the music flow and makes it quite sterile.

Anyway Gromit also tried some sprung feet with the Techy and said it was an improvement.

EDIT - Are forgot to say the point of the post - with the springs bouncing well you can basically stand the PL-71 on what you like. There is small differences thats all.

[Ammonite Audio]

I have (I hope) a KD750 on it's way to me...all 17Kg of it! I hope it a) arrives and b) in one piece!

So, your house is slowly filling up with old record players! This one should put the cat amongst the pigeons, as it were! I thought that the Kenwoods all used a similar motor block and control circuit, but looking at http://www.vinylengine.com/library/kenwood/kd-750.shtml it's clear that the KD-750 is quite a bit more sophisticated than my KD-770D.

I look forward to hearing your decks, particularly if I can get permission to use one of our classrooms for a bake-off. More details on that to come, but if it does go ahead, it will have to be a strictly ticketed affair, because of access restrictions to the site.

[DSJR]

Richard, any idea what the sprung feet were? The SL150 has a plastic base to which the "air-cushion" feet are attached, so this may not be the solution for my deck, although the 150 feet seem "springier" than the supposedly identical ones that were fitted to the other SL models of the period (13/14/1500 mk1's)...

The KD750 apparently had a motor servo problem which afflicted the review model I understand and the deck my arm came from was binned for similar reasons (am I right Paul, if you're reading this?).

Good luck anyway.

P.S. A shame that t'internet has got hold of the PL71 now, as a couple of years ago, one could have bought one VERY cheaply indeed I suspect

[WikiBoy]

Richard, any idea what the sprung feet were? The SL150 has a plastic base to which the "air-cushion" feet are attached, so this may not be the solution for my deck, although the 150 feet seem "springier" than the supposedly identical ones that were fitted to the other SL models of the period (13/14/1500 mk1's)...

The KD750 apparently had a motor servo problem which afflicted the review model I understand and the deck my arm came from was binned for similar reasons (am I right Paul, if you're reading this?).

Good luck anyway.

P.S. A shame that t'internet has got hold of the PL71 now, as a couple of years ago, one could have bought one VERY cheaply indeed I suspect

I wouldn't worry too much, the Dual direct drives are *very* underated. The Techy Gromit had and was modifying to see if he could get it up to or past the PL-71 was a new 1210. The feet he used were not compression ones like these they were in extension as they were attached to the side of the foot, three in each foot. I think they are a well known accessory but I forget the name. It will be in the archive here. He only had three of them so that was all he used.

Surfice it to say the 1210 was sold and he still has the PL-71 though he said it got quite close after fitting the external power supply.

I have got three PL-71's, as I say, and another one in bits for a slate plinth project. So if you get desperate I will listen to pleas.

[Ammonite Audio]

The Technics is back on the rack and playing Sheffield Steel. Rather well, it seems! Exact comparisons with the Kenwood are compromised by the infamous platter lip and the need to use a different mat - SRM silicone, as opposed to SRM acrylic.

So why am I apparently enjoying the Technics now, when previously I found it to be a rather mechanical and drab sounding thing? Well, the answer is in the power supply. I deliberately started off this listening session with the Paul Hynes SR3 supply, adjusted to 21v to suit the Technics. The sound was immediately dynamic, open, propulsive, organic and enjoyable. After a while, I changed over PSUs to the TimeStep and sat back to listen to the same album. Back came the old mechanical sound, and Joe Cocker's voice changed as though he was suffering from a cold, sounding somewhat distant in comparison, and noticeably softer. The difference, to my ears, is that the deck is playing music when fed by the Paul Hynes PSU, but cannot apparently be totally arsed to do its best with the TimeStep. Sorry Dave!

The TimeStep PSU brought about a huge improvement over the standard deck, so God only knows how awful it would sound if I returned it to standard fettle. Even though I am an advocate of Paul Hynes' products, I am genuinely surprised by the margin by which it betters the TimeStep.

So, a fun weekend beckons, dragging out long unheard albums in order to give this comparison some weight.

On the subject of platter mats for the Technics, what do folks recommend? I would try Dave Cawley's Mat1, but I'm not prepared to hazard that sort of money (I might go as far as Achromat money, but no further). I have another SRM acrylic mat coming, and will attempt to grind a bit off its edge to make it sit properly; alternatively I could always grind off the platter lip - has anyone done that? I have tried the standard Technics mat, cork and even an old Lenco mat, but none really floated my boat. The SRM acrylic mat works reasonably well sat on top of the SRM silicone mat, but I'd rather just have a single mat. Interestingly, the SRM acrylic mat only works well on the Kenwood when stuck to the platter with very thin adhesive tape, but that's a bas***d to remove, hence buying a new one. Anyway, thoughts, experienecs and recommendations would be appreciated.

[Dave Cawley]

Well, my PSU is designed to work well with Jelco and SME, can't win them all! BTW, why did you have to return the other PSU?

Also I'm not a fan of the GCHP, so I think it's a holistic issue. Hence the brilliant Hi Fi World and Tone Audio reviews that both used SME ?

Regards

Dave

[Marco]

Before I comment (later) what's a GCHP?

Marco.

[MartinT]

He means the PS Audio GCPH, as I use.