When does the SL-1200 become too expensive?

[REM]

Interesting thread this, so here's my 2pence worth.

I arrived at the 1210 after many years of following the saga of the resurgence of the once derided DD turntable which began in the pages of HFW, primarily driven by the enthusiasm of NK, whose opinions I have always rated highly. At first I thought it was just some kind of mid life crisis or something as like Codefus above I thought 'how is this possible?', we all 'know' belt drive is superior. Anyway time wore on and earlier this year it was obvious that my middle aged LP12 was in serious need of a little rejuvenation, so what to do? New tonearm? An Ekos is HOW MUCH!! A Keel then? Now you're really 'avin' a laarff (a friend of a friend has a machine shop, and he reckons a bit of CNC machining like that would cost about £50, btw). This was before Linn announced the Ridikulus and the Ulrikaka, which for some might redefine the meaning of value for money but not for me.
Well for less than the price of any of the Linn options, I now have a pretty heavily modded 1210 including the TimeStep psu, Herbies' Way Excellent mat, SME 309 (love that arm, it really is a work of art) and Isonoe feet, I think you can guess where it came from! Since then I've got hold of a Zu 103 and I would happily put this combination up against anything, yes anything. It might not come out on top but it certainly wouldn't be disgraced, in fact if the comparisons were done truly blind I think some people would get the shock of their lives.
Obviously I haven't heard all the possible alternatives but I have, over the years, heard most of the 'usual suspects' and the Techie is in a different league, the only thing that I would consider comes anywhere near it is the WT Amadeus GT and that is a lot more expensive and I'm not paying that sort of money for the 'kitchen table' build quality on offer.
My t/t isn't cheap and I'm not made of money but the performance more than justifies the outlay, if you can possibly stretch to it then do so, you wont regret it and if you can't do it in one go just do it in stages and enjoy the journey.

Cheers

[Marco]

Well for less than the price of any of the Linn options, I now have a pretty heavily modded 1210 including the TimeStep psu, Herbies' Way Excellent mat, SME 309 (love that arm, it really is a work of art) and Isonoe feet, I think you can guess where it came from! Since then I've got hold of a Zu 103 and I would happily put this combination up against anything, yes anything. It might not come out on top but it certainly wouldn't be disgraced, in fact if the comparisons were done truly blind I think some people would get the shock of their lives.

Hear hear, Ralph! I completely agree. Trust me, it would be the same with a 103SA and Jelco SA-750. Excellent posts above from Clive, Dave and Shuggs, too

The point about the Techy in relation to this discussion is that, as Clive correctly says....

its development and tooling costs well and truly amortized many years ago. For a company to make a similar product from scratch today would result in a very expensive product.

.....Therefore, taking this into consideration, a modified SL-1200 or 1210 *cannot* be viewed as anything else other than a hi-end turntable in its own right that's in a similar performance ballpark as the SMEs, Brinkmanns, Clearaudios, and Kuzmas of this world - and indeed would probably cost just as much to produce if what Clive correctly said were not the case. It's crucial always to keep this in mind.

Sorry, Shuggs, but that's the mistake you're making when analysing the perceived 'value' of the Technics. Think of it this way instead: how does a £1500 modified Techy compare in value to a £3000 SME 10, or a similarly priced Avid Volvere? Personally, though, I think it can compete at an even higher performance level than that. I've heard, for example, an £11k Brinkmann La Grange, and can tell you that my own Techy definitely didn't disgrace itself in comparison!

I've got plenty more to add to this discussion, but right now I'm too busy listening to music on my "DJ deck"...

Codifus, I'll deal with you later my boy!

Marco.

[Ammonite Audio]

The point about the Techy in relation to this discussion is that, as Clive correctly says....



.....Therefore, taking this into consideration, a modified SL-1200 or 1210 *cannot* be viewed as anything else other than a hi-end turntable in its own right that's in same performance ballpark as the SMEs, Brinkmanns, Clearaudios, and Kuzmas of this world - and indeed would probably cost just as much to produce if what Clive correctly said were not the case. It's crucial to always keep this in mind.

Sorry, Shuggs, but that's the mistake you're making when analysing the perceived 'value' of the Technics. Think of it this way instead: how does a £1500 modified Techy compare in value to a £3000 SME 10, or a similarly priced Avid Volvere? Personally, though, I think it can compete at an even higher performance level than that. I've heard, for example, an £11k Brinkmann La Grange, and can tell you that my own Techy definitely didn't disgrace itself in comparison!

Clive's point is an example of the insight that I hoped would come out of this thread, and it's pretty obvious now that I have read it; and I am pleased to have been educated and have my viewpoint altered. It's a pity that long ago Technics did not engineer in a really decent main bearing, though! What would the deck cost if designed and produced today, I wonder? Probably in excess of £1000.

Is the Brinkmann La Grange the DD one? I'd love to know something about the design and engineering of that deck, if anyone has anything to tell (purely curiosity, of course). Similarly, the Grand Prix Audio machine is interesting, and IIRC Dave Cawley has some experience of that. One of the reasons that I covet my mate's Raven-One is the astonishing standard of engineering and finish, which frankly goes way beyond what is expected even at its price level - I presume the Brinkmann is an engineering marvel too. So is the Audionote TT3 that I have heard at a friend's - if DD decks are said to have drive and timing, they are nothing in comparison to that (rather expensive and belt driven) beast!

[twelvebears]

Is this not the same world famous Technics SL-1200 made legendary by the vinyl DJs?

If so, because it was a turntable produced for high performance/high abuse disc jockeying
CD

Erm.... as far as I'm aware, that was never why the 1200 was produced. It just got adopted for the task because it was so bloody tough.

It was originally designed as a hifi turntable first and foremost, but got adapted down the line because it had become so popular with 'professional' users

[jfine]

When does the SL-1200 become too expensive?

When the wife finds out you been spending more on diamonds for it than her

[Alex_UK]

When the wife finds out you been spending more on diamonds for it than her

That is probably the most accurate post in the whole thread J!

[John]

The Brinkmann LaGrange is a beautiful deck but perhaps not te best value deck
I have not heard the Brinkmann Oasis (direct drive) turntable http://www.brinkmann-audio.de/inhalt...aper/oasis.pdf
The Raven AC is pretty special sothe 1210 mod TT is in the real big biy league so is probarly the best value for getting into the top league in performance terms

[Peter Stockwell]

it was a turntable produced for high performance/high abuse disc jockeying, with a high torque direct drive motor, light plastic base and chromed steel arm for economic and toughness, but not acoustic reasons,

Light plastic! Are you kidding ? You've obviously never had one in bits on the kitchen table. The TT is mostly an aliminium casting, damped by a resinous base. The plastic lid is arguably tacky. The cache for the resinous damping block is more rubber than plastic.



The only serious criticism I have is that the threaded holes for fixing the feet are in this rubbery housing and not in the aliminium base. I'll bet there's a good reason for that too.

[Ammonite Audio]

.................
The only serious criticism I have is that the threded holes for fixing the feet are in this rubbery housing and not in the aliminium base. I'll bet there's a good reason for that too.

I agree. The net effect must be the same as having two springs working at the same time, not necessarily in phase. I'm wondering how I can arrange for the Stillpoints that I use to attach directly to the alloy chassis, without the end result looking like the dog's dinner. The 'good reason' is almost certainly for additional isolation, but it's a pretty ropey way of addressing the issue, as the resonant frequency of the feet/base must we well into the audio band.

[Marco]

Peter, I think that Coddy is gently taking the piss, but we'll humour him for the sake of entertainment!

David,

I've seen these threads all over this forums about SL1200 or 1210 upgrades here and there, and I've always asked myself why?

Because they represent the basis for becoming top-notch turntables at a fraction of the price of ones from 'prestige badge' manufacturers - simple!

Is this not the same world famous Technics SL-1200 made legendary by the vinyl DJs?

No, it's famous for starting out its life as a top quality hi-end turntable for the Japanese market, developed from the legendary SP10, and since adopted by DJs because of its rugged construction and quick start-up time, due its high torque superb quality motor unit.

If so, because it was a turntable produced for high performance/high abuse disc jockeying, with a high torque direct drive motor, light plastic base...

As Peter has shown, there's nothing "light" or plastic about the SL1200/1210. It weighs 15kg and there's no plastic anywhere in sight! Where did you get that from?

...and chromed steel arm for economic and toughness, but not acoustic reasons, I would think that to start upgrading this unit to a high end audiophile turntable would be analogous to starting with a Jaguar and turning it into a Rolls. Converting a Bentley would be much much easier

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with your analogy, but the Technics has 'Rolls Royce' standards of construction compared to many so-called 'hi-end' turntables on the market, some costing much more. I'll repeat it again: you modify the Technics because the raw ingredients are there from which to create a truly world-class turntable. The motor unit is of exceptionally high quality, and it is this which forms the basis for any modifications to or replacement of its less than world-class partnering ancillaries.

Starting with the basics, how can a direct drive motor, a motor that is coupled directly to the platter, have a chance to compete with a belt drive motor in terms on sonic/vibration isolation, etc?

You're making the mistake of concentrating on one specific area of turntable design instead of looking at the bigger picture as a whole. A turntable is about the sum of its parts, not what those specific parts do in isolation. Instead of coming up with woolly theories to support your argument, have you actually heard a fully-modified SL-1200/1210 and compared it to a typical 'low-mass' belt-drive T/T?

If not, then with respect you should keep your ill-informed remarks to yourself and come back when you know what you're talking about.

Whatever 'benefits' the low-mass belt-drive method may have (high-mass is different), to my ears (and those of many others) these 'benefits' pale into insignificance compared to the speed and pitch instability issues exhibited, translating into a slurring and wavering of notes, particularly with solo piano, which once one's ears become attuned to this effect, renders most of them un-listenable. A direct-drive mechanism, done well in the case of a modified SL-1200/1210, is quite simply more accurate at reproducing the musical information on records with minimal coloration or 'sonic signature'.

I don't mean to offend anyone, I just find it rather bizarre.

You're not "offending" anyone - merely theorising and making daft remarks (which seem largely founded on ignorance) by quoting the usual blinkered dogma spouted by the (uninitiated) belt-drive fanboys, or dealers with vested interests. It always amazes me the amount of people willing to jump on a bandwagon instead of trying something for themselves and therefore being qualified to comment from practical experience. Quite simply, unless you've heard a fully-modified SL-1210/1210 (Sound Hi-fi, KAB, or whatever) you don't know what you're talking about in terms of what one is capable of sonically or musically.

Nothing's wrong with tinkering, but often I find that those who like to tinker tend to fault devices with limited modding capability, when in fact the only "fault" is that the device is not easily upgradeable.

At last you've written something that I wholeheartedly agree with! It's always far better having kit that's totally 'sorted' from the beginning, but how much equipment genuinely like this is available and affordable? There's nearly always some scope for improvement with most things. You mentioned the Beresford DAC, and that's a prime example.

It's far better to modify affordable equipment which is intrinsically excellent (the Beresford or the Technics, for example) than pay through the nose for some expensive over-priced piece of 'badge hi-fi' which quite simply fails to deliver the performance that one has paid for. I could cite numerous examples of this. It's about finding equipment that delivers the biggest bang for your buck, whether it be something that's modified or used as standard.

Ultimately, I just want to sit back and enjoy the music.

Me too - but sometimes it's worthwhile going the extra mile to ensure that your favourite music is reproduced as faithfully as possible, which is why so many people modify and upgrade their Beresford DACs or Technics turntables. Once done, they become veritable giant-killers - and *that*, is the most satisfying thing of all!

Marco.