|
|
Post by MartinT on Dec 11, 2015 11:01:08 GMT
The thing about the Technics, Richard, is that the base compound built chassis, motor and associated electronics are epic. The bearing, platter etc. are not so epic but good enough for the original job of a mass produced, relatively inexpensive high quality deck.
The motor is outstanding for non-cogging rotational accuracy and responds very well to power supply mods while retaining great reliability. A good look at the circuit diagram is mighty impressive, too: this was 1979 technology, remember.
So take these base ingredients, add a proper bearing, resonance-free platter, work on the electronics and platform/feet and what you have is a turntable that performs way above its station. This is why some of us love our decks and are glad that some vendors (Funk included) adopted it for modification. Would I swap it for any other £10k deck? Very unlikely, and I paid half that including the Dynavector arm.
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on Dec 11, 2015 11:26:29 GMT
The thing about the Technics, Richard, is that the base compound built chassis, motor and associated electronics are epic. The bearing, platter etc. are not so epic but good enough for the original job of a mass produced, relatively inexpensive high quality deck. The motor is outstanding for non-cogging rotational accuracy and responds very well to power supply mods while retaining great reliability. A good look at the circuit diagram is mighty impressive, too: this was 1979 technology, remember. So take these base ingredients, add a proper bearing, resonance-free platter, work on the electronics and platform/feet and what you have is a turntable that performs way above its station. This is why some of us love our decks and are glad that some vendors (Funk included) adopted it for modification. Would I swap it for any other £10k deck? Very unlikely, and I paid half that including the Dynavector arm. I wasn't criticising either the turntable or your choice to modify it Martin. I am well aware that Wonky's version is going to be an epic performer when I next see it, and quite possibly outperform my much-loved Pink Triangle - given that it will share many aspects (arm, bearing, and similar platter and suspension). Hence my appeal to Arthur yesterday to help me upgrade the PT before I go out to France and have a house guest with possibly excessive expectations. At least my Dynavector cartridge will give him something to think about. My criticism was of Arthur, who is far too easily distracted, and would much rather spend forever tinkering and improving and innovating and having people pat him on the back and tell him how clever he is, but who needs to earn a living and feed mouths at the factory. The Technics market is tiny. The R&D overhead, including product rejection is ridiculous for the potential (crowded) market and the payback is a fat loss. Nothing wrong with you enjoying your hobby and producing a fine turntable from a Technics. I don't think it was in Arthurs best interest to be so distracted by so small and bespoke a market, and although I resist saying "I told you so" he recognises that it has cost him money. Not just cash in scrapped engineering, but hundreds of hours opportunity cost (technical term we accountants use) in wasted R&D with no payback. And non-cogging? Let's not fall out, but I think Matsushita/Technics recently launched a brand new DD turntable motor which they claim is the FIRST non-cogging TT motor. This suggests Technics feel the SL1200 motor does cog (a tiny weeny bit). I'm still intrigued to see what they have done, and whether their claims are true. But if a motor is going to cog, its effects are more significant when it turns slowly rather than quickly  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Dec 11, 2015 11:33:00 GMT
Yes, I meant of course 'minimal cogging' as measured with the platter installed. The actual rotational stability is quite wonderful on piano music provided the pressing is up to it. You can fine-tune it by gently rotating the cog sensor under the platter, but it's not for the faint of heart as you can actually make the platter go backwards if you overdo it.
|
|
|
|
Post by DaveC on Dec 11, 2015 11:33:20 GMT
Let's make this very, very clear, the SL-1200 MKII upwards do not cog, not even a tiny bit. Competitors and marketing men may say it does, but it doesn't. BTW only people with qualified "first hand" experience of turntable measurement will receive much of a comment from me. And I'm out most of the day soon.
If we are going to talk about this we need a completely new thread. Even the title of this thread needs a question mark at the end of it ?
|
|
