Dual 1019 and 1229 what do you think? - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analogue Source
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Analogue Source Turntables, Tonearms, Cartridges, Phono Stages, Tuners, Tape Recorders, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st July 2014, 12:58 PM   #21
jmsent is offline jmsent  United States
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Originally Posted by benb View Post
I got a 1229 cheap in the late 90s and it worked fine for the few years I used it, but I've always assumed the LF rumble was just the normal rim drive thing, even with the heavy platter. I did clean up the rim inside, idler and motor shaft, but with little or any improvement. Maybe not totally rebuilding it had something to do with it.

I have had a problem with one or two headshells, with them falling apart - there's an extra small piece of plastic that's glued on and holds the wire ends/springs in place that connect to the arm, and that has fallen off.
Of course, we're discussing a turntable that was nearly 30 years old when you got it. The problem is that the idler wheel rubber material was the same age. You can clean it up and improve the traction, but time has taken its toll, making all the rubber stiffer and drier, and therefore transferring more vibration from the motor. Same holds true for the motor mounts. I would expect a lot of failure in glue joints as well. When they were new, these Duals were pretty quiet by any standard. Not belt drive quiet, but you only heard something when you had it cranked really loud and the stylus was on silent grooves.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2014, 01:27 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
You can't go wrong with either one!

A/B testing, side by side, I preferred the 1019. Both tables had the same model cartridge stylii combo. 1019 was lightly better at 3 d imaging. That short fat tonearm sounds amazing to my ears!

A few things though. If you can live without the built in strobe, the 1219 has an all metal headshell while the 1229 is connected to the toneaarm with plastic. I prefer the metal of the 1219 and the bling of the chrome trim ring on the 1219's platter! Also, the original 1019 cartridge mounts (sled) are more trouble some than the 12XX series mounts. I do see a seller on ebay making new 1019 mounts with spring contacts, so that should make the 2 mounts equal in that respect.

Please don't listen to the Naysayers about idler wheel rumble! They probably never had the pleasure of hearing an idler drive table!! If the motor mounts and idler wheel are supple, round, and working as new, rumble is a non issue.

All the best,
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2014, 12:41 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
I agree with stratus46. You need to disassemble, clean and lubricate these turntables. They are very finicky. Some people like them, some hate them. I have serviced many Dual turntables and still own quite a few in my private collection.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd October 2014, 01:17 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Default 1229

New guy here. I bought a new 1229 in 1973 and still have it. Have replace the idler wheel once in 41 years. Other than that only cleaned it and greased/oiled. The thing just keeps going and going. No rumble and still quiet! Would not trade it for anything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2014, 08:51 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oxfordshire
1229 has a very good arm. This makes them the bargain idler drive now that everyone has woken up to the Lenco's. People like me think that many idler drives can out perform belt drives at any price. With care the rumble can be brought down to cutting lathe levels.

An idler mixes the advantage of direct drive with more pole intervals per revolution due to gearing effect. The cogging if a hysteresis motor is minimal.

My experience with 1229 was in Tandburg ( spelling ) music centres . When I was 18 I won a prize from Tandburg for detecting an overload problem with the factory fitted Shure M44-7 in 1229. Once cured the sound was fantastic. The amp and FM also. Wish I had one now as it was so compact. The Shure is a superb pick up and would suit 1229. Many will never know as it needs a bespoke preamp. As good as a Decca London and better than almost any other Shure. I intend one day to have a posh stylus fitted to one. Stereo separation is about 20 dB which is fine in reality. Output at 10 mV is not always ideal. Loading > 68K I would say.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2014, 09:21 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
What needs a bespoke preamp? Slightly confused. Most modern phono stages should have plenty of overload margin.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2014, 09:59 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oxfordshire
It's not quite that simple. Most things have ideal gain. Worth saying as some will try to see if they can do better ( you should ). If overload margin is about >30 dB you are right. Even so it can be worth finding out. In fact you will find this is universally true and has almost nothing to do with overload margin these days. It will be the law of you volume control mostly. Again many are better than they were. The 68 K loading matters. Higher if you can if the pre amp is OK with it. A slight tweak of 75 uS to suit. 10 pence to paradise 0 pence to mediocre. Your choice. One up grade I can mention is quality of this loading resistor. I have no idea why it matters as down stream it seems not to. I only know this as a famous PU maker sent me some to fit and insisted they would be better. It was for his friend. Tyco foil types. I was very surprised. I have graphs and they tell me nothing or very little.

Back to gain. If matching a CD to an amp I suspect it is less critical, technically certainly so as there should be no unwanted spectrum ( I know ) . Turntables often do give far more when gain it correct. It is well worth the effort. Some will spot it more than others. It's like a TV correctly set up as my best analogy.

I often use a Shure 44 -7 into my MC preamp designs. They sound OK considering the wicked overload that should be happening. I put it down to the way the circuit recovers etc. Far more complex than is thought. Exaggerated scratches is the first sign of a troubled pre amp.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2014, 10:26 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
well not much money gets you 25dB overload NAD PP 3 digital phono preamplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com. Really not sure about the rest of your arguments. It's obvious if your gain budget is completely screwed then you will have suboptimal performance but Phono stages are no different from anything else in a system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2014, 11:10 AM   #29
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Oxfordshire
I was advocating self build. Whilst about it, think of what I said that everything has an ideal level.

Starting with the power amp configure for 500 mV sensitivity. That should make the pre amp design easier. It could sound better as the power amp loop gain will be higher which usually means more stable for the VAS cap chosen. If the distortion went from 0.0005 to 0.001 % I can live with that.

If the input resistor can be bootstrapped ( from feedback LTP base 2 ) the input impedance might be raised to 100K with no noise penalty. I am guessing 2 x 5K could be used. Used 10 K as upper feedback arm if so to get balance, 180 R bottom arm if 100 watts 8 R ( gain of 56 ). Use 2SA1085 inputs to keep noise low.

This means a simple passive preamp ( volume control ) can be used. They have near infinite overload marge. 10 K log looks about ideal.

Next a number of buffers with variable gain. One CD input straight to the volume control.

For phono I would have a variable gain control. Two end stop resistors to set max and min. Have passive 75 uS with EQ options ( 25 to 100 uS ) in this first stage. The 3180/318 uS active with fixed gain of about 17 at 1 kHz. My friend has a spare RCA next to phono in for his loading options. Cheap and excellent.

25 dB overload in the old days would have been seen as a failure. And 53 db a result. That's a bit daft. 32 dB is not hard to arrive at. If a really weird idea of a boosted op amp was used the sky is the limit. I tried it once and saw problems. It is an op amp running double voltage using the music to control the voltage difference across the op amp. Thus a NE 5534 might survive +/- 38 V rails. One can do it by building the second stage with a mini power amp. I dare say a real power amp chip held in class A would be fine. A 30 mA CCS to V- should work. There you are a Guinness book of records phono stage for a beer budget. Try +/- 50 v rails if so with +/- 10 V to op- amp 1 ? The record is 53 dB held by Technics. It is all active if I remember. If you do that strictly MC then a double inverting stage can be made with no real problems . The 75 uS in upper feedback arm and 100 R input resistor into virtual earth input of op amp -ve input.

Let me give you a real rife version of this. A tax law came out for 1.8 litre engines. BMW in haste put together a Reps special as it was company car laws. The 518. Not the 6 cylinder 2 litre of the 520. The 1.8 of the 318. Much loved and bought by many. The problem was some very ordinary cars were faster. Over the year 2 seconds was shaved of the 0 to 60 time and it used less fuel. Nothing dramatic was done. All it took was getting the gear ratios correct. The more seamless overlaps reduced fuel use also.The car apart from 4 cylinder vibration was the better 5 as handling was impeccable as the power was not able to expose chassis problems.

What you are saying to me seems very lazy or worse. Design with op amps is far easier than the old days. Almost Lego. For someone with time to devote the ideal gain and loading can be found.

In my work we built a 15 000 transcription turntable for Masterpiece in London. Mostly to transcribe 78's. The Shure was the easier choice as Expert make 78 styli for it. Andy bought the really ancient styli for acoustic 78's also . The arm was SME series 5. I suspect that was because he could afford it. The Shure had it's supplied 0.7 LP stylus. The sound unbelievable. I built the EQ device which was valve ( EF 86 shunt feedback PU gain , EF 86 EQ stage with high Z anode output ) . Mostly a rebuilt Leak Varislope with a 2 x 2 transistor buffer with bootstrap to run the mixing desk.

The Quad 33 has an overload figure of 40 mV on M1 ( 1 kHz Quad book with the 33 ) . The Quad was thought of as a joke. Using a Denon DL110 that's still >27 dB. If you own a 33 that's the sweet spot found. I dare say 44-7 into M2 would be OK. The DL110 will make you use full volume control at times. What it avoids is the Quad sound most people have. That is enclosed and a bit grim. Strangely the DL110 45 kHz bandwidth doesn't trouble the Quad when level was right. Quad were aware of this and provided a whole unpopulated section S1 to make your own. The 33 was panned in the press and rightly so. The valve version not as wonderful as some think either.

Douglas Self pointed out that PU's like 44-7 have the highest dynamic range regardless of type. If the HF is not squashed by too low loading ( 68 K was the old standard) and pre amp set up right it will sing.

As a rule of thumb with a modern preamp 6 db excess gain sounds about right. This allows under recorded stuff ( DGG ) to work better.

If you like BBC Radio 3 that needs 12 dB over again usually.

CD is well set to 500 mV usually. My power amp I recently made is 620 mV. That was the best it could give with low distortion ( SE valve ). That was excellent. The original design 5% THD and 2.5 V in ( a design with many followers ). Mine 1 % THD and nicer type 620 mV and same number of valves (2) and 8 watts. It was done with bootstrapping.

You know sub optimal is the other F1 cars. They all look about right. Williams should be given the title on money spent basis. Now that's how to do it.

So a 1229 M44-7 and a preamp of careful design might rival the silly money turntables. I would build is a skeleton plinth from MDF or Maple ( not Marble ) . Trim the spring dampers ( guess like latter Dual ) to have a bit of movement. Set tracking weight to upper range of Shure advice. If a 44 E is fitted it will sound different and might even sound dull. There was a 44-5 for stereo only I seem to remember. Expert make them I think ?

I would guess Goldring 1042 the very best match. That fits the standard model preamp design so means the quality of the preamp the only question. It is a PU that works with anything so can be used over and over. Lenco GL 75 arm even. Would think a OK match with Quad 33. Personally I would build the S1 card up for that. Sadly when Quad really was Quad they would have said how. Maybe they still can.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2014, 12:58 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
It's hard to understand the wisdom you are trying to impart here other than you like DJ scratching cartridges.

I prefer to normalise to the CD 2V RMS levels for the power amp. My current phono stage runs at the same levels so I don't have to swing the volume around much between CD and vinyl. 1V if you want an extra 6dB headroom and don't want to put that in the preamp. I don't have any vintage stuff that needs line gain anymore.

What is more interesting to me is the conjecture I need to test that a number of bodies can use the same stylus assemblies with minor modifications to the plastic. I have lined up ready to test an M55, M75 and A&R P77. If the theory tests correctly you can compare all 3 with the same stylus. Now that is an interesting area to explore,
  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB Lenco L75, L85 or Dual 1229 turntable gaborbela Swap Meet 1 1st February 2012 01:14 AM
Stock factory plinth for Dual 1019. Model CK5/CH5 tweakk Swap Meet 1 17th January 2012 06:42 PM
Dual 1019 tweaking ? dann Analogue Source 3 23rd October 2011 01:21 AM
PIONEER VSX 1019 Direct Energy Receiver wushuliu Swap Meet 1 14th July 2011 11:20 PM
anyone ever used Optimus 40-1019 woofer zuki Subwoofers 0 1st May 2007 08:47 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:41 AM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2