I've clearly got a good wife 
She likes music as much as I do.
You appear to have a very naive view of how turntable evolution occurred. Yes the SP-10 was revolutionary at the time (1970) in a world where idlers ruled the roost and yes Matsushita produced some very nice motors that were used almost exclusively in japanese decks. Of course there was some resistance in europe as everyone made idlers at the time and they had the high end. However by the end of the 70s there were high end DD tables being made in europe (Thorens, EMT even Garrard) .
The Japanese manufacturers knew their markets so made belt and DD models of the same basic chassis as well as automatic and manual versions.
None of which changes the fact that the drive mechanism is not really a big issue once you get to a certain level and other things have a bigger effect. Go look at the turntable speed stability thread on here. There you can see rational arguments based on real measurements as well as a few centuries of experience. And JP, who is lucky enough to have a Nakamichi TX-1000 in his collection.
I have no bias ,I have belt and DD and expect them both to be able to perform to the same standard.
And let us not forget that the timestep SL-1200 was reviewed as up with best measuring turntables hifi world had seen http://www.soundhifi.com/images/Hi Fi World SL-1200.pdf
Oh and an SL 150 with original SME III arm went for over £400 on ebay this week.
She likes music as much as I do. You appear to have a very naive view of how turntable evolution occurred. Yes the SP-10 was revolutionary at the time (1970) in a world where idlers ruled the roost and yes Matsushita produced some very nice motors that were used almost exclusively in japanese decks. Of course there was some resistance in europe as everyone made idlers at the time and they had the high end. However by the end of the 70s there were high end DD tables being made in europe (Thorens, EMT even Garrard) .
The Japanese manufacturers knew their markets so made belt and DD models of the same basic chassis as well as automatic and manual versions.
None of which changes the fact that the drive mechanism is not really a big issue once you get to a certain level and other things have a bigger effect. Go look at the turntable speed stability thread on here. There you can see rational arguments based on real measurements as well as a few centuries of experience. And JP, who is lucky enough to have a Nakamichi TX-1000 in his collection.
I have no bias ,I have belt and DD and expect them both to be able to perform to the same standard.
And let us not forget that the timestep SL-1200 was reviewed as up with best measuring turntables hifi world had seen http://www.soundhifi.com/images/Hi Fi World SL-1200.pdf
Oh and an SL 150 with original SME III arm went for over £400 on ebay this week.
I have a friend with 4 TTs in use. I was the beneficiary of an Oracle Mk1 that fell off the bottom, i do need to rig a speed controller for it.
I have owned a lot of turntables. We did a lot of comparisons between belt-drive and DD turntables when DD 1st came out, frankly the DDs were embarassed by much less expensive BDs. One of the best, and i owned one, was the Kenwood KD500. Stoll not up to the level of some of the better BDs. This was befor Idlers came back into fashion.
dave
The point was simply they probably used the best instruments and solid engineering theory to make their hypothesis of "what a tt has to do" come to pass.
Not this...
I've owned more than a few TTs myself - ranging from late 60's cheapie idler driven Duals, at least half a dozen belt drives from ARX through Rega2 to Oracle, Linn Basik and LP12, and at least 2 DD. Quite frankly, I preferred the Dual701 to the KD500 with whatever zoomie audio-tweaker tone-arm(s) I played with at the time - the old chasing the brass-ring, latest Absolute Sound, etc recommendations got to be a very costly and dizzying carousel ride.
While I've not played my current vinyl rig (RegaPlanar3/RB200/AudioNote IQ2) at home for more than one side in at least 5yrs, I'd have to say that in terms of ease of set-up, use and performance, the 701 with Decca London Gold was probably my overall favorite - but not so much fun on warped discs.
The last piece of vinyl I purchased was the 50th anniversary remastered release of St Pepper's for my son. Talk about a stroll down memory lane.
While I've not played my current vinyl rig (RegaPlanar3/RB200/AudioNote IQ2) at home for more than one side in at least 5yrs, I'd have to say that in terms of ease of set-up, use and performance, the 701 with Decca London Gold was probably my overall favorite - but not so much fun on warped discs.
The last piece of vinyl I purchased was the 50th anniversary remastered release of St Pepper's for my son. Talk about a stroll down memory lane.
Similar experience myself 30+ yrs ago where my DD Mitsubishi DP-EC7 was thoroughly thrashed by a 10+ yr old NIB and completely stock AR-XB. (I did lube the motor and main bearing first.) Same Ortofon LM20 cartridge on both tables, same Yamaha C-2 pre-amp which had 2 MM inputs allowing for a pretty quick comparison.. It was so shocking that my GF at time thought I had initially swapped the tables somehow, and was playing games with her, she initially could not believe the ugly duckling sounded as good as it did. We both quickly concluded the AR was the better of the two, more detail, and more natural timbre, more music..
When i was in the hifi biz in the late 70s we had SP10, big Denon and a couple other DDs set up with the same arm & cartridge as a number of belt-drive TTs. It was with much gleee to see the look on a listeners face when something like a Rega 3 or even a Connoisseur BD1 thrash these big DD tables.
Much like this one (we sold literally 1,000s of Grace 707s so it was a default choice):
dave
Much like this one (we sold literally 1,000s of Grace 707s so it was a default choice):
dave
I am far from a TT expert, but I went through a vinyl phase for a couple years around 2012. I rehabbed about 3 dozen vintage mid-fi tables, both DD and belt drives. And there was no clear winner. There were some great DDs and there were some TERRIBLE belt drives. My own personal conclusion was that SUSPENSION separated the best from the rest. Suspended Technics Direct drives were MUCH better than their regular DDs and were on par with the suspended belts like Thorens, etc.
Unfortunately there aren't many examples of suspended DDs.
Of course, being a vinyl ronin heretic I also have to say the most overrated turntable I ever owned was... the SL 1200. Lord knows I tried to so hard to get the hype with that table. All kinds of mods and vibration tweaks, etc etc. But the 1200 was the most non engaging, flat, boringest table of the several dozen I played with. There was something about it that just never sounded natural.
Sony DDs, however, way underrated.
Unfortunately there aren't many examples of suspended DDs.
Of course, being a vinyl ronin heretic I also have to say the most overrated turntable I ever owned was... the SL 1200. Lord knows I tried to so hard to get the hype with that table. All kinds of mods and vibration tweaks, etc etc. But the 1200 was the most non engaging, flat, boringest table of the several dozen I played with. There was something about it that just never sounded natural.
Sony DDs, however, way underrated.
If anyone happens to have an SME cut armboard for a KD-500 I would be interested! Mine was in the family system for many years and I was given it 12 months ago. Wife only insisted on some shelving for it to go on. Not audiophile approved shelving, but does the job with the limited space I have right now. little ones can't reach it, domestic harmony is restored and music can be played. Life is good
Attachments
Which one, when they divided into tracks like a cassette the outside channel is often shredded because it was too close to the edge of the tape. Then there's VHS Hi-Fi.
Well, the arm's not the greatest, so anything you can do to it helps. There are those that with jump up and down defending the stock arm, but they're quite obviously deaf.
And a good platter mat is also a must. I've got a Herbie's 5mm mat on my M3D.
jeff
VHS Hi-fi was not bad at all. Back when I was starting digital recording on U-Matic tape from a Sony PCM rack unit, I did a gig with a guy from Radio France who did his recording onto VHS Hi-Fi. They were very bit as good as mine, if not better.
I started to use VHS-Hi-Fi whenever I could.
TD-226 looks like very good turntable.
Ahh Ok. Thanks. Only Kenwood I have read about is L-07D and one model with unique glass marble plinth. Both nice.
Regards
Did you also own a not-so-cheap Dual idler? A well serviced 1219 or 1229 really is a great player. Even their smaller brothers 1218 and 1228 do sound great if in good condition. A thorough maintenance of a 1219 or 1229 may take quite some hours, though...I've owned more than a few TTs myself - ranging from late 60's cheapie idler driven Duals, at least half a dozen belt drives from ARX through Rega2 to Oracle, Linn Basik and LP12, and at least 2 DD. Quite frankly, I preferred the Dual701 to the KD500 with whatever zoomie audio-tweaker tone-arm(s) I played with at the time - the old chasing the brass-ring, latest Absolute Sound, etc recommendations got to be a very costly and dizzying carousel ride.
While I've not played my current vinyl rig (RegaPlanar3/RB200/AudioNote IQ2) at home for more than one side in at least 5yrs, I'd have to say that in terms of ease of set-up, use and performance, the 701 with Decca London Gold was probably my overall favorite - but not so much fun on warped discs.
A VHS HiFi deck doesn't write the audio linearly to the tape's edges with low speed, but uses AF heads instead that are placed to the same rotating drum as the video heads. This leads to an oblique high-speed writing to the tape with the option of low noise and wide band performance.
Best regards!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.