SAP7 – To be clear, I am an "ACTUAL" owner of an SL-1000R and of the DS Audio HS-001 head-shell (two in fact - for different cartridges).
An important spec when selecting a head-shell is mass. The combined effective mass of the tonearm, head-shell, cartridge and mounting hardware must be a good fit for the specified compliance of your cartridge. If the resonance is too low (5 Hz or less), it can be excited by record warps. If it’s too high, it can either reduce bass response, or be excited by information within the record grove. Most recommend aiming for an ideal of 10 Hz, but 8 Hz to 14 Hz works fine (in most cases) in keeping resonances far enough away from detrimental areas.
Resonant Frequency = 1000/ [6.28*square root (M*C)]
I find using a value of 5 grams for the SL-1000R arm (minus the head-shell), seems so work well for the calculation, use one gram for mounting hardware. So, the effective mass would be 6 grams + headshell (x grams) + cartridge (x grams).
A great resource for this and other information related to turntables is the “Vinyl Engine” (see link below).
Vinyl Engine - The Home of the Turntable
I also have the Oyaide HS-TF head-shell (the newer carbon one with silver finish). I originally purchased the Oyaide for a Technics SL-1200G (which I also have). I tried the Oyaide on the SL-1000R but prefer the DS Audio. It's a better design (in my opinion) and has provision for azimuth adjustment (the Oyaide does not). The Oyaide is still a great head-shell though, and a good match for Hana ML. It has roughly the same mass as the DS Audio (11 grams).
My original post to this thread (recommendation of the DS HS-001) was directed towards you (and your question) and is based on my personal experience (I own five turntables – one is vintage). My other posts were not directed towards you (or your question).
I prefer to stick to the subject at hand, but I will defend my comments and choices (or those of others) when I feel they have been unfairly judged or attacked. I don’t expect everyone to agree with my perspective, or with my choices. However, everyone here should be free to share their thoughts, personal experience and opinions without presupposition, prepossession, personal attack, or armchair psychological analysis.
I agree it’s best when we all just stick to the gear. I hope you're enjoying the SL-1000R, I think it offers great value and should last a lifetime.
Thanks for that post.
I was suggesting we stick to the topic and avoid the usual arguments about value and foo.
I want to settle on a cartridge and then the headshell, so i appreciate other users experiences.
The only other thing I need is a bloody good tonearm cable. Again, it’s about value and build quality and avoiding the ridiculous priced ones designed to take money off fools.
There is usually a sweet spot for peripheral items, where the build quality maxes out and the pointless profit add ons begin.
I like the look of the shell you suggest so I’ll consider it when I settle on a final cartridge. For now, the two Hana carts and the Clearaudio / Oyaide combo will do.
I was suggesting we stick to the topic and avoid the usual arguments about value and foo.
I want to settle on a cartridge and then the headshell, so i appreciate other users experiences.
The only other thing I need is a bloody good tonearm cable. Again, it’s about value and build quality and avoiding the ridiculous priced ones designed to take money off fools.
There is usually a sweet spot for peripheral items, where the build quality maxes out and the pointless profit add ons begin.
I like the look of the shell you suggest so I’ll consider it when I settle on a final cartridge. For now, the two Hana carts and the Clearaudio / Oyaide combo will do.
SAP7, I recommend checking out Audio Sensibility. They're a small company in Canada that make some very good audio cables at reasonable prices. I have several of their cables (of all types). All their cables use 7N Ohno continuous cast (OCC) copper or 7N OCC silver. The link below is for their excellent entry level phono cable, but even their high end cables offer very good value. Their prices are about half (or less) what you would typically see for big name cables of similar design and construction.
Phono Cables (OCC copper and OCC silver) + Audio Sensibility
Phono Cables (OCC copper and OCC silver) + Audio Sensibility
Wiseoldtech, as with the head-shell, no phono cable comes with the SL-1000R. You must therefore buy one. Yes, I know, it’s kind of crazy one is not supplied by Technics, especially since a less common 5 DIN connector is required at the turntable. I suspect this is because some prefer XLR’s to connect to the phono section (as I do), but others require RCA’s. Most throw-in cables are rarely used anyway, so I forgive Technics for this.
I feel the price is more than reasonable for the “Audio Sensibility” phono cable. It’s not just “for a few feet of magical wire”, it covers the cost of the (high-quality) conductors, high-quality connectors, the labor required for assembly and the packaging (albeit, packaging is very basic in this case). As I’m sure you’re aware (being a repair tech), labor costs are higher in North America than in China.
Continuous casting and cryogenic treatment (an alternative form of heat treatment) of metals is common throughout many industries where stress relieved high-performance materials are preferred (for a variety of reasons). Think aerospace. Even pistons (and other parts) for high-performance racing engines are stress relived using cryogenics.
Teflon is well accepted as the best dielectric (next to air) for flexible conductors and has been commonly used for decades. I prefer Teflon to air though – I hate it when my cables short out. Low oxygen content is commonly accepted as the preferential state for high performance conductors (remember? - air is the best dielectric).
It’s unfortunate that you’re missing out on many modern technologies through your presuppositions and automatic dismissal of them. I’m pleased that you’re amused though; at least you’re getting some enjoyment from 20th and 21st century technologies through not understanding any of them (or their benefits). Is the earth still flat too?
I feel the price is more than reasonable for the “Audio Sensibility” phono cable. It’s not just “for a few feet of magical wire”, it covers the cost of the (high-quality) conductors, high-quality connectors, the labor required for assembly and the packaging (albeit, packaging is very basic in this case). As I’m sure you’re aware (being a repair tech), labor costs are higher in North America than in China.
Continuous casting and cryogenic treatment (an alternative form of heat treatment) of metals is common throughout many industries where stress relieved high-performance materials are preferred (for a variety of reasons). Think aerospace. Even pistons (and other parts) for high-performance racing engines are stress relived using cryogenics.
Teflon is well accepted as the best dielectric (next to air) for flexible conductors and has been commonly used for decades. I prefer Teflon to air though – I hate it when my cables short out. Low oxygen content is commonly accepted as the preferential state for high performance conductors (remember? - air is the best dielectric).
It’s unfortunate that you’re missing out on many modern technologies through your presuppositions and automatic dismissal of them. I’m pleased that you’re amused though; at least you’re getting some enjoyment from 20th and 21st century technologies through not understanding any of them (or their benefits). Is the earth still flat too?
Ok.
Can anyone explain the torque to me? If it gets the platter up to speed quicker so what? The speed is held so accurately that this shouldn’t matter during normal playback?
I’ve stuck mine on 5 but yet to try and real A / B testing.
I know what it is, but not why you would need the variables in a device that is about speed accuracy.
Technics don’t really say much more than it’s there and can be set!
Can anyone explain the torque to me? If it gets the platter up to speed quicker so what? The speed is held so accurately that this shouldn’t matter during normal playback?
I’ve stuck mine on 5 but yet to try and real A / B testing.
I know what it is, but not why you would need the variables in a device that is about speed accuracy.
Technics don’t really say much more than it’s there and can be set!
It may be that the dynamics of the control loop depend on the torque setting - high torque is obviously best for quick startup, but might compromise the loop performance once upto speed. But your right, why not automatically adjust things optimally during spin-up and again once at speed?
I suspect marketing bullet point issue!
I suspect marketing bullet point issue!
I agree with Mark - it’s likely marketing. Assume that the engineers were told to make the -10R have the same functionality as the previous versions, variable torque would be one of those functions. (For short start times in broadcast)
Now as the -10R has a similar motor drive but completely different platter speed sensor than the rest, it bears asking if this would make any difference, since the rest of the SP-10s don’t do anything different to the platter once it’s on speed - the motor nudges and corrects as required per phase and the result is clear, these tables have the best speed accuracy of any turntable ever made.
But does the torque setting make any difference at speed? I very much doubt it. Maybe somebody could measure that... (paging Mr. P, Mr JP, please pick up the white courtesy phone, Mr. JP...)
Now as the -10R has a similar motor drive but completely different platter speed sensor than the rest, it bears asking if this would make any difference, since the rest of the SP-10s don’t do anything different to the platter once it’s on speed - the motor nudges and corrects as required per phase and the result is clear, these tables have the best speed accuracy of any turntable ever made.
But does the torque setting make any difference at speed? I very much doubt it. Maybe somebody could measure that... (paging Mr. P, Mr JP, please pick up the white courtesy phone, Mr. JP...)
I just can’t see it’s value other that it is there because it can be.
The platter gets to speed so fast it’s impossible to contemplate how more torque or less can have a tangible effect.
As it Spins so accurately it doesn’t need the grunt, other than to correct outside interference.
I guess it must be marketing as the Technics own details just say have a play and see what you prefer. There is no mention of a literal effect on listening.
It did seem harder to slow down on 5, but I haven’t tried enough to see if that’s expectation bias!
The platter gets to speed so fast it’s impossible to contemplate how more torque or less can have a tangible effect.
As it Spins so accurately it doesn’t need the grunt, other than to correct outside interference.
I guess it must be marketing as the Technics own details just say have a play and see what you prefer. There is no mention of a literal effect on listening.
It did seem harder to slow down on 5, but I haven’t tried enough to see if that’s expectation bias!
In the world of "DJ's", they often "slip cue" records, holding the record still and then allowing it to spin when the time is right.
So a higher torque is naturally needed to keep the platter "on speed".
Home use - consumers don't need that type of stuff.
SAP 7, my unit was set at “5” (highest torque setting) out of the box. I initially changed it down to “3” in an attempt to minimize start-up slippage of a solid graphite turntable mat I’m using (Boston Audio “The Mat”). I have since used a 1 mm rubber mat or glue dots underneath the graphite mat to stop any startup slippage. If you’re using the stock rubber mat, this (of course) would not be an issue.
After this, I stared playing with the torque settings, but IMO, the proper torque setting is just personal preference on the SL-10R/SL-1000R. It did (surprisingly) seem to change the sound slightly in some cases, but it was certainly not obvious, and the subtle change seemed to depend somewhat on the program material. Less torque seemed slightly smoother and more laid back, more torque seemed to have slightly more punch and energy, but the change was so very slight that I sometimes think I only just convinced myself of this. So, your preference (if any) may vary with program material, or with changes in phono cartridges and other associated gear.
Later, I plugged the SL-1000R into my PS Audio AC power re-generator (it has a very tightly regulated AC output voltage and AC frequency), the audible torque setting differences seemed to become even less noticeable (or unnoticeable). Then again, the differences were so very slight to begin with, so I have just left the torque set in the middle at “3”. The only real difference left now is the startup speed.
I’m just guessing here, but I suspect Technics provides alternative settings to optimize sound/performance for various AC power conditions. The power supply makes continual corrections to keep the platter at a constant speed, so a change in the torque value would vary the speed correction waveform (shape and duration), so it does make technical sense that it can (potentially) change the sound. I suspect those in areas with poorer AC conditions (greater variation in AC voltage and frequency) may notice greater differences between the torque settings than I did.
I’ve also heard of some using very heavy platter mats and record weights of around 0.7 kg each (1.4 kg total) on the SL-10R/SL-1000R, so Technic’s may have been anticipating these differences when providing optional torque settings too.
I look at it this way, if you notice an audible difference, use the torque setting that pleases your ears – there’s no right or wrong setting. If you want to go the technical route, find the setting that provides the lowest wow and flutter (if you even have a way of testing accurately enough) – but you may find there is no significant change here with torque settings either.
Although the differences are probably very slight, the motor and power supply are likely most stressed at startup when using either the lowest, or highest torque setting, so my logic is to use settings other than “1” or “5” (unless you find they provide better sound or measured performance). It’s odd that my other Technics (SL-1200G) has an “Automatic” torque setting by default, where it has higher torque at startup and then it drops once the platter is up to speed. I’m not sure why Technics wouldn’t have this setting option on the SL-10R/SL-1000R too.
Has anyone used the Acoustand plinth for the SP10R or SP10 mk3?
Acoustand Delrinium Plinth S2 System For Technics New SP-10R And Older SP-10. - Acoustand Audio
Acoustand Delrinium Plinth S2 System For Technics New SP-10R And Older SP-10. - Acoustand Audio
I thought I would post some W&F measurements for the 10R on the torque settings 1, 3, 5. I used the Vinyl Check LP (Tacet L 210) which is very good. The Ultimate Analogue Test LP AAPT-1 from Analogue Productions is very poor IME.
The measurements were taken in quick succession with the only variable being the torque settings. The tonearm is SME IV, cartridge Ortofon Cadenza Bronze. There was a very slight but consistent deterioration of the W&F figures as the torque settings increased. I doubt it would be audible but I have not completed the listening comparisons.
Attachments
The discussion since post #47, has been about whether the torque settings has an effect on the speed stability of the 10R, not about the absolute speed stability, which no-one disputes is state-of-the-art. My contribution describes my findings with a readily available test LP used as supplied. If you have some data with a superior test track and methodology, why don't you enlighten us?
This highlights some of the issues with W&F as a number as well as singular 'tests' and the need to setup for tests properly.
Below are measurements from my 10R done nearly three years ago now. You'll notice my flutter measurement is markedly lower than yours as is wow, though wow is higher than it should be. In the polar plot you can see that the test record is not centered which is a major contributor to the wow number, and that there's a 'slow' spot in the record.
There is a ton of nuance in W&F measurements, and a bit of an art when using a meter, but more telling. MI is great but you can't watch meter ballistics and ignore wow components from things like off-center records. You can FM demodulate and look at the spectrum, but it's far less obvious to the lay person as to what's going on. Bottom line is that there's a lot that can sneak in to those numbers.
Below are measurements from my 10R done nearly three years ago now. You'll notice my flutter measurement is markedly lower than yours as is wow, though wow is higher than it should be. In the polar plot you can see that the test record is not centered which is a major contributor to the wow number, and that there's a 'slow' spot in the record.
There is a ton of nuance in W&F measurements, and a bit of an art when using a meter, but more telling. MI is great but you can't watch meter ballistics and ignore wow components from things like off-center records. You can FM demodulate and look at the spectrum, but it's far less obvious to the lay person as to what's going on. Bottom line is that there's a lot that can sneak in to those numbers.
