In fact I don't understand how you can ask for all that money for scrap that is also pitiful from an aesthetic point of view.
At least when I put one up for sale at a price slightly higher than the requests for "scrap" I present them and deliver them as if they had just left the factory, disassembled piece by piece and changed the worn parts, completely refurbisch, new dissipating paste on power transistors, repainted, checked , calibrated to perfection as indicated by s.m. with new obsidian base or just engine, with arm chosen by the buyer or without and the buyer is happy being able to use it for another forty years.
Am I too specific and honest man or am I just a fool to do all this?
No, it's not foolish to be honest in business or sell a good product at a fair price, even when others have lower standards.
I guess people can command high prices for "collector" decks, I've seen a lot of that in open reel. Certain tape decks are expensive whether or not they're in good condition, yet you have to wonder who would pay upwards of $2000, even $3000 for a deck that's going to need an overhaul, and with some models, is prone to some serious known issues (Akai GX747, Teac X2000 come to mind). They're very susceptible to damage during shipping, there are few technicians who specialize in servicing them, and those who do usually have a long backlog. Tape itself is expensive and quite difficult to get hold of, with an uncertain future for the very few manufacturers that still exist. Yet tape deck prices have gone up and up and up.
I guess people can command high prices for "collector" decks, I've seen a lot of that in open reel. Certain tape decks are expensive whether or not they're in good condition, yet you have to wonder who would pay upwards of $2000, even $3000 for a deck that's going to need an overhaul, and with some models, is prone to some serious known issues (Akai GX747, Teac X2000 come to mind). They're very susceptible to damage during shipping, there are few technicians who specialize in servicing them, and those who do usually have a long backlog. Tape itself is expensive and quite difficult to get hold of, with an uncertain future for the very few manufacturers that still exist. Yet tape deck prices have gone up and up and up.
yes this is true but everything in hi-fi has increased, amplifiers, used cartridges, turntables, arms, shells etc.etc.
It has become a drug addicted second-hand market where excellent objects mix with filthy objects.
How is it possible now to ask $200/300 for a Technics SL 2000 used which was already a plastic entry level filth in 1978 built on the cheap?
Decisions, decisions.
I decided I need to mock up my nude motor plinth. Way too many details to take a chance.
Ultimately, I want the panzerholz type plinth but I may start with with a R/B casting because I can use the molds as a mock up and, if I screw it up the materials are a lot less.
I could use some help/advice with a few things. All decisions a builder has probably answered in their own project.
1. I was originally going to do a 2 tone arm plinth but tone arms are so specific I don't know how to prepare for it when I don't know what the second tone arm is. I also want to mount the tone arm directly to the plinth for damping purposes. No armboards.
2. I would like a tight fit between the TT platter and the plinth. With the TT bevel to edge flush with the plinth top surface. Actually 1mm above. I would prefer 1mm separation net when I am done buy I don't know if that is realistic. Comments appreciated.
3. I would like a bearing brace with dampening included but not sure how to do it. Probably need more than a pic here. Description also would be helpful. Thank you.
4. Finally, the motor mounting flange attachment procedure. The underside will basically be unaccesable and the flange itself I want mounted directly to the plinth for deadening. I am thinking maybe a mated ring with machine screw tap hole so I can machine screw the motor down. This ring will be trapped into the build so all will have to be precise. And the flange mount sets up the platter height position with the plinth. I am shooting for the "corner" of the platter to be 1mm above the plinth.
This build will require precision and detail.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Don
I decided I need to mock up my nude motor plinth. Way too many details to take a chance.
Ultimately, I want the panzerholz type plinth but I may start with with a R/B casting because I can use the molds as a mock up and, if I screw it up the materials are a lot less.
I could use some help/advice with a few things. All decisions a builder has probably answered in their own project.
1. I was originally going to do a 2 tone arm plinth but tone arms are so specific I don't know how to prepare for it when I don't know what the second tone arm is. I also want to mount the tone arm directly to the plinth for damping purposes. No armboards.
2. I would like a tight fit between the TT platter and the plinth. With the TT bevel to edge flush with the plinth top surface. Actually 1mm above. I would prefer 1mm separation net when I am done buy I don't know if that is realistic. Comments appreciated.
3. I would like a bearing brace with dampening included but not sure how to do it. Probably need more than a pic here. Description also would be helpful. Thank you.
4. Finally, the motor mounting flange attachment procedure. The underside will basically be unaccesable and the flange itself I want mounted directly to the plinth for deadening. I am thinking maybe a mated ring with machine screw tap hole so I can machine screw the motor down. This ring will be trapped into the build so all will have to be precise. And the flange mount sets up the platter height position with the plinth. I am shooting for the "corner" of the platter to be 1mm above the plinth.
This build will require precision and detail.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
Don
Hi Don,
Make the mockup plinth from cheap plywood it'll be much quicker and easier to work with.
1. I was originally against cantilevered arm boards as I thought they would ring. But after building my current plinth and measuring acoustic feedback at the arm mount on the armboard I have changed my mind. The other advantage is any tonearm can be mounted. Just make sure you have enough clearance between the bottom of the arm and top of plinth to install the cable.
2. My platter runs high above the plinth with raisers for the tonearms. This increases the distance between the journal and arm base. Sound energy has to travel down the motor pod through the plinth and up the tonearm pod. I used aluminium for these pods but there is no reason you couldn't make them from Panzerholtz.
3. You can't damp a bearing brace by design it needs to be rigid and the coupling between the plinth and bearing will prevent it ringing. My brace is a simple ring 30mm OD and 25mm ID with a split so it's actually C shaped. i drill a 30mm hole in the plinth and the brace just slips in then with a light tap the tapered bearing housing opens the brace forcing it into the plinth holding the bearing rigid.
4. I also though about having the base of the motor touching the pod but what I found is the motor base is not a machined surface so it's not perfectly parallel to the mounting flange. Sitting the motor base in the pod with base touching the base of the pod the mounting flange had varying distance to the pod mounting face. A better way is to have a gap under the motor and fill the gap with Blu Tack or similar.
It was partially a comment on the cost of SP-10s, specifically MK2's, that I see in my region. It may be that those models with visible scratches, dents or corrosion are actually worth what they're charging for them, because the SP10 has always been considered a high-quality deck, but to me it seems a lot to pay. And I actually wonder how a revered model comes to be treated that way, but I suppose they weren't in a residential setting. Sorry if my comment went OT. What I'd actually like to see is some opinions on the SP10 Mk1.
If a perfectly clean and operative Mk1 with plinth and arm can be had for half the price of a motor-only, cosmetically challenged Mk2, it may be indicative of the performance differences. This is not saying that the Mk1 is a poor table, it’s probably pretty good. The Mk2 and later are literal reference quality.
I dont know if anybody has any opinions on the Mk1 because all the people on this thread have been using Mk2 and Mk2a. There’s a separate thread for the Mk3.
As for your observations on R2R tape, I agree completely.
I dont know if anybody has any opinions on the Mk1 because all the people on this thread have been using Mk2 and Mk2a. There’s a separate thread for the Mk3.
As for your observations on R2R tape, I agree completely.
I haven't heard a mk1 there are very few in Australia. I am intimately familiar with the mk2 and have heard everything from a stock mk2 in a plywood plinth through to my highly modified mk2 in my system. I can say that a stock mk2 takes a lot of additional $$ spent to better it, and a well modified mk2 will play with the big boys. I have also heard a Lenco, Yamaha GT2000 and a Victor TT-71 in my system and my mk2 has out performed them all.
The beauty of the mk2 is the all analog PLL which means there are no proprietary chips to fail. All the chips are TTL logic and still available. In fact I have repaired 2 logic boards recently for other people.
The beauty of the mk2 is the all analog PLL which means there are no proprietary chips to fail. All the chips are TTL logic and still available. In fact I have repaired 2 logic boards recently for other people.
I didn't realize. The thread title seemed to cover all SP10 versions. It was the chance to grab an SP10 (Mk1) that brought me here, but 100+ pages of comments is a lot to go through. I realize that when people say SP10, they'll generally be referring to what is the Mk2. Actually, I didn't know there was a Mk1 at all until yesterday.
HiFi News reviewed the SP10 mkI and SP10 mkII in November 2010. The review is scanned
https://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?68538-Technics-SP10-write-up-Hifi-News-November-2010
A vast improvement! (I read the blurred version last night). Thanks for going to the extra trouble.
Also, there's very good information in there, for my purposes. Over the years, I have kept half an eye out for a Mark II at a price I would be willing to pay, but it never quite came together. That being the case, I never looked in much detail at the specs and performance of the deck, trusting its reputation alone. As I have seen a Mark I that I could afford (now purchased), your article was useful for finding out a bit about that earlier version in comparison with the Mark II.
Also, there's very good information in there, for my purposes. Over the years, I have kept half an eye out for a Mark II at a price I would be willing to pay, but it never quite came together. That being the case, I never looked in much detail at the specs and performance of the deck, trusting its reputation alone. As I have seen a Mark I that I could afford (now purchased), your article was useful for finding out a bit about that earlier version in comparison with the Mark II.
Glad to be of assistance. The article claims that there is subjectively little to choose between mkI and mkII apart from the very quick start/stop of the mkII, which is a pro advantage rather than domestic necessity. The importance of a good plinth also comes through in the article.
Have fun.