This looks fascinating... my current TT project will use an arm with removable head shell, I would be very interested in this.
T-01HS Ebony Headshell From Timestep - The Audiophile Man
T-01HS Ebony Headshell From Timestep - The Audiophile Man
While I've nothing against Technics/Panasonic products (I love them), these "high end" turntables don't excite me because normal people cannot "hear' a difference over a reasonably-priced turntable.
They only thing they DO hear is their bank account emptying out.
And of course this is due to listening to marketing hype and other obsessed "audiofools" insistance that you must spend lots of money or you'll be chastized by the audio community.
AKA Peer Pressure.
They only thing they DO hear is their bank account emptying out.
And of course this is due to listening to marketing hype and other obsessed "audiofools" insistance that you must spend lots of money or you'll be chastized by the audio community.
AKA Peer Pressure.
I’m sensitive to pitch fluctuation and wanted a rock solid deck. My current SP10 was always causing issues and the power supply wasn’t reliable.
This deck is a lot cheaper than a huge number of boutique offerings and it’s going to last a lifetime.
It’s built like a tank.
The SP10r reviews show it has the lowest figures ever for distortion and it has a huge range of adjustments. It can switch speeds in a blink.
So your post sounds like nothing more than armchair jealousy. I’d take you half seriously if you had heard the SP10r. Have you?
This deck is a lot cheaper than a huge number of boutique offerings and it’s going to last a lifetime.
It’s built like a tank.
The SP10r reviews show it has the lowest figures ever for distortion and it has a huge range of adjustments. It can switch speeds in a blink.
So your post sounds like nothing more than armchair jealousy. I’d take you half seriously if you had heard the SP10r. Have you?
I'll assume your comments were in reply to me, if not, that's fine.
With that said, I've sold and serviced audio, including turntables, both to consumers and the professionals for about 45 years now.
Comparing, understanding, and measuring and evaluating specifications is something most people cannot do unless they have the amount of experience my field requires.
Sorry - I'm kind of late to the table, but I would recommend the DS Audio HS-0001 headshell. It's around 11 grams, so the total effective mass (arm, headshell, cartridge and hardware) should be around 22 grams (SL-1000R arm). That would give you a resonance frequency of around 11 Hz. I use it with a Dynavector that's a little heavier, but it has the same compliance as the Hana SL (with a resonant frequency of around 9 Hz).
Although pricey ($450 US list), the DS Audio HS-0001 is beautiful, looks great on the Technics arm and is of exceptional quality. It has a two pin mount (instead of one) and uses a brass washer (instead of rubber), so it has a very sturdy connection to the tonearm. Highly recommended!
wiseoldtech, the Technics SL-1000R does not come with a headshell, so you must buy one. The standard Technics headshell, that’s included with the more affordable Technics units, such as the SL-1200G (which I also own), is too light for very low mass, or very low compliance cartridges and would place the tonearm resonance too high. Some excellent MC cartridges (such as the Ortofon A95) are both low mass and low compliance.
The standard Technics headshell is well designed though and works fine on my SL-1200G with an Otofon 2M Black; but's very unlikely a high compliance, low mass, moving iron cartridge would be used on a turntable of the SL-1000R’s caliber, and is likely why Technics does not include it with the SL-1000R.
Yes, you’re right, the DS Audio headshell model is the HS-001 (I typed an extra “0”); however, you’re incorrect in assuming it’s just “Snake Oil”. Many well designed, precision components are expensive. If you’re unwilling (or unable) to spend the funds, or don’t have the associated gear and/or ears to notice or appreciate any difference that’s all fine and I understand this. Just don’t assume that’s the case for everyone here on this forum. It always amazes me when some are quick to criticize the choices made by others - we’re all free to spend our money and enjoy our systems and gear in any way we chose – including yourself wiseoldtech. Let’s just appreciate one another’s love for music and for this great hobby – no matter our personal choices.
All noted, thanks.
After checking out this entry by Technics, I see it's price of $18-20,000 US makes purchasing a $400 headshell trivial by comparison.
However, in numerous photos, I see a headshell mounted, but have to wonder why one isn't included (per your description).
After all, asking 20 grand for such a thing and not providing a headshell is to me a bit odd.
All this adds up to an esoteric style of playing records that only the rich would venture into, similar to those other monster machines such as the Basis "Work Of Art" turntable (around $150,000.00) with it's impressive yet superficial adornments.
Lastly, Providing a superior enviornment in which to play a record to its fullest extent can be had for a fraction of the above costs, actually.
We're all familier with various "tier levels" of products, and a point is reached at which additional funds simply don't increase benefits to the listener, however keen their hearing is.
Part of this is due to the limitations of the recording itself, along with the physical properties of extracting the music.
Built-in background rumble from records is rarely even discussed, yet it's there, plain and simple.
Of course the level of it depends on the pressing and recording equipment.
Another thing is pivoting tonearms and antiskating measures.
We all know how recordings are cut initially, in a linear trajectory, yet it seems that all these "high end" machines cling to the (traditional) pivotal way of tracing the grooves.
This means compromises, like antiskating, which at best is only partially correct depending on groove modulation at a given moment, and radius.
Another is tracking error, also varying with radius.
So in the end, you're forced to include these compromises, even at jaw-dropping prices.
Instead, you must concentrate your efforts on the delicate balance of such things as Vertical Tracking Angles (VTA), resonant qualities due to stylus compliance and tonearm mass, and a plethora of other possible issues.
While I've nothing against pivotal arms, I do understand their limitations, and I own several myself.
However, my one Linear Tracking machine is devoid of the aformentioned issues imposed on playing records, since it "plays records the way they were originally cut", and while my human hearing has its limitations, the difference from my other machines is subtle enough to overlook and ignore.
And at costs a fraction of those Upper Crust prices.
wiseoldtech, much of what you say is accurate, but the differences others can perceive and the value they put to those differences can be difficult (or unfair) for anyone else to judge.
Linear tracking arms are theoretically superior in certain areas (such as tracking angle error), but not in others (such as bearing and carriage noise). Just like you, I have used both designs, but those small differences you speak of apply here too. Even linear arms have pivots (albeit with limited movement) and must have some tracking angle error before the linear carriage responds to correct it. One (or a few) platter revolutions later, the error occurs again and must once again be corrected (and so on….). Yes, the tracking angle error is small – but it still exists. And if the cutting lathe has any angular error, how can we account for this? Everything suffers from some degree of deviation from the ideal, but we sometimes can’t know where, or by how much.
Well-designed turntables and tonearms of every design methodology or technology can perform with (essentially) equivalent measured performance, although there will always be one at any given point in time that temporarily holds the performance benchmark in one (or a few) given areas. But is it meaningful? Well that's fundamentally within the ears and mind of the beholder. We’ve both been in this hobby long enough to know measured performance benefits don’t necessarily equate to better sound.
Many high-end designs of all types and technologies, even in other categories (such as automobiles for example) may not have meaningful performance advantages to some, but they may be meaningful to others. And even when those measured benefits may be small (or may even be eclipsed in certain areas) some with the means will buy them in appreciation of their remarkable technological design and/or beauty. What’s wrong with that? Many appreciate all types of technology, and technology at its pinnacle is art. Besides, high-end technology often trickles down into products the rest of us can afford.
We all have differing interests and priorities in life – there is nothing wrong with that. I will never criticize someone for making a different choice than I would have made and will never begrudge anyone with greater means for having something that outperforms and/or looks much nicer than anything I can afford. It's all good.
Linear tracking arms are theoretically superior in certain areas (such as tracking angle error), but not in others (such as bearing and carriage noise). Just like you, I have used both designs, but those small differences you speak of apply here too. Even linear arms have pivots (albeit with limited movement) and must have some tracking angle error before the linear carriage responds to correct it. One (or a few) platter revolutions later, the error occurs again and must once again be corrected (and so on….). Yes, the tracking angle error is small – but it still exists. And if the cutting lathe has any angular error, how can we account for this? Everything suffers from some degree of deviation from the ideal, but we sometimes can’t know where, or by how much.
Well-designed turntables and tonearms of every design methodology or technology can perform with (essentially) equivalent measured performance, although there will always be one at any given point in time that temporarily holds the performance benchmark in one (or a few) given areas. But is it meaningful? Well that's fundamentally within the ears and mind of the beholder. We’ve both been in this hobby long enough to know measured performance benefits don’t necessarily equate to better sound.
Many high-end designs of all types and technologies, even in other categories (such as automobiles for example) may not have meaningful performance advantages to some, but they may be meaningful to others. And even when those measured benefits may be small (or may even be eclipsed in certain areas) some with the means will buy them in appreciation of their remarkable technological design and/or beauty. What’s wrong with that? Many appreciate all types of technology, and technology at its pinnacle is art. Besides, high-end technology often trickles down into products the rest of us can afford.
We all have differing interests and priorities in life – there is nothing wrong with that. I will never criticize someone for making a different choice than I would have made and will never begrudge anyone with greater means for having something that outperforms and/or looks much nicer than anything I can afford. It's all good.
Musicman0578, I can agree with much of your statements, and trust me, I'm not trying to judge anyone, they can be free to choose and spend whatever they feel like on something.
I believe a good part of it, particularly when it comes to super-cost high end products, is the satisfaction gained in owning such items, regardless of performance.
In other words, a "hole" is filled mentally, perhaps a feeling of status is attained.
As some of us know, though, more expensive isn't always better, and a plateau arises once a certain performance level is reached. Anything else is simply glitter and adornments, of course at added cost, yet the superficiality of it all is what humans are weened on since birth.
Indeed, human hearing varies, that's a fact, as we get older it gets less keen.
I've had "seniors" come into my shop to audition their restored audio equipment.
Some have asked me "why is the thing so "bass heavy"?
The last time they claim they heard it play was perhaps 5 to 10 years or more in the past.
Some even complained that they couldn't hear the tweeters playing, or that they were "weak" in output.
It was all because of their hearing loss of course, and I've gotten plenty of mixed responses to that mention.
As a seasoned old service tech, I've taken all that into account, I myself can barely hear 14Khz now, but I know how to get around that in order to provide uncompromised service.
Back when I was in my 20's and 30's, I had the luxury of handling lots of equipment.
Before service took its place, I sold audio and video in various "boutiques", many have long gone now as Big Box stores and online shopping took over.
I knew quality, gained insight, and the experience to judge differences.
It hasn't much changed since those days - superficiality is always a strong point used to sell products, and performance varies "up to a point" - sadly, much of todays offerings are lackluster in comparison to the "golden era" of the 60's-70's, perhaps early 80's.
But I see a definite trend towards making one spend more, yet get less.
I consider that corporate greed masked by inflation.
My world is basically positioned towards sensible, value oriented things, ignoring the driven intentions by manufacturers that others have somehow fallen for.
A friend of mine, obsessed with "high end" mainly because his friends all have such things, desires MacIntosh, among other audio "nice things.
One visit to my home, I had a record playing on my custom restored/improved 1963 RCA Victor console stereo in the dining room...
He wandered in there, and was utterly shocked by how it sounded.
LOL!.... imagine that!
He asked me - "Can I get that kind of sound from my stuff?"
I told him no, it's a whole 'nother world from where your head's at.
I believe a good part of it, particularly when it comes to super-cost high end products, is the satisfaction gained in owning such items, regardless of performance.
In other words, a "hole" is filled mentally, perhaps a feeling of status is attained.
As some of us know, though, more expensive isn't always better, and a plateau arises once a certain performance level is reached. Anything else is simply glitter and adornments, of course at added cost, yet the superficiality of it all is what humans are weened on since birth.
Indeed, human hearing varies, that's a fact, as we get older it gets less keen.
I've had "seniors" come into my shop to audition their restored audio equipment.
Some have asked me "why is the thing so "bass heavy"?
The last time they claim they heard it play was perhaps 5 to 10 years or more in the past.
Some even complained that they couldn't hear the tweeters playing, or that they were "weak" in output.
It was all because of their hearing loss of course, and I've gotten plenty of mixed responses to that mention.
As a seasoned old service tech, I've taken all that into account, I myself can barely hear 14Khz now, but I know how to get around that in order to provide uncompromised service.
Back when I was in my 20's and 30's, I had the luxury of handling lots of equipment.
Before service took its place, I sold audio and video in various "boutiques", many have long gone now as Big Box stores and online shopping took over.
I knew quality, gained insight, and the experience to judge differences.
It hasn't much changed since those days - superficiality is always a strong point used to sell products, and performance varies "up to a point" - sadly, much of todays offerings are lackluster in comparison to the "golden era" of the 60's-70's, perhaps early 80's.
But I see a definite trend towards making one spend more, yet get less.
I consider that corporate greed masked by inflation.
My world is basically positioned towards sensible, value oriented things, ignoring the driven intentions by manufacturers that others have somehow fallen for.
A friend of mine, obsessed with "high end" mainly because his friends all have such things, desires MacIntosh, among other audio "nice things.
One visit to my home, I had a record playing on my custom restored/improved 1963 RCA Victor console stereo in the dining room...
He wandered in there, and was utterly shocked by how it sounded.
LOL!.... imagine that!
He asked me - "Can I get that kind of sound from my stuff?"
I told him no, it's a whole 'nother world from where your head's at.
Last edited:
Back to headshells and SP10r...
Lectures on foo and money aren’t necessary, they thrive in every Hifi forum.
I’ve got an Oyaide carbon shell to try with a heavier Hana ML.
Despite all the replies above, all I was looking for was ACTUAL owners replies on what they use or what non owners would suggest given the tonearms specifications (which technics seems to keep a bit vague).
There are apparently more than one owner here, but I’m not seeing any of them!
Lectures on foo and money aren’t necessary, they thrive in every Hifi forum.
I’ve got an Oyaide carbon shell to try with a heavier Hana ML.
Despite all the replies above, all I was looking for was ACTUAL owners replies on what they use or what non owners would suggest given the tonearms specifications (which technics seems to keep a bit vague).
There are apparently more than one owner here, but I’m not seeing any of them!