Hello All,
This thread might be a tad long. Hope it holds the vinylphile junkie's interest!

Today. I discovered just before going to my machinist friend, I blew the measurments of a new sheet of 1.00" thick Black Acrylic to be machined for my "reference" (if you wanna call it that?) VPI HW-19 Mk-IV Table.

Reason for the new Plinth on the VPI, I am installing a new Arm, and wanted to try a solid, thicker Plinth.

So, with that being said, and having the HW-19 out of commission for the last few weeks, dis-assembled, I've been dying to spin some vinyl.

So, having here a mint Denon DP-2550 as a spare table, which I very recently retro-fitted an Audioquest PT-8 Arm onto, swapping out a Denon-Grace DA-307 Arm, I also had to have a custom machined Armboard from 1.00" thick Black Acrylic made for the retrofit AQ Arm.

I decided to yank the VPI out, and put the Denon in for some spin time in my system.

I had mounted my old trusty Shure V-15 III with Jico SAS Stylus, but began to think, lets try another Cartridge which I just happened to have "lying around" here, a mint, virtually new Benz Micro Ruby 3 Cartridge, with only 15.6 hours on it.

So, off came the Shure, on went the Ruby 3, and after VTF, rough VTA, alignment with an Arc Protractor, rough Anti-Skate dial in with Cardas Test LP, I decided to give her a spin. (I did double check of everything before Stylus touched vinyl)

I am very satisfied, and this Table-Arm Combo exceeded my high expectations. Of course, I'm using the $3,000 Sutherland PhD Phono Stage, and an AQ pure solid Silver Tonearm Cable to compliment the front end.

I noted qualities which seem to compliment the Ruby 3 better than the VPI MK-IV did, with 16lb Platter.

After a good hour of listening, there is slam, lightning fast speed, clarity, flawless tracking, great pace, fairly quiet groove noise (no, the Ruby 3 isn't near as quiet as my ZYX Airy 3X) the sound is smooth, detailed, articulate, good mids, and highs, and the bass is a little bit shy of the VPI, and when I say shy, I'm talking minute levels of being ever so "less" than I remember the Ruby 3 on the VPI.

To say the least, I am very impressed, which brings me to some "new conclusions" I'd like to share, and see what others think?

While this Denon isn't in any way a slouch, I'm thinking there is better, and "that better" just might be the Technics SL-1210 MK-2, and variants?

Some time back, I've shared thoughts about the Technics, and in one instance specifically wih a good poster here, Mr jfine.

We agree on much, but also seemed to disagree about what weak points there were the the Technics, mainly, that being the Tonearm.

It's great that Kevin at KAB offers so much for his customers. While I've never dealt with him personally, I highly respect the man for what he brings, and gives to the audio community.

Many here of course, have gone with very good upgrades that he offers, Tonearm re-wire, Damping, External Power Supplies, Strobe Disabler, Footers, Wood Bases, etc, etc. (You get the picture)

With that being said, and my personal assumptions are this:

Whatever money you hand to Kevin, you would most likely be recieving a Turntable which will equal, or exceed any belt drive table for equal cost today.
I have no doubts that the 1200 series, even bone stock, would be a tough act to follow-beat.

But here's where I want to take you folks to "fantasyland" for just a moment if you will:

While I will back 100% what JFine says about the Technics, I do also wish to stand my ground amicably, in saying that the Technics can be considerably improved upon with a better Tonearm!

So picture this: As many probably already know, Origin Live does make Armboards that will fit Rega Tonearms for the Technics. One can go all the way up to the Rega RB-600, but one can also go a bit beyond.

So picture this!? A brand new Technics 1210 MK-II, with Origin Live Armboard, and a brand spankin new Origin Live Silver MK 3 Tonearm?

Yep, the Silver MK 3 is a $1,000 Tonearm, but why not?
And too, lets throw a very high quality Cartridge as well, why not? Lets's say a top quality MC, like a Lyra Skala, Benz near top line, Dynavector Karat, top line Grado, Cardas Heart, Koetsu, etc?

I'm coming to the conclusions, that a combination such as this might rival Belt Driven, at twice the cost, all other things being equal (Phono Stage, Cabling, rest of system).

Is this absurd thinking? I honestly don't think so, but one might scoff at placing a $2K to $3K Cartridge, and $1K arm on the Technics.

From what I've gathered, many belt drives seem to try to adress thier shortcomings with some sort of band-aids, such as ridiculously heavy platters, tape drives, thread drives, floss drives, idler wheels, stand alone motor assemblies, speed controllers,etc. The tweaking on a Technics 1200 might be free!? Mark

Interesting, but why? You seem to have a number of projects going and some are making excellent sounds. Where does this get you that you aren't already capable of going? $1K arm, how about on the Denon? What makes the Technics so attractive? Is the feed-back loop through the base better? Is the motor speed more accruate? Not sure I understand the rational?

There are good belt drive turntables and there are good direct drive turntables.

There are good belt drive turntables and there are good direct drive turntables.

Pretty much sums it up. :smoke:

There are good belt drive turntables and there are good direct drive turntables.

Hello Gentlemen,
I do of course agree, implementaion, good design are most important regardless of type. Many like the Teres Tables, and or purchase Teres Parts for custom DD projects.

And yes, there are some really fantastic belt drives out there. Galibier comes to mind as one (Or should I say Mylar Tape Drive?). I believe that thier entry table, the Serac comes in at about $3200 minus Tonearm.

As you mention Broc, I seem to have my "Plate full" currently, but pleasantly learning what I think I have learned today, I truly believe that my "hypothetical" Technics-Origin Live Table would certainly be nothing to scoff at-laugh at, once it would be heard-listened to.

A shoot-out of this caliber, against a high quality belt drive, utilizing same Arm-Cartridge, would be very interesting to hear, and compare.

My wondering is, just how far up the belt drive "ladder" one would have to go to equally compare?

We know the Technics posesses a virtual incomparable specification of wow, and flutter, and rumble.
I then wonder whatever other mechanical-electrical influences could then hamper the Technics to hold its own against such other world class belt drives?

I know I have read instances of end users commenting about how well the Technics Base is damped, with a couple noting it is slightly "over-damped", but seems with a little time-ingenuity, this isn;t hard to tweak-overcome.

I'm certainly not persuading others/twisting thier arms to rush out to do something like I explain, but they are just some ponderings of mine, and with the very high costs of many Belt Drives today, I do believe that this could be another very good option for a very good Turntable, that would not need a second mortgage on the house to put together. Mark

Unfortunately, all of this is speculation. There's no good way to A-B an upgraded arm on a Technics table, unless you've got the means to have two specimens hooked up side by side, and all other variables of turntable playback are controlled. Beyond that, swapping out the arm, guaranteed, will sound "different", but it would be difficult to quantify "better", IMHO.

Kevin at KAB takes on the argument of whether the tonearm of the 1200 is the weak point. There are a couple of points he makes, but this one seems to be most significant:

http://www.kabusa.com/myth3.htm

The 1210 M5G I own does not have the Cardas rewire or any other upgrades. The tonearm of the 1210 M5G seems to have more internal damping than that of a standard 1200, and it does have better internal cabling, and does have a titanium finish. I've not bothered with the tonearm damper option as yet because of the 1210's improved damping. Yet, this table is the best sounding turntable I've owned. It replaced a Thorens TD-145, and IMHO it was an easy choice to let the Thorens go.

Unfortunately, all of this is speculation. There's no good way to A-B an upgraded arm on a Technics table, unless you've got the means to have two specimens hooked up side by side, and all other variables of turntable playback are controlled. Beyond that, swapping out the arm, guaranteed, will sound "different", but it would be difficult to quantify "better", IMHO.

Kevin at KAB takes on the argument of whether the tonearm of the 1200 is the weak point. There are a couple of points he makes, but this one seems to be most significant:

http://www.kabusa.com/myth3.htm

The 1210 M5G I own does not have the Cardas rewire or any other upgrades. The tonearm of the 1210 M5G seems to have more internal damping than that of a standard 1200, and it does have better internal cabling, and does have a titanium finish. I've not bothered with the tonearm damper option as yet because of the 1210's improved damping. Yet, this table is the best sounding turntable I've owned. It replaced a Thorens TD-145, and IMHO it was an easy choice to let the Thorens go.

Thanks for the link Whell. I have read this article by Kevin before, and what he says makes good common sense.

Of course a lot of my post was speculation, and as you say, to do accurate meaningful A-B testing, one should have two samples side by side.

Of course doubtful if a good quality Arm would hinder the Technics, but as Kevin explains, is it necessary to climb to a $1,000 Arm to achieve very good performance?

I reckon Cartridge-Arm compatability-synergy is one area which is very important, and should always be considered. Probably wouldn't do a bit of good, with one placing a $4400 Graham Phantom Tonearm aboard if it wasn't a good match for a given Cartridge.

As I close, I just would like to say, that I would like to hope most of you enjoyed these ideas-ramblings of mine. Mark

Ohhhhh, this argument again.

I have one of each.

Love them both.

Dave