Hi,

I do own it. While it is cool looking TT I do not quite understand why everyone thinks so highly about it.

1. The effective arm length is 220mm only. Plenty of other TTs (like cheap Technics) have 230mm.
2. SNR is 73db. Again cheap DD Technics can do better.
3. Plynth-to-tonearm isolation is not that good - light knock on the plynth goes right to the speakers.

Any reason why I should keep it and not get it replaced with something else?

Thanks

All of those are valid points. However, despite the Technics better specs, the Pioneer's arm design produces a certain sonic quality that many prefer. And as far as the isolation, just don't knock on the plinth. If vibration from the room is a problem, you can achieve adequate isolation by either replacing the feet with something better (often necessary with this model anyway) or just putting it on something. Bubble wrap is one solution for this. Lots of excellent sounding tts used only feet for isolation. And I believe the arm is 221mm, although I know that is nitpicking. :D

If you doubt any of this, get a Technics and compare. If you like it better, then sell the Pioneer--you won't have any trouble finding a buyer.

I own a PL-516, which is the same TT only belt-drive instead of direct drive. I paid $200 for mine but it was in mint condition with a new cartridge. I felt like maybe I overpaid at first, but now a year later -- I've more than gotten my use out of her and she's still going strong.

I'll never get rid of her.

I'm sure the PL-518 turntable is a fine unit.

My only concern is with the word "cheap" when referring to Technics. I think it gives the impression of them being poorly built. Believe me, they are not cheap in this regard. They may be inexpensive when compared to a number of turntables, but they are not cheap. My Technics SL-2000 direct drive turntable is still performing perfectly after 31 years of use.

We now return you to yoiur regularly scheduled thread!:D

If you have any hesitations or doubts about the PL-518, then look for a PL-C590.

Assuming you choose a suitably nice arm for it, it will satisfy you on every count you mention, and then some. You can then sell the PL-518 on to any of the many people who appreciate them.

Of course, you'll probably have to pay a LOT more for the PL-C590...

Of course, if you aren't satisfied with THAT one, then maybe you can find an Exclusive P3a...

I'm not trying to be facetious, but just make the point that every turntable (well, every one below the level of a Rockport Sirius III... and in some ways, even at that level) is about compromises, and to some extent "you get what you pay for".

The fact is, many people like the sound of the PL-518, especially after a few tweaks (like better feet). It must be doing some things "right", for so many to like it, even if you can still find some apparent "faults" in it. Stats aren't everything in audio; sometimes it is just a good sonic value-for-money, and simply subjective enjoyment!

Still, it is good that such discussions crop up; by analyzing and comparing the specific strengths and weaknesses of gear, and trying to understand why some gear is well liked, we can all make more informed buying decisions. Thanks for speaking up! :thmbsp:

My main turntable for years was the belt drive version of the pl-518, that being the pl-516. I regret that I still don't own it! I had a Dynavector 10 x 4 on it and it absolutely sang. very quiet , good pacing , simple in design. I paid $100 for it back in about 1979.

S/N ratio of 73db is not too shabby! My beloved Dual 1229 is only 63db and is very quiet to my ears. I am currently getting a Pioneer PL 514 ready as a Christmas gift and feel the unit is well built but one of the features I like about it is it's overall simplicity. Pioneer did some nice work even in the lower price ranges such as the 514.

We have two PL-518s, from GW ($25 with no headshell) and ($40 mounted with AT13E cartridge/needle).

They are 1978/79 vintage, in the PL 560-540-518 line. The 518 is the manual version (auto return is all you get) the other two are auto play and return and include additional displays on turntable rate (beyond the strobe indication). They all share the same tonearm and plinth.

We tried our luck at the next in line in that era about 2 months ago, the PL630, but it arrived smashed up, from an Ebay seller who didn't want or need to hear about shipping tables. They worked for the post office and knew what to do, already.

I can play the PL 518 within 2 feet of of blasting away Polk Monitor 10's, with the lid down, without any worry of feedback. The thing that really makes the difference is how much vibration is coming up from what the TT is sitting on, besides the vibration the TT absorbs from the surrounding air itself.

Hakaplan is very knowledgeable about TT's, in my humble opinion. :thmbsp:

The PL-518 ('X' in my case) is a very respectable unit thit will work with a wide range of cartridges and is easy to adjust and maintain. It isn't the last word in refinement, but it's pretty quiet and can play any kind of music.
Yes, you can do better - my own Goldmund gives it a thrashing. But then again, the Goldmund is 25 times (more or less) more expensive than the Pioneer. And I can assure you, it's not 25 times better...

Three PL-518 have made it across my bench in the last 18 months. Two went on quickly to “audio makeovers”. What elevates this table to its “sought after” status? Hard to say, when it’s the sum of the parts that gets you to that nice listening level. But I suspect Howard’s call on the tonearm has a lot to do with it. I also suspect that this early servo direct drive sounds a little more fluid and real than later quartz locks. It also may be that it was ahead of its time in direct coupling the platform to a solid mass plinth, even though by today’s standards it’s a lightweight solid mass plinth (10 lbs?).

The only serious trouble I’ve run into is with my current keeper, whose electronics governing the fine tune speed trim have gotten a little flakey. Any thoughts on fixing that, Howard?

I found one at the Salvation Army a few months ago. It was in great shape, the handsome Black version, so I grabbed it. I am not a knowledgable tech, really just beyond novice. I did the same thing I do to all finds. I changed out all electrolytic caps, including those on the motor board. I lubricated the bearing, and I cleaned all electromechanical parts with Deoxit. The unit came with an Empire 2000II. So I got a new Jico Stylus for it, the best one available.

It has been my main TT till about a week ago. My previous favorite was my Dual 1219 with Grado Sonota cartridge, which I just put back into use. It is certainly no slouch.
It excels at pacing, and of course that warm wide bandwidth Grado sound.

I must say it was a letdown putting the Dual back up. Nothing wrong witht the Dual, but it seems on analysis that the Pioneer has a certain relaxed nuetrality to it that presents music well, but draws no attention to itself. Very hard for me to describe what the appeal was ,except that the Dual was simply not as pleasing.

Cartridge placement on the Dual was a challenge because of the size of the Grado cartridge. I'l have to mount another cartridge more precisely to see if that makes a difference. I have an Ortofon OM-30 that has worked well on that table.

I must admit that the Pioneer surprised me without dazzling me. Maybe i should try the Grado on the Pioneer.

I'm working on a Technics SL 1700 and will put that to the paces to see how it compares.

518 is a nice table. There are better Pioneer tables, and there are ones that aren't in measure with the 518...just as the same could be said for Technics.

I had the 516 for a long time...but gave it to an ex-girlfriend (duh...idiot!!!). Wish I still had it, it was a nice performing unit.

I guess the 518 may be beloved not for being overly sexy or flashy, but just for being a reliable workhorse that delivers consistently good sound with a minimal of fuss. There's a lot to be said for those qualities...

I use a PL-518 in my office system. I like it just fine!

I use mine quite frequently as well - great table. No compliants here. :no: