I am currently running a Technics SL-120 with a SME 3009 MKII arm, and an assortment of cartridges.
A friend has promised me a JH turntable, with a Grace arm (in exchange for some audio and Ham equipment I have).
My question: Is the JH / Grace combination equal to the Technics? (given the same cartridge/s)
Here’s my assessment of your Technics versus the JH, and the winners in each category.
Looks: Technics
Rumble: JH
Wow and flutter: Technics
Tonearm: probably the Technics’ SME, although the Grace isn’t bad
Reliability: hard to say – the JH is so simple there’s not much to go wrong, so it may be best (apart from the belt), but the Technics is pretty strong. Call it a draw.
The JH is an interesting piece of Australian audio history, and is capable of very good performance. However, I wouldn’t go out of my way to chase one. By the way, the cheapest belts for them are the ones for a range of Michell turntables – I think from the Gyrodec/Orbe/Syncro, which are available on Ebay at much (much!) cheaper prices than some you’ll find, and are very slightly stronger than the original belts.
I own a JH Phase 2 turntable, which I’ve had for years, and it was surprising the performance they got out of such a simple design – they were actually very similar to some very well thought of brands, and in my opinion the only area where they suffered was in looks, which tended to vary, particularly on the ones which had been put together as kits. That’s why the bases usually vary from quite good (the genuine ones sold complete with base, and the ones sold complete by hi-fi shops) to really bad. Mine, which I bought very cheaply off a colleague years ago after he'd upgraded to a Denon direct drive, was supplied with a sprung base and cover made by a former Melbourne and Sydney hi-fi shop (Instrol Hi-fi), and is quite smart, although the four springs are a bit too stiff to provide much acoustic isolation.
The JH turntable was actually, surprising as it may seem, a really high performer, as can be seen by the following independently tested performance results, all of belt drive turntables (apart from the Technics):
Akai AP-100C: rumble 32dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.1% RMS
Harksound (by CEC) HS-310: rumble 38dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.09% RMS
JH Audiolab (this was a late-70's model, which had a floating sub-chassis): rumble 42dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.09% RMS
Philips AF-977: rumble 34dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.13%
Pioneer PL-516: rumble 36.5dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.09% RMS
Rega Planar 2: rumble 36dB unweighted, (wow & flutter measured using a different standard)
Rega Planar 3: (example 1) rumble 43.5dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.072% RMS (example 2) rumble 42dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.075% RMS
Sanyo TP-728: rumble 31dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.16% RMS
Technics SL-1200MkII (direct drive): rumble 36dB unweighted, (wow & flutter measured using a different standard)
Thorens TD115: rumble 36dB unweighted, wow & flutter 0.06% RMS
The problem is that many were made from kits, and the quality of the base varies markedly between examples, but the original complete factory JH turntables were quite good, and very good value for money, as were the ones sold by dealers like Instrol Hi-fi. JH sold four different variants: the Audiolab 'O', which came without a tonearm, 'F' which included the JH Formula IV tonearm for an extra $90, or the 'A' which came with a JH Audiolab tonearm, also for an extra $90, or the kit, which came without a base or tonearm. The tonearms were the cheapest available in Australia in the 70's and 80's, although they cost $95 ($5 more) if you bought them without a JH turntable.
Mine had the JH Formula IV tonearm, which was the original Formula IV. You can read what JH thought of the Mayware Formula IV in the JH advertising flyer over at vinylengine, where JH warn about avoiding copies, because they “reflect an abysmal ignorance of elementary design principles”!
JH designed it in the early 1970’s and had Risui Mito of Japan build it for them. The Sonus and Polk Formula IV versions were actually JH models (licensed by JH), and apparently if you peel back the stickers, it says JH underneath the Polk and Sonus names! JH were actually the Sonus cartridge distributors in Australia, and those cartridges were a perfect match for the JH tonearms. Back to back testing of the two (JH and Mayware) by USA magazine Absolute Sound found that the Mayware didn’t sound as good as the JH, as the sliding weight resonated on the Mayware. They are regularly found on Linn Sondek LP-12 turntables in Britain, as Linn were the British JH distributor.
JH also later designed another lightweight tonearm, the Audiolab, using a gimbal design at the pivot. It was also made by Risui Mito.
One of the links was to a discussion on Vinyl Engine forums regarding JH turntables running too fast. FWIW, the consensus in that thread was that they were intentionally designed to run fast.
Many belt drive turntables without adjustable speed ran slightly fast. Here’s a list of tested ones that were slightly fast – Akai AP-100C (0.1%), Ariston RD-80SL (0.4%), Challenge CSP-2 (0.3%), Hitachi HT-320 (0.15%), JH Audiolab (0.01%), Rega Planar 3 (1st example 0.02%, 2nd example 0.03%), Rotel RP-820 (0.1%), Sansui SR-B200S (0.04%), Stanton 8004-II Gyropoise (0.2%), Thorens TD-160 Super (0.5%). It was very common, and it was usually just a very marginal speed increase, which wouldn’t be noticeable in normal listening, and occurred across a range of turntables prices, from quite expensive models, to budget ones.
If it's noticeable, something's wrong. I can't pick it with my example, although running it with a strobe card proves it is very slightly fast.
