• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

AT-LP120 and Technics Sl-1200 MK2

Status
Not open for further replies.
arcorob

arcorob

Addicted Member
Notice I said "and", not "versus". This is not about my table is better than your table. This is a comparison to see if the AT is a cost effective alternative to the Technics which used, demands premium prices.

I have completed some initial comparisons which I will post here. Later this week, I will post non-copyright sound clips which will be the best test of all. Again, this is not to say one is better - just a comparison on features, usability, sound quality.

Pictures will be at the end of the thread with many more to come. Let the compare begin

Overall Body and feel
Both tables are heavy but the Technics is heavier and a bit sturdier feeling. Something very solid about it including a tap test.
Tap both plinths. The AT is solid but sounds a bit hollow. The Technics on the other hand sounds like tapping stone. No resonance. I am not talking about a tap while playing (that test comes later when I record clips)

The Technics platter is much heavier but that is primarily due to how the DD motors work. The AT is your standard spindle drive, the Technics is magnetic. One special feature - The Technics has a rubberized underside. very nice damping. Wish to do the same to the AT platter.

Both have nice feet (the AT's are wider - The technics are adjustable. They both seem to isolate pretty well.

They are very much the same size however; the AT is about 1/2" taller.

The Arms and arm operation
Both arms look almost identical. I know they are not but I will outline the parts below
  • Arm Length - AT is slightly longer by 1/4 to 3/8 inches
  • Arm design - Looks identical with the only difference right at the pivot base. The Arms are all metal as are the pivots but the pivot base on the AT is plastic (matches the metal crosspiece) but the technics is all metal matching
  • Counterweight - Both work very well however; the AT sits much further back. Its easier to mount the AT but really, no difference in being able to balance the arm. It has been suggested that having the weight further back is bad but I have nothing that supports that.
  • VTA dial and operation - Both tables have VTA adjustment but the AT is much easier to use. The dial is easier to see and the operation to turn it is smoother. Not a big deal in overall operation, just pointing it out.
  • Ant-skate - Clear winner with the Technics. I tried a blank track on a test record..I could move the arm back and forth with the anti skate on the Technics. Pretty precise. On the AT, I had to exceed the VTF number (1.5) to get it to stay (around 2.5) ...backwards away took all the anti skate ..
  • Cueing - Now the AT was the clear winner. From release of the cue to touch was about 8 second...slow and smooth. The Technics is smooth but drops in under half that time. Good for a DJ but I like the slow approach.
Overall in terms of arm movement, pivot, riding the grooves, no measurable difference (without equipment or a sound clip which will say more)

Operation and controls.
No winner or loser. Both tables get to speed almost in a heartbeat and stop on a dime. Speed control on both is precise. No drift.

Current summary - So right now, before the sound clips, the AT is still a solid cost effective alternative. It has pluses and so does the Technics which is a more solid build but at 2 to 3 times the cost, it should be.

Pictures
The players
295603_624134810935318_508408975_n.jpg


Technics
578088_624134794268653_1021976305_n.jpg


AT
246508_624134614268671_272052340_n.jpg


Arms
601511_624134644268668_1470451024_n.jpg


221680_624134924268640_387600505_n.jpg


Platters
522459_624134534268679_1405119636_n.jpg


526606_624135120935287_557791071_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Good start.

I think I spotted a typo though in the cueing point:

Cueing - Now the AT was the clear winner. From release of the cue to touch was about 8 second...slow and smooth. The AT (should this be Technics?) is smooth but drops in under half that time. Good for a DJ but I like the slow approach.
Click to expand...
 
My $0.02 ;
The AT appears the share the platter with a BD TT somewhere in the line as it has the mid-point belt drive rim and the belt access windows, a sensible shared cost savings if provided with an OEM mat that can properly damp the platter and record.
From what I've seen of both you get substantially 'more' TT with the Techie, and you do properly pay the diff for it. The diff performance-wise is going to be much better resonance management and isolation with the Techie which is critical in the loud disco venues it was used. At home on headphones the perceptibly audible difs could pretty much be very minor.
 
I'm really sorry, but i don't understand what you're hoping to achieve here. You only have to look at the specifications to see that the AT is not in the same class as the Technics. Wow and flutter at .2% (figures from the AT website) compared with .025% for the Technics, SNR at 50Db compared with 56db unweighted and 78db weighted, and you begin to see that the AT isn't in the hunt, and, to be fair isn't intended to be.

The Technics platter is built the way it is for a reason, you can't just dismiss it by saying "but that is how the DD motors work". It eliminates cogging, which the At, with a lighter platter, is more likely to have.

I have a Technics, and have looked closely at the AT. It is a good, probably worthy, but inferior copy because even the naked eye can see the build quality isn't there - think paste jewellery as compared to the real thing. Before anyone accuses me of being a Technics fanboi I'm selling mine, because it is inferior to the Clearaudio I have just bought, but can recognise that, given it sold for 1/10th the cost of the Clearaudio, it was a budget to midrange bargain. In fact, few decks can equal that wow and flutter figure no matter what the price.

The AT LP120 is a copy, but it misses out on the engineering fundamentals. That said, I've heard that the later ATs follow more closely the Technics original and may even be very close to the SL1200.
 
But the AT mops the floor with the SL-1200mkxx in the anti-skate dept - the AT dials ups to 7 where as the hapless SL-1200 only goes up to 3. Why waste the money on a SL-1200 then?????

(Meant to be a joke)
 
Why don’t we let Rob finish his tests before we come to any forgone conclusions, I have had several of both TTs through here and I am interested to see what he comes up with.
 
I run an AT PL120 (precursor to this one) as my work-horse pre-"keep" record tester. Been happy with it for years, but it is not a Technics.

The AT does 78 out of the box, don't think that's an option on the Technics w/o spending for mods?

I have found that the AT likes the lightest headshell rigging you can build. SOAR wires, aluminum screws, etc. Better tracking and better dynamics with MM and MI cartridges.

It will do heavier shells and MC cartridges, but it's not that happy doing it.

I have found the AT to like its own brand of cartridges, mostly - duh. The AT150MLX is overkill for my version of this table. For me, it seemed to top out at the 440MLa. I say that because I could hear almost all there was in the 440 off this table, but the 150MLX had more to offer, that I could not really hear, until I mounted on my JVC QL.

It also likes the Shure M75, M97, Ortofon 20, quite a few Nagaoka's and Empires :) There is a Toneral 2000 (EU Nagaoka) on the arm and it's been there for months. Once you find a cartridge combo this table likes, it shines quite nicely :music:
 
Very tru on several points

BrocLuno said:
I run an AT PL120 (precursor to this one) as my work-horse pre-"keep" record tester. Been happy with it for years, but it is not a Technics.

The AT does 78 out of the box, don't think that's an option on the Technics w/o spending for mods?

It will do heavier shells and MC cartridges, but it's not that happy doing it.

I have found the AT to like its own brand of cartridges, mostly - duh. The AT150MLX is overkill for my version of this table. For me, it seemed to top out at the 440MLa. I say that because I could hear almost all there was in the 440 off this table, but the 150MLX had more to offer, that I could not really hear, until I mounted on my JVC QL.

Once you find a cartridge combo this table likes, it shines quite nicely :music:
Click to expand...


Hope you don't mind me borrowing your post to answer several things. First, I agree that the AT tops out and LIKES the AT440MLa...Match made in heaven. I tried the At150MLx on it and it just did not seem the best fit. AT95E that it came with was ok but hey, we are trying to get the best out of it , yes?

On the TYPO, yes, I will go fix that - The TECHNICS drops too fast.

As to new vs used - that's part of my point $200 for a NEW WARANTEED table vs 400 to 700 average for a decent used table.

wow and flutter specs, DB, etc...are very valid on the Technics , suspicious as I found out on the AT. They did not post their best. just the less than. Regardless, since wow, flutter and Db have NOT been an issue in my listening, I suspect only the MOST CRITICAL LISTENER would ever find it and that said..why is the MOST CRITICAL LISTENER buying a $200 table? If you stand on that argument and that the superior engineering..etc etc. then you don't get the point of this whole comparison as I have said time and time again..what is the value you get for $200...It may not be a REGA 3 , or a Pro-Jetc Debut Carbon or a new out of the box Technics SL1200 Mk2 - but for a 1/3 the cost you get a damn fine table.

To my friend divot dog..thank you..when I am done with the clips and such, the noise tests, I would really love to hear your view, public or private. I am glad you have not told me yet as that would spoil my bias. Thus far, I see pro's and cons in both :D
 
grottyash said:
I'm really sorry, but i don't understand what you're hoping to achieve here. You only have to look at the specifications to see that the AT is not in the same class as the Technics. Wow and flutter at .2% (figures from the AT website) compared with .025% for the Technics, SNR at 50Db compared with 56db unweighted and 78db weighted, and you begin to see that the AT isn't in the hunt, and, to be fair isn't intended to be.

The Technics platter is built the way it is for a reason, you can't just dismiss it by saying "but that is how the DD motors work". It eliminates cogging, which the At, with a lighter platter, is more likely to have.

I have a Technics, and have looked closely at the AT. It is a good, probably worthy, but inferior copy because even the naked eye can see the build quality isn't there - think paste jewellery as compared to the real thing. Before anyone accuses me of being a Technics fanboi I'm selling mine, because it is inferior to the Clearaudio I have just bought, but can recognise that, given it sold for 1/10th the cost of the Clearaudio, it was a budget to midrange bargain. In fact, few decks can equal that wow and flutter figure no matter what the price.

The AT LP120 is a copy, but it misses out on the engineering fundamentals. That said, I've heard that the later ATs follow more closely the Technics original and may even be very close to the SL1200.
Click to expand...

The AT specs don't mean much.....I had this table and never heard anything close to the W&F of .2%. AT surely was hitting at the high end of the range, but I never heard it in the year I had the table.
The builtin phono amp is bad, and that can affect sound. But if you bypass it and run thru another one, the table performs excellent based on its price point.
 
GPJeff said:
But the AT mops the floor with the SL-1200mkxx in the anti-skate dept - the AT dials ups to 7 where as the hapless SL-1200 only goes up to 3. Why waste the money on a SL-1200 then?????

(Meant to be a joke)
Click to expand...

Why in heavens name would you want to track an Lp at 7 grams. :scratch2:

Just because the AT's anti will go that high why would you?
 
He was joking

Stanton681EEES said:
Why in heavens name would you want to track an Lp at 7 grams. :scratch2:

Just because the AT's anti will go that high why would you?
Click to expand...

I was okay with dialing up the anti-skate on the AT to get the right offset...chalk it up to measures - any scale can be calibrated any way so a 3 on one is a 5 on another giving equal force...I do plan on mentioning it to AT tech support...just a few more windings on the spring

The Technics on the other hand was very precise. At 1.5 gr VTF, anti-skate seemed dead steady at 1.5 - go figure

In either case, one should not just go by the dial anyway AND PLEASE NO ANTI SKATE THREAD HERE...LOL
 
I have both...

When I started getting back into vinyl, I started with an AT-LP120, then upgraded to an SL-1210MK2. I kept the AT-LP120 as a backup.

Overall, I do think the SL-12xx is a better table. Higher build quality, smoother operating tonearm (particularly anti-skate), better specs, stronger and tighter bass reproduction when listening. The AT-LP120 arm tends to drift toward the rest when leveling and adjusting, whereas the SL-1210 did not.

Wow and flutter on the AT-LP120 was not objectionable. I think the specs are conservatively rated.

The AT-LP120 is not a bad table for $200. It has full tonearm adjustments. I think the sound quality is about 90% as good as an SL-1210 when using the same cartridge (I used a Denon DL-160). The onboard phono stage is noisy, but can be bypassed if you have phono inputs or a better phono stage. The noisy phono stage is probably the weakest thing about this table.

Value for the $$$ is off the charts with the AT-LP120. It does 78RPM, which the SL-12xx does not (unless you pay $200 for a mod, the cost of an LP120). I don't own any 78s, but it was nice of Audio-Technica to include it. A separate 78RPM stylus is a must if you want to play old shellac.

In a world where high-end vinyl rigs cost as much as a car, I'm glad there's an affordable option with 1/2" mount and full adjustments. I remember the days when $200 would buy a crappy P-mount-only belt-drive table, and that isn't even adjusting for inflation.

So suffice it to say, if you can spend $500, get a used SL-1200. If you can spend $5,000, visit your local high-end shop and check out the wares. But if you need to play 78s or are on a tight budget, you can do much worse than an AT-LP120.
 
I am glad folks are following

There are so many options out there in terms of tables..literally the skies the limit...but not everyone can afford the sky. Not everyone is technically inclined to fix up a vintage table.

So finding good values in the $200 range is a benefit. who knows, the Orbit may be a great buy when people get them and hear them. Not as many feature but heck, for most, that's just fluff...its about sound.

At least folks are not stuck with 1) Pay more than they can really afford 2) stuck with cheapy shoddy USB tables.
 
No big difference so far, #2 is a little bit better with everything as I see it, except the pitch, both are 1018Hz.
gusten
 
Last edited:
arcorob said:
Not sure if they will be valuable but..I started each with the tonearm raised for a certain amount to see if there is any motor noise, then cue down , then the test.

Guesses welcome. feedback on anything heard in the background appreciated.

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=D25B243EF6E53584!651&authkey=!AHehlEOhnNVz7To

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=D25B243EF6E53584!650&authkey=!AMI6eHAFXqhxovI
Click to expand...

On #2, high frequencies are slightly more pronounced (based on the announcer voice's sibilance). On the other hand, #1 has slightly bigger low mids presence. This makes surface noise slightly more noticeable on sample #1. I guess that music should have stronger vocal presence on turntable #1, while it might have more of a scooped ("hi-fi") quality on # 2. Very slight, but noticeable differences nonetheless.

That's what I feel it is worth mentioning from what I hear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom