Mount Pro-Ject 9c tonearm on SL-1200?

[Ghumbs]

I currently have a Pro-Ject RM5-SE and am considering replacing it with a Technics SL-1200 due to the excellent speed and low noise. However, I was wondering, should I so desire, if I could replace a stock Technics tonearm with the carbon fiber straight arm from my current tt. Google hasn't located anyone as nuts or ignorant as me, so perhaps one of you could shine some light on this. Thanks!

Grant

 

[skriefal]

You can get an SL-1200 compatible Linn armboard from www.soundsupports.com.

 

[Ghumbs]

Thanks for the link. Are you saying the Linn armboard would work for the Pro-Ject 9c?

 

[eteller]

The RM5-SE uses the 9cc arm which Linn uses as well I believe. Personally I'd stick with the RM5-SE. I just A/B one to a new 1200 and while the Pro-ject has it's faults the quality is there if it affects the sound of the unit.

 

[Ghumbs]

The RM5-SE uses the 9cc arm which Linn uses as well I believe. Personally I'd stick with the RM5-SE. I just A/B one to a new 1200 and while the Pro-ject has it's faults the quality is there if it affects the sound of the unit.

I see you use the Speed Box with your RM5.1 SE. I tried 2 different new Speed Boxes with mine and got the same hum with both when the stylus came into contact with the vinyl. Because I can't regulate the speed I'm now considering other options.

You mentioned auditioning one against an SL-1200. Were you using the same system and carts? Based on specs, the SL-1200 has better speed regulation and lower noise than the Pro-Ject. I REALLY don't want this to become yet another SL-1200 vs Goliath thread but I am curious on your findings. Thanks.

 

[eteller]

Yeah, it's a very polarizing topic and I am a huge Technics guy. I have a SL-D3 modded and a SL-1700 before I got the RM5-SE. I wanted something different and the 1200's went out of sight anyways so I got the RM5-SE with a open box deal. I posted a comparison of the Pro-ject to my SL-D3 stating it was apples to oranges as these are two totally different price range tables not long ago. Since then I found a NIB 1200 at a friend's shop he did not even know he still had and I got it for a song as he said "we haven't had a call for those in 15 years", so out of curiosity I picked it up cheap to do some comparisons. I pulled the Blue Point from the RM5-SE (carefully!!! man,those are tiny leads!!) and mounted it to the Technics with the Technics factory gauge (so no grief from you sticklers) and set the tracking to the same 1.8gr . The result is hard to describe but the electricity in the air was gone as was the soundstage, my gf who has no interest in the stuff even said "what happened". So I ebayed the 1200 for a nice chunk. A lot of the difference would be the tonearm and interconnects, but I think the platter has sometihng to do with it as well.
As for the RM5-SE it reminds me of a Soviet product, like a AK-47 or watch, it functions great, but pop the case and you see tooling marks. The tonearm is a work of art, the swiss bearings are nice, the platter is well engineered , the motor is a joke! The motor suspension, a rubber band?!? Come on! A Japanese engineer would fall on his sword for that! I almost sent it back but the sound is just awesome and it's a looker to boot. Kinda like dating a supermodel with lots of issues.
Mine does hum with the Speed Box but I only hear it at the end (dead wax) so I'll put up with it (see psycho supermodel comment). There is a fix over at vinylengine.com that looks like a small piece of dynamat, but like I said it does not bother me. The Speed Box did tighten everything up, but it sounds more CD like now, so it might get returned. I noticed no speed issues before. One thing I did find is that both the Technics decks and RM-5E have problems at exactly the same volume level. Raquet ball halves fixed that after a LOT of experimenting with different ideas (inner tubes, cork, foam, etc).

 

[thedelihaus]

I currently have a Pro-Ject RM5-SE and am considering replacing it with a Technics SL-1200 due to the excellent speed and low noise. However, I was wondering, should I so desire, if I could replace a stock Technics tonearm with the carbon fiber straight arm from my current tt. Google hasn't located anyone as nuts or ignorant as me, so perhaps one of you could shine some light on this. Thanks!

Grant

I think the stock SL1200 MK2 motor/plinth offers you a lot, and adding this arm should be pretty straightforward. I really like that Pro-Ject arm.

Mounting plates are readily available for this.

For somewhat relevant positive reference- check out the following articles:

HiFi World and Tone Audio mounted SME arms on some modded SL1200s and thought the bees knees of them.

http://www.soundhifi.com/images/Hi Fi World SL-1200.pdf

http://www.soundhifi.com/images/Tone SL-1200.pdf

 

[HypnoToad]

The Carbon Fiber 9cc arm is very nice and sounds great, I have no hum problems with the speed box II on my Pro-Ject Perspective II. I would think the Technics would benefit from that arm, and also a power supply mod to remove all that feedback.

 

[thedelihaus]

The Carbon Fiber 9cc arm is very nice and sounds great, I have no hum problems with the speed box II on my Pro-Ject Perspective II. I would think the Technics would benefit from that arm, and also a power supply mod to remove all that feedback.

Agreed!

I won't disregard the stock Technics arm- but freely admit it begs for improvement, whether you mod the stock arm or replace it altogether.

As for the SL1200MK2, the great fundamentals are there as building blocks for a table that can really perform well above it's humble beginnings.

MWalt put a modded Sumiko FT-3 on his, and it usurped the throne of his Music Hall MMF 5.1.

Of course, one needs to take into consideration one's personal preference and personal system/synergy.



I believe both a RM5.1 SE with a Speed Box and a modded SL1200MK2 to be excellent options.

 

[moon unit]

I had a very slight hum when I first installed the Speed Box, when you switch the belt to the 45rpm pulley it tightens up some and motor vibration is more readily transferred to the platter.

Give the belt a little time to stretch and the hum will be gone, that was my experience at least.

 

[Ghumbs]

By the sound of things, it seems like putting my 9c (not the current 9cc) tonearm on a SL-1200 would be giving me the best of both worlds, no?

 

[Mr. Lin]

By the sound of things, it seems like putting my 9c (not the current 9cc) tonearm on a SL-1200 would be giving me the best of both worlds, no?

Not if eteller's account is anything to go by:

Yeah, it's a very polarizing topic and I am a huge Technics guy. I have a SL-D3 modded and a SL-1700 before I got the RM5-SE. I wanted something different and the 1200's went out of sight anyways so I got the RM5-SE with a open box deal. I posted a comparison of the Pro-ject to my SL-D3 stating it was apples to oranges as these are two totally different price range tables not long ago. Since then I found a NIB 1200 at a friend's shop he did not even know he still had and I got it for a song as he said "we haven't had a call for those in 15 years", so out of curiosity I picked it up cheap to do some comparisons. I pulled the Blue Point from the RM5-SE (carefully!!! man,those are tiny leads!!) and mounted it to the Technics with the Technics factory gauge (so no grief from you sticklers) and set the tracking to the same 1.8gr . The result is hard to describe but the electricity in the air was gone as was the soundstage, my gf who has no interest in the stuff even said "what happened". So I ebayed the 1200 for a nice chunk. A lot of the difference would be the tonearm and interconnects, but I think the platter has sometihng to do with it as well.
As for the RM5-SE it reminds me of a Soviet product, like a AK-47 or watch, it functions great, but pop the case and you see tooling marks. The tonearm is a work of art, the swiss bearings are nice, the platter is well engineered , the motor is a joke! The motor suspension, a rubber band?!? Come on! A Japanese engineer would fall on his sword for that! I almost sent it back but the sound is just awesome and it's a looker to boot. Kinda like dating a supermodel with lots of issues.
Mine does hum with the Speed Box but I only hear it at the end (dead wax) so I'll put up with it (see psycho supermodel comment). There is a fix over at vinylengine.com that looks like a small piece of dynamat, but like I said it does not bother me. The Speed Box did tighten everything up, but it sounds more CD like now, so it might get returned. I noticed no speed issues before. One thing I did find is that both the Technics decks and RM-5E have problems at exactly the same volume level. Raquet ball halves fixed that after a LOT of experimenting with different ideas (inner tubes, cork, foam, etc).

There are reputedly methods on the internet to eliminate any hum you're having. If it happens at the normal 33 1/3 rpm speed, that's something else. It should be dead silent at that speed. Personally, I wouldn't rely on specs to choose what will probably be better, so I'd advise you to just make sure you don't damage the RM-5 during the process if you decide to go ahead with it, as you might want to go back.

 

[eteller]

Not if eteller's account is anything to go by:



There are reputedly methods on the internet to eliminate any hum you're having. If it happens at the normal 33 1/3 rpm speed, that's something else. It should be dead silent at that speed. Personally, I wouldn't rely on specs to choose what will probably be better, so I'd advise you to just make sure you don't damage the RM-5 during the process if you decide to go ahead with it, as you might want to go back.

+1, plus I think Moon Unit's theory has a lot of validity, the problem seems to lie with the motor getting canted when moving it to the 45rpm slot on the pulley. Like i said mine does not bother me, the fish tank in the room makes more noise and I only hear it when it hits dead wax anyways.

BTW, Mr Lin I think you stole my cat Mine is big black and clumsy and a good friend.

 

[Ghumbs]

The Speed Box hum is slightly audible during quieter tracks and definitely there on dead wax, especially through headphones. I'm returning it regardless.

But on to the SL-1200. I'm not entirely sure how eteller's account applies to putting my carbon fiber Pro-Ject 9c tonearm on the Technics. If I understand correctly, the job of a turntable is to operate with little wow/flutter and rumble. Nothing more. And it seems that the Technics does that better than my current table. So taking my better tonearm from my RM5 and putting it on the better turntable (regarding w/f and rumble), wouldn't it HAVE TO be better?

Please don't think I'm here to dissent. I very well may be leaving something out of the equation. If so, let me know. Always looking to learn

 

[MWalt]

There are a lot of parameters that affect sound quality. I only know what I know by my own trial and error. I had a stock SL 1200 MKII and a stock Music Hall MMF 5.1. The MMF 5.1 sounded better to my ears stock vs stock. The gap widened slighly when I added a Speed Box II. Then, I retrofitted a Sumiko FT-3 tonearm on to the Technics that had been hot rodded by the Delihaus. I also added a set of Isonoe footers. IMHO the two greatest weak areas of the SL1200 are the feet and the tonearm. I addressed those weaknesses. I then decided that I liked the SL 1200 better and sold the Music Hall. I still stand by my opinion that the Music Hall MMF 5.1 is a helluva nice mid-level modern turntable.

 

[thedelihaus]

The Speed Box hum is slightly audible during quieter tracks and definitely there on dead wax, especially through headphones. I'm returning it regardless.

But on to the SL-1200. I'm not entirely sure how eteller's account applies to putting my carbon fiber Pro-Ject 9c tonearm on the Technics. If I understand correctly, the job of a turntable is to operate with little wow/flutter and rumble. Nothing more. And it seems that the Technics does that better than my current table. So taking my better tonearm from my RM5 and putting it on the better turntable (regarding w/f and rumble), wouldn't it HAVE TO be better?

Please don't think I'm here to dissent. I very well may be leaving something out of the equation. If so, let me know. Always looking to learn

It's different strokes for different folks.

While I have greatly enjoyed listening to the Music Hall MMF 5.1, and think it's a worthy deck esp. with the Speed Box II, and I also will give it the leg up over a stock Technics, my alliance is with the Technics decks, when modified.

I have found the Technics to be quieter and the speed is tighter. And both of these can even be further improved.

I would love to hear the Pro-Ject arm on a 1200.

 

[eteller]

Let's not forget the platter, I think the Pro-Ject has the edge there being MDF and vinyl so it resonates at the exact same frequency as the LP does. Unlike the Technics which is lighter ringy aluminum in stock form.

 

[thedelihaus]

Technics platter combats that with the rubber adhered plate to the bottom and concentric rings.

I personally also add a TTweights copper mat I've modded myself with rubber damping for both intertia/mass and for even more additional damping. I currently run the Technics SP25, the studio version of the 1200 with different, heavier birch maple/rubber/inert material layered plinth and swappable arm boards. Platter is different, but of the same method of build.

The MDF platter is inert- a good thing, agreed. The Technics platter would be more likely to ring- but they have addressed this incorporating concentric grooves to break up any "bell' effect as well as that adhered, shape-formed rubber mat under the platter, and a top mat- rubber, ribbed aluminum, rubber.

 

[Bob_in_OKC]

The Speed Box hum is slightly audible during quieter tracks and definitely there on dead wax, especially through headphones. I'm returning it regardless.

But on to the SL-1200. I'm not entirely sure how eteller's account applies to putting my carbon fiber Pro-Ject 9c tonearm on the Technics. If I understand correctly, the job of a turntable is to operate with little wow/flutter and rumble. Nothing more. And it seems that the Technics does that better than my current table. So taking my better tonearm from my RM5 and putting it on the better turntable (regarding w/f and rumble), wouldn't it HAVE TO be better?

Please don't think I'm here to dissent. I very well may be leaving something out of the equation. If so, let me know. Always looking to learn

If there is nothing more to a turntable than low wow/flutter and rumble, then I wonder why pay the money for an SL-1200. I see less-expensive Technics models on Craigslist quite often and many of them are the same on those two specs.

 

[Ghumbs]

If there is nothing more to a turntable than low wow/flutter and rumble, then I wonder why pay the money for an SL-1200. I see less-expensive Technics models on Craigslist quite often and many of them are the same on those two specs.

This is entirely possible. Sadly I'm not well-versed on different Technics models. I'd be looking for a fully manual table, so if Technics makes one with the same specs for less, I'd love to know about it.