Denon dp 80 vs yamaha gt 2000

Discussion in 'Turntables' started by filipealm, Oct 27, 2017.

  1. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    The evidence would be visual inspection of the spindles and thrust plates. The motor torque, fb speed control, and platter mass and momentum could cover thrust bearing wear or galling in use, unless the sleeve bearing galls and seizes from long term lack of lubrication, which isnt likely.
     
  2. theophile

    theophile Pheasant Plucker. Subscriber

    This to me is the GT 2000's biggest flaw. The difficulty in using other tonearms. Sure, one can unscrew the tonearm baseplate, cobble-up another baseplate for a different tonearm, but it is not an altogether straightforward endeavour. The hole in the plinth under the stock baseplate is neither large nor particularly deep. Hence my desire to either buy a GT 2000 with a damaged plinth or to fabricate a new plinth for mine, putting aside the stock plinth should I ever wish to part with the GT.

    The tonearms have some question marks about them, but they most definitely aren't utter rubbish. I am certainly of the opinion that they can be improved upon and have said that from even prior to owning mine. However, ask a GT 2000 owner, with a GT 2000 arm whether they are happy with the sonic quality of the package and the testimony is that they are delighted.

    I have always been of the opinion that the overriding strong point of the GT 2000 remains the motor/motor-control electronics. I speculate that those elements could benefit further from being replinthed, matched to a better arm and one of the heavier platters. I have no evidence of that, but it is my speculation. There does not( to the best of my knowledge) exist an aftermarket industry in Japan to enable replinthing.

    There are more than one aftermarket tonearm baseplates for the GT 2000 for sale in Japan, so that suggests to me that word of mouth testimony has stimulated further investigation into tonearm alternatives. As does SAEC producing a specific tonearm model for the GT 2000 to substitute for the stock and optional Yamaha tonearms.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  3. theophile

    theophile Pheasant Plucker. Subscriber

    So I'm guessing that you haven't found any evidence of anyone presenting this as a problem which has arisen?
     
    808_state likes this.
  4. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    I haven't actively researched the deterioration of G-2000 spindle thrust bearings, so, no. I dont know of specific disassembly and inspection suggestions on these or other direct drive motor spindle bearings, specifically the load bearing thrust ball and plate area, but it seems a good idea to do so periodically to check condition of bearings and lubricant.
     
  5. totem

    totem AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,059
    Location:
    Vancouver B.C.
    theo I didn't delete my post although it seems to be back on track for the moment.
     
  6. theophile

    theophile Pheasant Plucker. Subscriber

    There is a Japanese blog written by the engineer who designed both the motor for the Japan Victor TT-81 and the motor for the GT 2000. In that blog he specifically recommends that the bearing requires no further lubrication.
     
  7. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    Interesting! I've seen that with many older exa himples of various turntables.
    I do wonder tho what the design service life was estimated. I suspect much of what we treasure and use still is way beyond the ecpected service life, most of the crappy stuff in constant use went years ago.
    Even so, as far down the road as we are with the remaining older good stuff, a disassembly, inspection and relubing might be prudent for prolonged reliable service.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2017
  8. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2017
    fiddlefye likes this.
  9. fiddlefye

    fiddlefye AK Subscriber Subscriber

  10. Mister Pig

    Mister Pig Pigamus Maximus Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,840
    Location:
    Olympia Washington
    I do not own a GT 2000 or any of its variants, so I cannot comment on how that particular table does sound. I do own A DP 75, which is the US imported version of the DP 80 minus the pitch controls. From people who own them, the are considered to be on the same level. I also own a SP 10 MK II.

    The comments I have are this. I do not think holding the Japanese hobbyist up as some infallible arbiter on analog performance is a good idea. We did that with the British audiophile and hi fi press, and this brought us the perceived dominance of the LP 12. Secondly, while the GT 2000 is not cheap when new, as an integrated package it is less expensive than buying a DP 80, SAEC arm, and a plinth. The consideration of value to the Japanese audiophile may have influenced its popularity and sale numbers. In short, it was a great deal.

    Now when you have a piece that is as popular as the basic 2000 was in Japan, is that what most audiophiles want to own? From what I have observed of human nature, people who prize their audio equipment want it to be distinctive and perhaps even rare. So the upgrades to the stock table have an interested audience, and I doubt the Japanese audiophile is significantly different than their world wide brethren. Then comes the discussion of value, diminishing returns, and what incremental improvements are worth. These concepts are bandied around here on a weekly basis, and there is no reason that the GT 2000 should be immune to these same equations. Exactly what does one get when they buy some of these upgrades, such as the high mass platter: improved performance, exclusivity, or a combination of both? What I do know is that when I put a high mass platter on my SP 10, I hated the end result, and returned to the stock platter. And this movement of putting a high mass platter on the SP 10 MK II originated in Japan. See what I mean about the dangers of thinking the Japanese hobbyist is infallible?

    So what does this post mean? What am I trying to say? Not much. Other than that sometimes we create solutions to problems that do not need solving. That certain revered groups are given an aura of superiority that may or may not be appropriate. That all of us desire to be distinctive, and even unique. One way be can do that is by owning treasures that others do not. As I think about it, its going to be extremely difficult to do a side by side comparison of a GT 2000 and a DP 80, unless the owner is willing to obtain a second matching Yamaha arm to make this comparison fair. To be even more "fair" the DP 80 would also need a plinth built in the same manner as the GT 2000, along with the Yamaha arm. Otherwise the comparison is of two similar analog "systems" but they are not close enough to make definitive declarations that the drive unit, platter, bearing, logic control, resonance control, or design of one unit is inherently superior to the other.

    Here is an idea. Why don't we just buy the turntables we enjoy, that give us satisfaction in listening to music, and spin our favorite records. I have owned several types of turntables over the last few years, making an exploration of some well regarded tables. I found excellent examples of idler drives, belt drives, and direct drives. I have to admit I prefer these two direct drives to the others I have owned. Also, that one day I may try an uber belt drive, if I feel compelled to do so. But what I do know is that I can find genuine enjoyment in all types of better quality turntables. There is joy to be had in owning a GT 2000, SP 10, DP 80, SOTA, Oracle, Linn LP 12, VPI, Merrill, Townshend, Well Tempered, Vyoyd, Transrotor, and many many others. Turntables are distinctive, buy the one that suits you the best.

    Regards
    Mister Pig
     
  11. muovimies

    muovimies Super Member

    Messages:
    1,510
    Location:
    Finland
    I think there's more significant differences between DP-75 & DP-80 than the pitch controls. For one thing, I think only the DP-80 uses the 3-phase motor. Also you could buy about one and a half DP-75 for the price of one DP-80 :) If the performance was very close indeed, I'd imagine the DP-75 sold better by far. That ~30,000jpy difference I believe bought you a decent tonearm back then.

    As for the rest of your post, well put.
     
  12. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    The DP-80 iirc had an outrotor AC motor, my DP-55K a more conventional AC motor. Don't remember which in the DP-75
     
  13. Mister Pig

    Mister Pig Pigamus Maximus Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,840
    Location:
    Olympia Washington
    That is another point that is hard to resolve. From info that has been passed on from folks who service these, their perspective is that the 80 has no significant improvement in SQ over the 75. Although there is some discussion regarding improved torque on the 80, and that it comes up to speed incrementally quicker. And sometimes we create solutions to problems that do not exist....I happen to have a $4K cartridge on my DP 75, and it performs pretty well, it appears the table can support that level of cartridge. But I cannot say from my own experience that a 80 and 75 are equal. Perhaps you can weigh in on that with some comparative experience? Sure the price difference is significant, but engineers have never been known to overbuild things for their flagship piece, have they? These days I find that there is less and less that I am sure of beyond a shadow of a doubt. Ask me these questions ten years ago, and I would say advances in resonance control and materials engineering would have meant the modern belt drive table is a superior turntable over an 80's era direct drive. With recently acquired experience, I could not make those same statements.

    Regards
    Mister Pig
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2017
  14. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    My DP-55K uses afaik the same motor as the other mid-market Denon AC drive TTs, DP-60L and similar. The DP-75 iirc was the entry level high end Denon AC drive TT.
     
  15. muovimies

    muovimies Super Member

    Messages:
    1,510
    Location:
    Finland
    I don't know, maybe you misunderstood something in my post or I wasn't clear, but at no point did I mean to imply the difference in price between the models would mean significant differences in SQ as well. Just pointing there's more differences between them than one having pitch controls and other not. I have no experience with either table, only what I have read over the internet (I was at one point contemplating getting either DP-75 or DP-80 shipped from Japan, and actually got as far as making a "test run" with a DP-3000 which is plentiful in Japan and sells for peanuts, though shipping is very expensive...) - and what I have read over the internet is mostly the same what you already said, there's not much if anything between them in terms of SQ.

    EDIT: read my original post again, I think my syntax was not correct and I ended up saying something I didn't mean. Replace "was" with "is" and maybe it makes more sense...
     
  16. Onvinyl

    Onvinyl New Member

    Messages:
    15
    Location:
    Germany
    This is a bit OT, but I did make comparisons. Few years ago I got a Garrard 401, got it made a modern resonance optimized plinth, polished the motor spindle a dozen times and fitted a spindle bearing from ATA and replaced the idler wheel. It finally bested my equally modded Thorens TD125MKII. I had a Denon DP3000 at that time, as well in a custom made plinth made of modern materials. 401 was better. Than I got a Sony TTS4000 in an diy plinth (not by me). It has all the slam of the 401 and more detail refinement (when choosing an appropriate arm, a SAEC 407/23 w Supex Cart could clearly show the diffs). Without the Analog Tube Audio bearing on the 401 it would have no chance at all. I sold the 401 and the Denon.
    Then came the GT-2000. It had more authority, body of instruments and better long term speed stability. The very top end was smoother with the sony. I blame that on the tonearm, I could not fit the SAEC on the yamaha.
    That all is highly subjective I know, but I‘m hearing music subjectivly...

    Onvinyl

    [What is ‚body of instruments‘? I‘m a drummer and I not only hear music, but feel it (I also have visual impressions when I hear music, so different sources do look different with eyes closed). With good analog the presence of the musical instruments is (much) stronger than wiht digitall, the strrongest with reel to reel mastertape copies. Unfrtly, I don‘t have any...]
     
    Pio1980 likes this.
  17. nailer

    nailer audionerd Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,953
    Location:
    DFW
    Don't we all pretty much do this? I have since 1974 when I bought my first turntable.

    Excellent post. My only quibble is that I'm thinking well designed plinths have significantly less sonic impact than well designed motor units.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2017
  18. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    23,442
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    Both, imo with a direct drive unit.
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2017
  19. EngineerNate

    EngineerNate AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    881
    I'm with the Pig on this one. It's difficult to compare tables that are supplied as a integrated unit with tables that are supplied as a motor system only. There are too many variables.

    I still have to think that given equal design quality, two drive units with wow and flutter specs well below the audible threshold and having well designed non-ringing plattters will perform similarly. Differences in tonearms and cartridges are much more difficult to quantify.
     
  20. Mister Pig

    Mister Pig Pigamus Maximus Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,840
    Location:
    Olympia Washington
    Quibble? Is that a cousin to the infamous tribble of Star Trek lore? Do they hate Klingons as much as the tribble does? Perhaps they are a French Canadian tribble from Quebec? Please do tell us about these quibbles!

    Regards
    Mister Pig
     
    fiddlefye likes this.

Share This Page