Technics 1X00/1X50 Series - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly
- Thread starter 4Play
- Start date
I think both. Summarizing what the TS stated:
A reference thread for owners or potential owners of SL-1X00/1x50 series (SL-1300/1350 to 1900/1950 series) turntables covering:
- how do they rank in the Technics hierarchy?
- What makes one model a better choice than the others (pros/cons)?
- What makes one model more popular than the other in terms of features and technology?
- And pictures welcome and most appreciated.
So far we've had discussions such as:
- the SL-1900 and its differences with the others
- I and boreas provided some info regarding common issues that cropped up with the SL-1700 and SL-1401.
- some of the common references located off this board have been linked to. - we've perhaps had a bit of 'leakage' regarding SL-1100 / SL-1200 models ... but I guess to make some of those comparisons one has to include them. (IMHO at least the armless models (e.g. SL-150) should be included in the discussion).
... and yup, we've had some pics.
Few things that come to mind that would help flesh out some of the info in this thread are:
- links to other threads where issues such as SL-13/14/1500 Mk2 cueing repairs are discussed. I believe there are a couple sources out there now for 3D printed replacement parts.
- other issues, such as sourcing the SL-16/1700 Mk2 tonearm belt.
- do we want to identify what models beyond the armless ones lend themselves to tonearm upgrades (and good sources for armboards)?
- do we want to get into discussion of cartridges and alignments?
A reference thread for owners or potential owners of SL-1X00/1x50 series (SL-1300/1350 to 1900/1950 series) turntables covering:
- how do they rank in the Technics hierarchy?
- What makes one model a better choice than the others (pros/cons)?
- What makes one model more popular than the other in terms of features and technology?
- And pictures welcome and most appreciated.
So far we've had discussions such as:
- the SL-1900 and its differences with the others
- I and boreas provided some info regarding common issues that cropped up with the SL-1700 and SL-1401.
- some of the common references located off this board have been linked to. - we've perhaps had a bit of 'leakage' regarding SL-1100 / SL-1200 models ... but I guess to make some of those comparisons one has to include them. (IMHO at least the armless models (e.g. SL-150) should be included in the discussion).
... and yup, we've had some pics.
Few things that come to mind that would help flesh out some of the info in this thread are:
- links to other threads where issues such as SL-13/14/1500 Mk2 cueing repairs are discussed. I believe there are a couple sources out there now for 3D printed replacement parts.
- other issues, such as sourcing the SL-16/1700 Mk2 tonearm belt.
- do we want to identify what models beyond the armless ones lend themselves to tonearm upgrades (and good sources for armboards)?
- do we want to get into discussion of cartridges and alignments?
Decibel_116
AK Subscriber
Speaking for myself, I think yes. These topics address optimizing performance for these turntables.
Right. Maybe I can contribute to this. First things first!
Part 1: The Basics
The brand
Matsushita mostly made Technics turntables, but the older ones / ones for the domestic market have the "National" brand or sometimes National Technics.
Also there have been some turntables made under the National Panasonic name. To my best knowledge however, the 1100-2000 series were always branded "National Technics" or "Technics".
Technics model naming system
1. Prefix
All the turntables have the SL- prefix, so in Technics language this simply means "turntable".
2. Colors
The third digit in the name designates the color: 0 stands for metallic grey or silver, 1 for the typical Technics brown-black. So:
SL-1300 = silver, SL-1310 = black, SL-1301 = silver, SL-1311 = black.
The first SL series had a light grey and lush satin brown-black finish.
The MK2 SL series had a metallic silver and matte brown-black finish.
Because of this I personally prefer the first SL series in black and the MK2 SL series in silver.
3. Make
First make = no suffix (which means no MK1): SL-1300
Second make = MK2: SL-1300MK2
MK1 is sometimes used by people to make sure that others understand it's not a MK2 they are talking about. Sometimes people write MK2 as MKII but it actually is MK2. (The only true MKII I know of is the SP-10MKII).
Do not get confused by the MK2 designation: the MK2 series has very little in common with the "MK1" series. Actually, a 1300MK2 has much more in common with a 1301 and a 1600MK2. And a 1300 has much more in common with a 1600 than with a 1300MK2. You get the picture.
Just consider the MK2 designation as a means that enabled Technics to expand their famous SL-1x00 line.
4. Automation
The different series were made in 4 models: automatic, semi-automatic, manual and armless manual (the latter was indicated by dropping the last digit). Note, this applies to the MK-none series as well as the MK2 series.
auto / semi / manual / armless / changer
13xx / 14xx / 15xx / 15x / 1350 (black changer!)
16xx / 17xx / 18xx / - / 1650 (silver changer!)
Timeline
First product range (around '75): SL-13x0, SL-14x0, SL-15x0
Second product range (around '77): SL-16x0, SL-17x0, SL-18x0
In between product range (around 78): SL-13x1, SL-14x1, SL-15x1
Third product range (around '78): SL-13x0MK2, SL-14x0MK2, SL-15x0MK2
Fourth product range (around '80): SL-16x0MK2, SL-17x0MK2, SL-18x0MK2
Note that the introduction year - as well as the number of years that it was available - highly depends on the country, and also that the timelines overlap.
For example in the US, in '77 and '78 the second and third range were available, and in '79 both the third and the fourth range were available. I think Japan and the US did usually get the new range first, then Germany and the UK, after that the rest of the world.
Ranking (subjective!)
Based on selling prices, specs and how the products were ranked when 2 series were available at the same time I think the ranking should be as follows:
1. third range (it has the best specs - weight, heaviest platter, torque, quartz, VTA, TNRC) - and was ranked above the fourth range in the '79 US catalogs)
2. fourth range (it has the second best specs, quartz, VTA, TNRC)
3. in between range (heavy platter, quartz, rubber-damped bottom plate )
4. second range (floating subchassis, rubber-damped bottom plate)
5. first range (no floating subchassis and plastic non-damped bottom)
This by no means this order is absolute and reflects the sound quality that can be attained by these players, there are many factors involved there.
Also, there are many nuances. For example, the knobs, motor, platter, arm of the first range seem slightly bigger / heavier built than that of the second series. But to me the floating subchassis and metal bottom plate with rubber slab damping of the second series is more important. Other series
Let me finish with the 2 series that do not really belong to this thread because they are each a series of their own:
SL-1100, SL-110, SL-1200, SL-120: the first Technics Direct Drive models from 1971/72, great quality, heavy, but a different motor system (not integrated with the platter) and not available in different colors.
SL-1900, SL-1950 and SL-2000: the odd-ball, inevitable "me-too!" models from 1977.
Not the same quality, no full metal chassis but plastic, only available in black. Still very decent performers though!
Last edited:
A word about the timeline since we're getting into the nitty gritty.
The 1100 came in 1971, predating the 110 and 1200 (1972). The 1300 came in 1974, and the 1400/1500 in 1975.
Interesting historical graphic:
http://i.imgur.com/bGOb5YK.jpg
The 1100 came in 1971, predating the 110 and 1200 (1972). The 1300 came in 1974, and the 1400/1500 in 1975.
Interesting historical graphic:
http://i.imgur.com/bGOb5YK.jpg
boreas
"If it sounds good, it IS good." E.K.E.
Excellent post but I'm going to nit-pick you a little bit here.
The 1301, 1401 and 1501 were quartz locked direct drives like the MK2 versions of the 1300, 1400 and 1500 but the "01" motor was less powerful. It seems to have been, at the time, it's own motor, developed specifically for those three turntables. Later on, however, it appeared in the SL-Q2 and Q3 as did the tonearm.
Also, the cabinet/plinth for the "01" turntables is the exact same casting as the "MK1" versions of the 1300, 1400 and 1500. The controls are different but the control locations are the same.
The tonearm of the "01" turntables is essentially the same within these two groups but the "01s" lack adjustable VTA.
So, the "01" tables share certain things with both the MK1 and MK2 1300, 1400 and 1500 but they are different from both in some important respects. They're probably closer to the Q2 and Q3 (same motor and arm) but, of course, the "01s" are suspended and the Q2 and Q3 aren't.
John
MX5Seeker
Prog-aholic
Excellent overview! I learned quite a lot. :tresbon:
Excellent corrections / additions about the dating of the 1100/1200/1300 series, thanks.
Correct, that's exactly what I tried to say with my positioning of this series. It's a nice hybrid with some of the good points of the MK1 and the MK2, though not a full MK2 (apart from the torque, also the VTA and pitch control comes to mind).
Just curious, when you say the 1301/1401/1501 have the exact same motor as the Q series, you mean the circuit board, or just the circuit scheme (quartz locked, amount of torque, electronic brake).
The stator and the rotor are surely very similar in a lot of these series: platter/spindle fit aside I bet the motor coils and magnet ring could be exchanged between many of them.
Correct, that's exactly what I tried to say with my positioning of this series. It's a nice hybrid with some of the good points of the MK1 and the MK2, though not a full MK2 (apart from the torque, also the VTA and pitch control comes to mind).
Just curious, when you say the 1301/1401/1501 have the exact same motor as the Q series, you mean the circuit board, or just the circuit scheme (quartz locked, amount of torque, electronic brake).
The stator and the rotor are surely very similar in a lot of these series: platter/spindle fit aside I bet the motor coils and magnet ring could be exchanged between many of them.
boreas
"If it sounds good, it IS good." E.K.E.
This. ^^ I didn't say "exact" though. I don't have access to a Q2 or Q3 so I don't know how far the similarities extend beyond the above.
John
Having repaired them pretty much all I can tell you they are all the same, but different.
Motor board and magnet are identical (or at least very, very similar) between virtually all of the contemporary ('75-'80) series. The (quality of the) materials used, the construction, the bearing, the number of coils, the magnet, they are all the same.
In this respect I consider a SL-1300 to 2000 to be just as excellent as a SL-D2, SL-Q2, SL-1600, SL-5300, SL-10 etc for that matter, and also as excellent as the MK2 series, which just happen to have more torque but the rest is the same. My opinion is that the extra large amount of torque is not important unless you go scratching or DJ-ing. The cheaper direct drive models still have a lot of torque compared to most of the direct drive competitors, and even more compared to the belt drives.
The other main variation that can be found is the PCB integrated motor coils combined with the flat platter magnet. This variation is used in the newer "flatline" series like the SL-D202, SL-Q202, SL-D22 etc but also the SL-7, SL-6, etc. I have never been able to conclude is there is any quality loss involved with this variation, compared to the standard motor construction. One thing is for sure, the published specs do not show any difference.
Same story goes for the arms - no matter how often you see people claim that the SL-1200MK2 arm is vastly superior to a simpler, say SL-Q2 arm. The quality of the bearings of an SL-D2, SL-Q2, SL-1200MK2 or SL-1300MK2 etc is the same, they are made from the same materials and machined the same way. There is just some variation in the gimbal suspension geometry, in the total arm mass and the (lack of a) VTA adjustment feature.
More significant differences can be found in features like suspension, platter weight, application of rubber for damping, Quartz Lock, VTA adjustment, electronic v.s. mechanical switches, that kind of things. Then there are the obvious differences like the dust cover and base material: with the D2 they dropped the metal base and used a cheaper dust cover, with the Q2 they kept the metal base but still had that dust cover with the dreaded, cheap hinges.
I think that Matsushita made some very smart choices in cost reduction, keeping the performance of their turntables as constant as possible by leaving the core essentials (almost) unchanged.
If anybody wants to know about differences between particular models, just let me know. I repaired many of them and have taken pictures of many of the insides, so I don't have to rely on just my memory.
Motor board and magnet are identical (or at least very, very similar) between virtually all of the contemporary ('75-'80) series. The (quality of the) materials used, the construction, the bearing, the number of coils, the magnet, they are all the same.
In this respect I consider a SL-1300 to 2000 to be just as excellent as a SL-D2, SL-Q2, SL-1600, SL-5300, SL-10 etc for that matter, and also as excellent as the MK2 series, which just happen to have more torque but the rest is the same. My opinion is that the extra large amount of torque is not important unless you go scratching or DJ-ing. The cheaper direct drive models still have a lot of torque compared to most of the direct drive competitors, and even more compared to the belt drives.
The other main variation that can be found is the PCB integrated motor coils combined with the flat platter magnet. This variation is used in the newer "flatline" series like the SL-D202, SL-Q202, SL-D22 etc but also the SL-7, SL-6, etc. I have never been able to conclude is there is any quality loss involved with this variation, compared to the standard motor construction. One thing is for sure, the published specs do not show any difference.
Same story goes for the arms - no matter how often you see people claim that the SL-1200MK2 arm is vastly superior to a simpler, say SL-Q2 arm. The quality of the bearings of an SL-D2, SL-Q2, SL-1200MK2 or SL-1300MK2 etc is the same, they are made from the same materials and machined the same way. There is just some variation in the gimbal suspension geometry, in the total arm mass and the (lack of a) VTA adjustment feature.
More significant differences can be found in features like suspension, platter weight, application of rubber for damping, Quartz Lock, VTA adjustment, electronic v.s. mechanical switches, that kind of things. Then there are the obvious differences like the dust cover and base material: with the D2 they dropped the metal base and used a cheaper dust cover, with the Q2 they kept the metal base but still had that dust cover with the dreaded, cheap hinges.
I think that Matsushita made some very smart choices in cost reduction, keeping the performance of their turntables as constant as possible by leaving the core essentials (almost) unchanged.
If anybody wants to know about differences between particular models, just let me know. I repaired many of them and have taken pictures of many of the insides, so I don't have to rely on just my memory.
Last edited:
boreas
"If it sounds good, it IS good." E.K.E.
I absolutely agree.... DJing as in clubs and as in broadcasting. The two turntables I use regularly now are a "low-torque" SL-1401 and a "high-torque" SL-1600 MK2. The fact that the 1600 has 50% more starting torque than the 1401 has absolutely no influence on any aspect of normal playback. In fact, I actually prefer listening to the 1401. They're so close that my preference may be the result of some underlying consideration (like appearance) so, suffice it to say, I'd be equally delighted with either as my only turntable.
John
To me it's the black stripe along the front. I think they look better and cleaner without it.
Decibel_116
AK Subscriber
Well that explains more than a few things to me, dutchflea. It also confirms some of my assumptions as far as quality and performance thoughout the Technics lines. For one thing, my SL-Q3 seems to perform at the same level as my SL-1200M3D as far as sound quality goes. VTA can be a pain sometimes, though.
For fun let me just show you some pics I took of the motor of the SL-1300, SL-1600mk2 and SL-1300mk2. Apart from some variation in how the spindle is mounted, you'll notice the large similarities in the materials, general design, the drive coils and (inner, small) speed detection coils.
SL-1300, the first generation.
SL-1600mk2, the fourth generation, which is identical to the SL-1200mk2. See the big similarities with the first-gen SL-1300?
SL-1300mk2, the third generation, with the extra inner ring serving for the (quartz-locked!) pitch control but otherwise the same
SL-1300, the first generation. Notice the nice thick platter rim and the that the platter is (dynamically) balanced by drilling a hole at the correct place.
SL-1600mk2, the fourth generation, which is identical to the SL-1200mk2. Notice the big similarity with the first generation SL-1300. Also notice the platter is not dynamically balanced with a 1600mk2 / 1200mk2
SL-1300mk2, the third generation, with the extra inner ring serving for the (quartz-locked!) pitch control but otherwise the same. Notice the extra-thick platter rim. And again, as with the SL-1300, the platter is dynamically balanced by the right amount of holes at the right places.
Hope this gives some insight in how an older generation SL compares to the well-known SL-1200mk2.
SL-1300, the first generation.
SL-1600mk2, the fourth generation, which is identical to the SL-1200mk2. See the big similarities with the first-gen SL-1300?
SL-1300mk2, the third generation, with the extra inner ring serving for the (quartz-locked!) pitch control but otherwise the same
SL-1300, the first generation. Notice the nice thick platter rim and the that the platter is (dynamically) balanced by drilling a hole at the correct place.
SL-1600mk2, the fourth generation, which is identical to the SL-1200mk2. Notice the big similarity with the first generation SL-1300. Also notice the platter is not dynamically balanced with a 1600mk2 / 1200mk2
SL-1300mk2, the third generation, with the extra inner ring serving for the (quartz-locked!) pitch control but otherwise the same. Notice the extra-thick platter rim. And again, as with the SL-1300, the platter is dynamically balanced by the right amount of holes at the right places.
Hope this gives some insight in how an older generation SL compares to the well-known SL-1200mk2.
My SL-1401 arrived with a stuck 45 RPM button and undamped cuing too. The cuing responded to "Method A" in the service bulletin (squirt the silicone in from the top).
I was able to free up the 45 RPM button by popping the button cover off from the top and thereby exposing the switch. I could then squirt the DeoxIT in from the top. All told, both fixed would have taken less than 15 minutes.
Currently I have that 1401 and a 1600 MK2. Love them both but for some reason I prefer the "lesser" 1401. It seems to have a "blacker" background.
John
I just got a1401 in nice shape but I have the same problem 45 button not working. Do the buttons actually move at all? They both seem to be frozen. How did you pop the button cover off?
Thank you
boreas
"If it sounds good, it IS good." E.K.E.
The buttons don't move much, just a tiny amount but they do move.
I didn't take the covers off. What I did, as I recall, was to squirt some DeoxIT around the edge of the button and then let it sit for a while. Then I worked the buttons, changing speed until the one that had been stuck felt as free as the other one.
I suspect the only way to remove the button covers is to access them from inside the turntable.
John
I own three turntables from this series, an original SL-1200, a SL-1300, and a SL-1301. The SL-1200, of course, is the predecessor of the long-lived SL-1200Mk2. The tonearm is quite different from that used by pretty much every Technics turntable model which came later. I mostly use it in radio station DJ capabilities, though it works just fine for regular hi-fi use in a pinch.
Haven't done much with my SL-1300 yet (still needs a fair amount of work), but the SL-1301 is an interesting case. Unlike what others have mentioned, it has more in common with the SL-1600 than the SL-1300 which came before it. I believe the 1x01 series was introduced as a stop-gap series, while they were still putting the finishing touches on the SL-1600/1700/1800Mk2 series, after the SL-1300/1400/1500Mk2s and their various cueing issues. It currently has issues with the automatic mechanism, and has suffered from intermittent speed glitches in the past, but seems to work fairly well overall.
Haven't done much with my SL-1300 yet (still needs a fair amount of work), but the SL-1301 is an interesting case. Unlike what others have mentioned, it has more in common with the SL-1600 than the SL-1300 which came before it. I believe the 1x01 series was introduced as a stop-gap series, while they were still putting the finishing touches on the SL-1600/1700/1800Mk2 series, after the SL-1300/1400/1500Mk2s and their various cueing issues. It currently has issues with the automatic mechanism, and has suffered from intermittent speed glitches in the past, but seems to work fairly well overall.
vwestlife
Super Member
I purchased a 1350 new in 1975. Still have the 2 multi-play spindles and original overhang gauge. Recently brought it back out of storage. Had it serviced. Damn thing still won't retain fluid in cueing lever.
So...I just lower the arm very carefully and go on about my business. Other than normal speed pot cleaning, it's been like a rock.
Snagged a 1300 a few months ago. Had it serviced and it plays like new. 'Nother rock.
One thing I did for VTA on both tts: I bought 2 more rubber platter mats; one for each unit so that I can adjust the record height with cartridges that have different vertical lengths. I add or remove a mat as needed and keep the carts as level as possible without getting stupid trying to shim each cart. Works pretty well, IMHO.
just my $0.02
So...I just lower the arm very carefully and go on about my business. Other than normal speed pot cleaning, it's been like a rock.
Snagged a 1300 a few months ago. Had it serviced and it plays like new. 'Nother rock.
One thing I did for VTA on both tts: I bought 2 more rubber platter mats; one for each unit so that I can adjust the record height with cartridges that have different vertical lengths. I add or remove a mat as needed and keep the carts as level as possible without getting stupid trying to shim each cart. Works pretty well, IMHO.
just my $0.02
Similar threads
