• 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

Cream of the Crop? Four new $500-$700 TTs discussed.

Jovinyl said:
Holst said:
I have the Moonbeam, The motor bearing developed a chatter a few years ago,

I also have a Moonbeam. It is about 11 years old. Contacted Sota with ser#. It might have developed a similar chatter sound. Mine sounded like something was off center sort of a thump sound every revolution on different LP's. Sent it to Sota for inspection and tuneup. I like the turntable for what it is. I did choose the Sota after researching along with the others mentioned though not the Sumiko. Rega and Sota got the coin toss in my decision.
Click to expand...

With my it seems a bearing got unseated, it went from dead silent so being able to hear it while sitting next to it. Let us know how it comes out.
Click to expand...
 
My Cream Of the Crop...

Hi,

Here are my choices for the 3 best Turntables that are good and affordable to the common audiophile.:yes:

1. Thorens TD-166 MKII
2. AR-XA
3. Pioneer PL-630

Put a midrange to good cartridge on any of these and they will sound GREAT!
As good or better than the other ones that are listed in this thread.

And they won't break your wallet.:thmbsp:

John.:music:
 
i have a planar 3 bought around '94 and love its simplicity..i can't compare with the others but generally i find less sonic differences between similarly priced fixed plinth designs than comparing a fixed plinth with a vintage suspended deck in the same price bracket...
a planar 3 and an ar eb101 sound quite different..although both were priced almost the same back in the day...
i have a fixed plinth(p3) and a suspended ariston rd60..both are good sounding..both from the same price bracket give or take a few £££'s but differ slightly in presentation...depending on the type of music being played..
the rega does instrument & vocal detail well and grips the elements in the music in a dry kinda clinical way...the ariston adds some ambience to that detail , trading a tiny bit of bass definition but adds an extra bit of depth and a few lower notes to the bass end of the audio spectrum...there is also a bit more spatial information...echoes...depth...stereo placement..etc
which i prefer generally falls down to what type of music i'm playing...
its nice to have both options if you have wide musical tastes..:scratch2:
 
My linear tracking turntable died several years ago. Control chip fried... couldn't find a replacement anywhere. I had bought it in late 70s early 80s. Cried for a week. Literally. Loved that puppy.

After searching for months, I chose the Music Hall mmf-5. At the time it was under $500. The Goldring lost it's diamond pretty quickly (months) so I replace it with a Grado.

Overall, it's an OK turntable but nothing to write home about. Being completely manual ticks me off a bit. It's competent at what it does, no rumble, good tracking, etc. It was also a bugger to balance for some reason.

Honestly, if I were to do it again, I'd purchase something else. Especially now as it's up to $700. The Sota comes to mind. Although for the automation along the Pioneer looks good also.

Quite frankly, part of me is thinking about a second mortgage and trying one of those laser LP players. http://www.elpj.com/
 
I inherited a MUSIC HALL MMF-5 and I needed the arm rest, record clamp and the little rubber nipple thingy that caps the ram of the arm lift. Music Hall was absolutely a PITA. I ended up getting a clamp from a UK dealer (Needles and Spins) who sells Pro-Ject (apparently they're made in the same factory (SEV)) and the guys at the NeedleDoctor found the plastic bits after weeks. That said we love the table with an Ortofon OM 20 Super but Roy Hall will never see a dime of my money.
 
Of those listed (and I've listened to them all) I prefer the Music Hall 5.1. With it I hear a more defined soundstage and great bass extenstion, mostly due I beleive to it's excellent isolation features and impeccable speed accuracy. The fact that it comes WITH "extras" such as the glass platter, built in record clamp, and a decent quality and more importantly correctly matched Goldring 1012GX cartridge ($300 MSRP) MORE than justifies the price difference IMO. In fact add the cost of the Goldring cartridge to any of the other decks listed and the incredible value of the 5.1 is readily apparent.

This takes out much of the guesswork and setup confusion for those just getting into audiophile grade vinyl reproduction, and introduces them to an important aspect of TT design that the entry level MM5.1 exudes... total symmetry of components.

Leave the SL-1200 to the DJs and scratchers IMO...:nono:






lol j/k Techies!:lmao:
JMO
WopOnTour
 
WopOnTour said:
Leave the SL-1200 to the DJs and scratchers IMO...:nono:

lol j/k Techies!:lmao:
JMO
WopOnTour
Click to expand...

You know the more I hear about the 1200 like an outcast the more I want to chuck it in the fireplace. Should've never listened to any 1200 advice. Cuz it was all from weird underground-like rebels who for some reason wanted to keep it afloat, just to spite the "others". Now I'm gonna be on the anti-1200 crusade! IMO, j/k, jmo, etc., etc.,
 
I've auditioned both the P2 and Xpression II and after I compared them for several days, I ultimately decided the Xpression is the better value. Out of the box, the P2 with the included Rega Bias cartridge (although you can buy it without a cart) had a more pleasing sound compared to the Xpression with the Sumiko Oyster cartridge. But considering the differences between the carts, I didn't think this was a proper comparison and decided to fit the Xpression with a Shure m97xe. Things certainly became more interesting with this combination -- there were definite sonic improvments which raised the sound quality significantly. I didn't bother trying to fit the P2 with the Shure cartridge to further the comparison for a few reasons. First, the quality of construction of the Xpression is better. It includes real hinges on the dust cover, a metal motor pulley, a metal spindle hub, and a heavier platter (however, they both use the same plinth material AFAIK). Second, the tonearm has VTA and azimuth adjustments (and has a carbon fibre arm tube -- but whether or not this is better, I can't comment). Third, it has height-adjustable aluminum cone feet. And finally, after factoring in total costs, the Xpression was cheaper and I preferred its sound compared to the stock configuration P2. I was not convinced the P2 was fundamentally a more capable TT compared to the Xpression, and that adding an upgraded cartridge would provide a compelling enough reason to choose it over the cheaper Xpression. Plus, I would have needed to add spacers to the tonearm because it sat too low for the Shure cart.

I should add my only complaint about the Xpression is the rather clumsy anti-skate adjustment. But once it's adjusted, it seems to work well enough.

But I guess I'll never know for certain whether or not the P2 could have provided better sound. All I know is that, with the sum of all things I have mentioned thus far, I feel confident in my decision. I've been extremely pleased with the Xpression thus far and have no desire to seek out anything better.
 
UpsideThe Head said:
The link below is to TNT Audio's Review of the KAB Technics 1200 with a side by side comparison to Music Hall TT's and also really good reviews for the other tables mentioned.

Suprised?

http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/technics_sl1200_2_e.html
Click to expand...

And this is the guy that wrote it:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/edit/arvind_e.html

Is he totally objective or is he excited/eager/hungry to write a review for tnt?

For every good review there's always a bad one, or more. I'm not so sure I believe some of this stuff anymore. Not jumpin on you UpsideThe Head, or anything like that, :smoke:
 
jfine said:
And this is the guy that wrote it:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/edit/arvind_e.html

Is he totally objective or is he excited/eager/hungry to write a review for tnt?

For every good review there's always a bad one, or more. I'm not so sure I believe some of this stuff anymore. Not jumpin on you UpsideThe Head, or anything like that, :smoke:
Click to expand...

The reviewer is more of a digital guy, which actually is good because he approached the subject of turntables with a open mind.
I don't know if you noticed but he also gave full reviews of many other tables, not just Technics 1200. He just found that the 1200 was the best of the bunch for half the money.
The thing about the 1200 is not that it has good or bad reviews, it's that it doesn't get mentioned. It's just weird that it is so roundly ignored by reviewers of the kind we find in most Audiophile type magazines. Why would you think that is? COUGHtheiradvertizersmake$2000+TT'sCOUGH. No offense taken.
 
UpsideThe Head said:
It's just weird that it is so roundly ignored by reviewers of the kind we find in most Audiophile type magazines. Why would you think that is? COUGHtheiradvertizersmake$2000+TT'sCOUGH. No offense taken.
Click to expand...

I dunno why really, who can really say?

The problem is, once a product starts to get bad mouthed for whatever reason, it's up to the buyer to somehow make an informed and educated opinion about that product. You cant feasibly buy 10 expensive products and line them up for A/B tests, unless you have money.

Not saying either that a product with no bad reviews is perfect.

But on the other hand, when you constantly see references to bad mouthing, for whatever the reason, you have to honestly say to yourself, there must be a reason for it. I am hesistant to think it's all nonsensical, or that it has to do with reasons other than honest and correct listening comparisons.
 
jfine said:
But on the other hand, when you constantly see references to bad mouthing, for whatever the reason, you have to honestly say to yourself, there must be a reason for it. I am hesistant to think it's all nonsensical, or that it has to do with reasons other than honest and correct listening comparisons.
Click to expand...

There are many reasons. Some may be that the maker isn't spending advertising bucks as intimated before. That unfortunately occurs in business. Most is probably just that people enjoy different sounds. Some people prefer belt drives TTs and that's it for them. Everything else is running last and they knock any non-belt drive table. If you have heard a decent belt drive table and prefer that sound to direct drive, then you do need to sell your table. I tend to prefer direct drive and idler tables and i've heard more than one good belt drive table. There is a different sound - more dynamic - with direct and idler - maybe not quite as black a background as belt drive but lots of life. I'm NOT putting down belt drive tables. It's like flavors of ice cream...I like pistachio...others don't...that doesn't make pistachio good or bad.

An eye-opening experience for me once was listening to a VERY expensive system that had been professionally set-up. It was conservatively a quarter million dollars in gear for a two channel stereo system.....and I hated it. I wasn't the only one who felt that way. This system was like nails on a blackboard to me and several others. The owner loved it.

I wouldn't trade an SL1200 for an MMF-5...or maybe even a Scout..but that's me. I've heard 'em both and the technics table sounds better to me. That's doesn't mean that it would sound better to someone else but I'm not alone either.

You'll need to listen as much as possible for yourself and then pay more attention to the people whose opinion you tend to agree with and who personally have heard the equipment...not just quoting some magazine...and who have some experience in hearing a variety. There will always be some folks who have similar tastes in sound. There really is no correct - and honest people have different opinions.
 
The point is the 1200 seems to get more negative comments than any other TT, IME. That alone leads one to think there must be some underlying truth somewhere.
 
jcmjrt said:
An eye-opening experience for me once was listening to a VERY expensive system that had been professionally set-up. It was conservatively a quarter million dollars in gear for a two channel stereo system.....and I hated it. I wasn't the only one who felt that way. This system was like nails on a blackboard to me and several others. The owner loved it.
Click to expand...

This really caught my attention, and not to go off topic too much, but did the setup include a turntable? If so I'd be really interested in knowing what kind of table it was, and, although this isn't really the place for it, I'd like to know what made it so bad.
 
He was basically a digital guy. Maybe you are too young to relate to the description of fingernails on a blackboard....I guess another description would be setting your teeth on edge. It was hyperclean/detailed and drove me (and it was amazing to see people bail) out of the room.

Jfine, what do YOUR ears tell you? Take your 1200 to a dealer and plug it in to a system with a different new TT and listen for yourself. Anything under a $1000 (and possibly more!) and I'll bet that you prefer the 1200...but do that test for yourself. If YOU prefer a belt drive or some other table then get it but do NOT let other people on a board convince you that your TT isn't good. I think it's by far the best new TT FOR THE MONEY. In the end, YOUR opinion is the only one that matters.
 
I have sinned, by ommission.

The Technics should have been in this list- it is a very nice table.

I should have also included a few other belt-drive models too, that I didn't- so the post is flawed.

But the original TTs I mentioned are an interesting lot, and alhough the 1200 isn't getting as much respect in some of the mags as it should, it's obviously a contender.

Remember- I run an SL-1300, and like it very much.

This post was only an attempt to generate discussion about the tables I mentioned, and if there were any other contenders (which there are), to bring them up.

It wasn't a dig against anyone's preference, or brand- just an attempt to generate interesting conversation.

jfine said:
The point is the 1200 seems to get more negative comments than any other TT, IME. That alone leads one to think there must be some underlying truth somewhere.
Click to expand...

Where?:scratch2:

If you're referring to folk who pooh-pooh Technics because it isn't exotic enough of a brand, maybe so. That's nothing to get upset over- so what, if someone rather buy an exotic name for "bling" effect, or so what if someone doesn't like the popular 1200- I imagine Technics is still selling tons more 1200s than what the other companies, possibly combined, are selling.

Most of the instances, the only times I see the 1200 get bad reviews is from folk who exclusively prefer a belt-drive (or other drive method) type of table over a direct drive table. Folks who don't like direct drive, whether by ear or by theory, aren't normally going to like the direct-drive 1200.

For those who do like direct drive tables, or for those who try to keep options open, the 1200 gets it's share of positive comments, credit, and respect. I've yet to hear an open-minded person bad-mouth a 1200.

I have, as an addendum, heard some open-minded folk say it wasn't thier favorite table, so be it, but I've yet to hear one slander or disregard it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom