Hitachi HT-463

[seannc]

Greetings! I'm a new member. Having pretty much given up on an irreparable Dual 621, I bought a Hitachi HT-463 today that I found on craigslist. It looks to be in good condition and seems to work well.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of information online and the gentleman who sold it couldn't find the owner's manual. Does anybody here have any thoughts, suggestions on maintenance, ideas what Empire stylus I have (it's an Empire 2010 cartridge).

I'm also curious whether this turntable is a step up or down from the Dual 621.

Thank you!

Sean.

 

[GerardG]

Hitachi turntables are excellent machines. I purchased a Hitachi HT-561 for my father and found it to be very good indeed. In so far as the cartridge is concerned the Empire is also very good but I would consider a new stylus. There are several good vendors of new old stock and after market offerings around. Try to find a good NOS offering or at least an EVG or Jico for it.

And, welcome to AK! :yes:

Gerard

 

[seannc]

Thanks Gerard. I found a genuine stylus replacement on LPTunes.com for what looks to be a reasonable price.

 

[Roivas]

I can second that Hitachi made some great gear in the past. I have a stereo receiver, SR-903, and it is just phenomenal. One hopes that the turntable side of things was run just as well.

 

[zenith2134]

Hitachi was a good all-around company in my experience. I have used their VHS machines, vidicon cameras, integrated amplifiers, and TVs with rarely a problem. Back in the analog TV days they were known for having above-average CRTs in terms of longevity and performance.

 

[wualta]

And yet Hitachi is still overlooked in the audio kingdom, which is why I was able to afford a lot of it. Good stuff. But now, a word about that Empire cartridge:

That "2010" is a clone (Empire made zillions of "different" models that are really just clones of a few originals), in this case a clone of the 2000X (not to be confused with the 2000Z). It has one of Empire's best elliptical-tipped stylus assemblies on it, with a good lightweight cantilever. Plus, the body's inductance is low enough to accept one of the CD-4 capable styli from the famous 4000D series, should you ever find one.

The stylus currently being sold by LPGear/Tunes is not the same as the S917E stylus on the cartridge as originally sold ( I have both right here). It may be "genuine Empire" legally, but the important thing is that it doesn't have the features or the performance of the original stylus. That said, it's not a horrible stylus, and if you've already bought it, you might get some use out of it. Just know that it's not the same as the original-original.

 

[mythless]

I've had many Hitachi turntables and yes, Hitachi made some really nice stuff. But, like with every company they made a lot of mediocre gear. I can't comment on this particular table but, by the looks of it and strickly by the look, this may be one of Hitachi mediocre table. But, it is still a very nice turntable and a great entry level deck.

No idea on how it would compare with the Dual. But, maybe a step down as those Dual turntables had some really nice tonearms. Hard to compare, they are two different style of turntables.

 

[ETI_5000]

Welcome to AK, seannc.

I can confirm that your Hitachi was quite a good turntable. It cost less than the Technics SL-1200MkII (1979 Australian price AUD$377 versus Technics $419), and as some of that cost was for the fully automatic operation, it couldn’t be expected to match the fully manual Technics for performance.

The Dual 621 cost exactly the same price as the Technics, so was slightly more expensive than the HT-463. That may mean that the performance is slightly better for the Dual, but as I don’t have much info on that, it’s hard to say. The manufacturers’ specifications show the Hitachi rumble is ranked slightly better than the Dual, but that could just be Dual being more conservative. Wow and flutter can’t be compared, as they use different measurement standards. Both are fully automatic direct drive turntables with similar features. It may be that the Dual is slightly heavier as it has a wood base (hard to say, as they don't mention weight in the Dual owner's manual, so it may have sometimes been sold without a base), and so may resist acoustic feedback better, but in most respects they are probably fairly similar, being from (roughly) the same price range.

The Hitachi HT-463 was quite a decent performer, and in the reviews I have for each (by the same magazine) it actually matched the Technics SL-1200MkII for unweighted rumble, so it was pretty quiet. Other turntables with the same unweighted rumble result (measured by the same laboratory) included with direct drive the Akai AP-Q70C, Pioneer PL-400, Realistic Lab-500, Revox B795 and Technics SL-7, and with belt drive the Hitachi HT-320, Rega Planar 2 and Thorens TD-115. Of those, the only ones which were cheaper than the HT-463 were the Hitachi HT-320 and the Pioneer PL-400.

The only criticism that could be made of it, that was the same for many other cheaper model direct drive models of the time, is that it was relatively light (6.5kg). However, many other competitors such as the Technics SL-3200 (6.9kg) and JVC QL-A2 (6.5kg) were similar in weight.

Hitachi seem to be less well known these days as a hi-fi manufacturer, which is probably because they make lots of other stuff, and no longer make much (if any) hi-fi. They are a huge conglomerate operating in many different areas. Since I own a Hitachi cordless power drill, I can tell you they make good drills! The fact that their Japanese-market hi-fi was sold under the brand Lo-D rather than Hitachi also means it’s harder to find info on Japanese websites about Hitachi hi-fi. However, they weren’t alone in having different brand names around the world – witness Matsushita (Panasonic and Technics), Sharp (Optonica) and Toshiba (Aurex), among others that used a variety of brand names for their hi-fi.

All of the Hitachi turntables I have reviews for (which varied from an AUD$210 entry-level model up to a $500 one) were good performers, particularly for rumble (quietness) in relation to their price. If you want a copy of the HT-463 review, PM me your email address, and I’ll send it to you.

 

[seannc]

Thanks to ETI_5000 for the terrific info. I actually found what I think is the review you're referring to before buying the TT. Found it searching the forum.

A little disappointed to read that the stylus I've ordered isn't the real deal and perhaps there was a better alternative in the same price range, but I figure I can make do. wualta, any idea what I should adjust the counterweight to?

I'm still holding out a grain of hope that the Dual 621 can be spared. It's hard to find anyone nearby who knows how to service this thing. It's been in two repair shops for a total of eight (!) months. My uncle has offered me his Dual 1249. I may get my hands on it someday, but if no one around these parts knows how to repair it, it might just collect dust.

 

[wualta]

A little disappointed to read that the stylus I've ordered isn't the real deal and perhaps there was a better alternative in the same price range, but I figure I can make do. wualta, any idea what I should adjust the counterweight to?

Don't feel bad; I bought the same one you did with the same expectation. The problem is that an aftermarket stylus distributor bought Empire. So what's "genuine" now wouldn't have been considered "genuine" back in the day. And even when a company hasn't changed hands, there are instances of recently-manufactured styli (new factory in a different location, sometimes in a different country) not coming up to the standards of the products of 40 years ago. It's a different world.

I'd treat it as an aftermarket stylus and my experience with such has been that they require lots more VTF to sound decent. With the record not spinning, rest the stylus on the lead-in groove and try different VTFs and see how far the body sags. It'll be obvious when you're VTFing too heavily. I'm guessing you'll find that you have to track around 2g to keep this stylus tracking properly. I don't recall what I found on mine because I stopped using it when I found out it was, well, how to say it-- the real thing but not the original real thing.

There are tricks you can use to get the really-real S917E, but one way to tell the original is the word EMPIRE is in gold letters against the spiffy red metallic stylus guard.

 

[seannc]

By your description, it sounds like the stylus that came with the TT is a genuine S917-E. Does this photo help? Hard to take a close up, but the guard is metallic and the "Empire" is gold.

 

[wualta]

That is indeed how the original looks. The gold lettering wasn't obvious in the earlier photo. My replacement stylus grip is all metallic red, no gold lettering. The pudding-proof will be the appearance of the cantilever: dull gray, very thin and tapered, but not quite to a point.

 

[seannc]

I don't have a magnifying glass, but that description does fit the cantilever on the stylus.

This question will expose how new I am to this, but how can I tell if the stylus that came with the TT (possibly the original real thing) is still in good shape? I ordered a replacement under the assumption it needed replacing because of the age. How can I tell if the original has many hours of play left in it?

 

[wualta]

The stylus that came with the turntable is indeed an original. I assumed that you had installed your replacement already, but I was mistaken. We'll have to wait to see how that one looks.

The only sure way to know how much wear a diamond has is by microscope, one with specialized lighting that highlights wear spots on the diamond. It's rare for an audiophile to own such a thing, and it's rare these days for dealers to have them, so I've fallen back on listening tests with known-good LPs with known-difficult-to-track sibilants, since mistracking of this kind of signal is one of the first audible signs of stylus wear. I've settled on a Joe Jackson [now Bangles] disc from the early '80s, but obviously there are others. I've also picked a popular disc so I know if I somehow damage a disc by testing worn styli on it, I can always get another copy cheaply.

A good stylus plays strong sibilants cleanly, so they have a knife edge, metaphorically speaking. Pure S, no shhh or scxx; it's gotta be utterly smooth, clean.

Having another cartridge/stylus with known-good tracking ability for comparison isn't absolutely necessary but it's very helpful. When you know a groove contains a cleanly-engraved sibilant because cartridge/stylus A can track it, you have a basis for comparison with cartridge/stylus B.

And just fiy, there's a sticky in this forum about acquiring and equipping a microscope to do stylus examination, and I urge you to read it. In the meantime, get one of the 60x pocket/mini magnifiers from one of the Chinese vendors on eBay. I just got another one for 99 cents shipped. They won't check wear but, importantly, will check cleanliness.
PS: Hitachi made some very nifty and too-often-overlooked turntables.

 

[seannc]

Sorry for the confusion. I bought the TT over the weekend and it came with what we think might be the genuine original Empire stylus, the one in the picture. Even so, I ordered a replacement stylus under the assumption that the one that came with the TT needed replacing. I have not received the new one yet, but I'm assuming it won't be a genuine original.

Thanks for the information. Perhaps the (possibly) genuine original still has some life in it!

 

[wualta]

Thanks for the clarification. So future readers aren't confused, I've corrected my earlier posts.

Fingers crossed on the incoming stylus, but I'm afraid it will look like mine: shiny straight-sided cantilever tube, bonded rather than nude or diasa, no gold lettering. Still, use whatever methods are available to you to check the condition of the original stylus you have. The first step is to clean it thoroughly, and to check your work you'll need a magnifier of some kind.

 

[Wolfie62]

This is an old thread, but I have both, the same cartridge that I just bought, and the same 463 table. I have ALL of the original paperwork for the table, including the Quick Guide and warranty card. I can send a file of scanned copies.

It’s a truly great table! I also have the HT-460 table. It trounces the SL1200 MKII table! Both Hitachis have performed flawlessly, and I have stored my Denon DP45F and JVC QL Y5F while I enjoy these Hitachis.

Let me know if you need a copy.

 

[Balifly]

This is an old thread, but I have both, the same cartridge that I just bought, and the same 463 table. I have ALL of the original paperwork for the table, including the Quick Guide and warranty card. I can send a file of scanned copies.

It’s a truly great table! I also have the HT-460 table. It trounces the SL1200 MKII table! Both Hitachis have performed flawlessly, and I have stored my Denon DP45F and JVC QL Y5F while I enjoy these Hitachis.

Let me know if you need a copy.

Do both the Hitachi HT-460 and the Hitachi HT-463 both use the same cartridge alignment measure - 51 mm ?

 

[Wolfie62]

Do both the Hitachi HT-460 and the Hitachi HT-463 both use the same cartridge alignment measure - 51 mm ?

They both have identical pivot to spindle distance, the same tonearm. Depends on your alignment as to what your overhang will be. 51 mm doesn’t mean anything. I use the Conrad Hoffman arc protractor, DIN null points, Lofgren B alignment.

 

[Balifly]

They both have identical pivot to spindle distance, the same tonearm. Depends on your alignment as to what your overhang will be. 51 mm doesn’t mean anything. I use the Conrad Hoffman arc protractor, DIN null points, Lofgren B alignment.

Thank you for the information about the tone arm and spindle distance.

The "factory/manufacturer" uses the 51 mm cartridge alignment as illustrated in the the owner' manual of the Hitachi HT-463.