• Please note that there are a few updates and clarifications made in the Audiokarma Rules, mostly relating to advertising and the addition of the new "Paying it Forward" & "Giving back" forums in the AudioKarma Audio Marketplace section.

How good is a Technics SL1200MK2... I mean really, how good is it?

Great info and opinions. Now I really can't wait till parts get here. I just ordered a orig head shel and I'm thinking a denon 103 cart. The rest of the stuff I've been eying is gonna have to wait till I plug this thing in and hear it sing.
 
boostedb18 said:
Great info and opinions. Now I really can't wait till parts get here. I just ordered a orig head shel and I'm thinking a denon 103 cart. The rest of the stuff I've been eying is gonna have to wait till I plug this thing in and hear it sing.
Click to expand...
DL-103 is not a real good match for the stock arm compliance-wise as it is a pretty low compliance cartridge. You may need to add more weight to the counterweight (or use an auxiliary weight) as the 103 is a bit on the heavy side. Also, the DL-103 is not quite as tall as other cartridges so you may need to stack mats as even with the VTA ring set to zero, the cartridge will be "nose down".

Speaking from experience here, as I recently put the same cartridge on my SL-1200MK2. Not trying to talk you out of it as I was fairly happy with the end result, but it can be a bit more than a simple cartridge swap.
 
mprince said:
DL-103 is not a real good match for the stock arm compliance-wise as it is a pretty low compliance cartridge. You may need to add more weight to the counterweight (or use an auxiliary weight) as the 103 is a bit on the heavy side. Also, the DL-103 is not quite as tall as other cartridges so you may need to stack mats as even with the VTA ring set to zero, the cartridge will be "nose down".

Speaking from experience here, as I recently put the same cartridge on my SL-1200MK2. Not trying to talk you out of it as I was fairly happy with the end result, but it can be a bit more than a simple cartridge swap.
Click to expand...
Hrm what would you recommend? I was gonna get one to try regardless figured id throw it on the mkII just to see.
 
I guess you could shoe horn a DL-103 onto the 1200 but there are a number of way better cartridges that are an easy compliance fit to the 1200 tonearm that will work with the standard factory headshell and without the add on counterweight. Why make things difficult for a bottom of the Denon line cartridge that was designed for very heavy tonearms.
 
They were a remarkable bargain a few years ago when they could be had brand new for $375 (which is what I paid in 2007 - amazing!). I had a bunch of mods done to it and enjoyed it quite a bit; it was my first "good" turntable. I no longer have it though.
 
majick47 said:
I guess you could shoe horn a DL-103 onto the 1200 but there are a number of way better cartridges that are an easy compliance fit to the 1200 tonearm that will work with the standard factory headshell and without the add on counterweight. Why make things difficult for a bottom of the Denon line cartridge that was designed for very heavy tonearms.
Click to expand...

I've heard good things about the 103. Just wanted to try it. This seemed like a good excuse to buy one. Sometimes I just need to justify a purchase. This is one of those cases. What would you recommend?
 
A DL-103 has a documented dynamic compliance at 10Hz of about 12 x 10-6 cm/dyne (CU). Mass is 8.5g. Effective mass of the SL-1200 arm is 12g. Plug this into the resonance calculator with 1g for mounting hardware. So 12+8.5+1 = 21.5g. Resonant frequency works out to 9.9Hz ... which is right in the middle of the 8 to 12Hz recommended range.
 
Van_Isle said:
A DL-103 has a documented dynamic compliance at 10Hz of about 12 x 10-6 cm/dyne (CU). Mass is 8.5g. Effective mass of the SL-1200 arm is 12g. Plug this into the resonance calculator with 1g for mounting hardware. So 12+8.5+1 = 21.5g. Resonant frequency works out to 9.9Hz ... which is right in the middle of the 8 to 12Hz recommended range.
Click to expand...

They actually measured it over at Vinyl Engine years ago and it's actual compliance was around 7cu.
 
majick47 said:
I guess you could shoe horn a DL-103 onto the 1200 but there are a number of way better cartridges that are an easy compliance fit to the 1200 tonearm that will work with the standard factory headshell and without the add on counterweight. Why make things difficult for a bottom of the Denon line cartridge that was designed for very heavy tonearms.
Click to expand...

I'm curious what you recommend too, medium compliance MM carts tend to mostly be budget options and can leave a lot to be desired. Most other LOMC carts are expensive. The HOMC Denon DL-110 tends to be what a lot of people end up with. I don't really see the issue with adding weight to the arm, one of the great advantages to arms with removable headshells is compliance is essentially adjustable.
 
There are lots of test measurements out there ... sorry I think the 12cu is lateral. It's been tested higher than 7 though in vertical compliance.
 
RickeyM said:
One nice thing about the SL-1200MK2 is it's not "fiddly". Once you set it up, you just play your records.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

And then I get to obsess over other things like RCM fluids instead of null points, VTF, and VTA. :music:
 
Interesting that the TNT piece refers to the tonearm (w/headshell) as medium-high mass. For some reason I've always thought of it as on the low end of medium mass so I guess my frame of reference was off. Learn something new every time I log onto AK.
 
The effective mass with the headshell is 17g, that's definitely medium-high. 12-14g is normally considered medium and low mass is under 9 grams.
 
This is an excerpt from the TNT piece: The arm's medium-high 12 g effective mass (including headshell) precludes the use of high-compliance MMs (i.e. most MMs fall out).

Not trying to be argumentative here but is it 17g or 12g?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom