Hypothetical. . Rega RP6 vs. Technics SL-1210MK2 vs. Marantz TT-15S1

[kamiraa]

Without getting into costs so this would move. Lets say each of these turntables were free.

The Technics SL-1210mk2 with a Ortofon Blue a great choice with proven experience

The Marantz TT-15s1 which is a clearaudio built turntable with some very awesome parts, but hardly mentioned.

Finally the Rega RP6, which has an amazing arm design.

Which would everyone choose and why?

The Marantz looks like it would be the clear winner.

 

[illini]

 

[luvvinvinyl]

I chose the Marantz. Sent an Ariston RD11S out the door, to make room. Technics visited here, before I made my choice. Also demoed a Rega P3-24, which isn't in the same class as the Marantz, or the P-6, but the Marantz deal wasn't much more money.

In fairness, keeping the Marantz meant swapping out the Clearaudio Virtuoso cartridge for a Benz Ace, into a Lehmann Black Cube.

 

[cactuscowboy]

Without getting into costs so this would move. Lets say each of these turntables were free.

The Technics SL-1210mk2 with a Ortofon Blue a great choice with proven experience

The Marantz TT-15s1 which is a clearaudio built turntable with some very awesome parts, but hardly mentioned.

Finally the Rega RP6, which has an amazing arm design.

Which would everyone choose and why?

The Marantz looks like it would be the clear winner.

For me, the Technics. Why?

-Quartz-locked speed accuracy
-Excellent build quality
-Interchangeable headshell, fast/easy cartridge swapping
-Plus/Minus 8% pitch control
-Easy VTA adjustment, on-the-fly if desired
-Platter brake
-Change speeds at push of a button
-Can be modified to play 78s


The other two I would not even consider. They're not capable of playing 1/3 of my record collection and are compromised by lack of features and capabilities. They might be OK for a guy who does nothing but spin a few stereo LPs, but they just wouldn't meet my needs.

Then there's also personal experience. I've owned a modified SL1200MK5 for five years and have been completely satisfied with its excellent performance.


Let me guess... You actually own the Technics? It's the only one you've paired with a cartridge in your query and have also described as having "proven performance."

 

[WmAx]

Marantz TT-15S1. I was up against this decision and the Marantz has the best tonearm and superb build/engineering quality overall. I considered the VPI Scout as the main one vs. the Marantz, but the Marantz again, had what seems to be the best arm and overall higher build quality/design for it's price range.

I did consider the Technics. The Technics would be a superb choice for me, IF an excellent arm was installed; I would like to see the Clearaudio Satisfy aluminum series arm on the Technics; the same arm as on the Marantz. Then I would consider the Technics the overall best.

 

[luvvinvinyl]

For me, the Technics. Why?

-Quartz-locked speed accuracy
-Excellent build quality
-Interchangeable headshell, fast/easy cartridge swapping
-Plus/Minus 8% pitch control
-Easy VTA adjustment, on-the-fly if desired
-Platter brake
-Change speeds at push of a button
-Can be modified to play 78s


The other two I would not even consider. They're not capable of playing 1/3 of my record collection and are compromised by lack of features and capabilities. They might be OK for a guy who does nothing but spin a few stereo LPs, but they just wouldn't meet my needs.

Then there's also personal experience. I've owned a modified SL1200MK5 for five years and have been completely satisfied with its excellent performance.


Let me guess... You actually own the Technics? It's the only one you've paired with a cartridge in your query and have also described as having "proven performance."

I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were restricted to only one table, all things for all records, as it were.

I can't say that I've ever been characterized as "a guy who does nothing but spin a few stereo LPs". Interesting experience, that.

I'm glad that your table meets all your needs. Enjoy your table, and your music.

 

[kamiraa]

Ya I figured this will turn into a fun debate, but it's the situation I'm left in, and I highly respect the opinions of this website.

 

[kamiraa]

For me, the Technics. Why?

-Quartz-locked speed accuracy
-Excellent build quality
-Interchangeable headshell, fast/easy cartridge swapping
-Plus/Minus 8% pitch control
-Easy VTA adjustment, on-the-fly if desired
-Platter brake
-Change speeds at push of a button
-Can be modified to play 78s


The other two I would not even consider. They're not capable of playing 1/3 of my record collection and are compromised by lack of features and capabilities. They might be OK for a guy who does nothing but spin a few stereo LPs, but they just wouldn't meet my needs.

Then there's also personal experience. I've owned a modified SL1200MK5 for five years and have been completely satisfied with its excellent performance.


Let me guess... You actually own the Technics? It's the only one you've paired with a cartridge in your query and have also described as having "proven performance."

haha good logic, I have a Technics new in the box. I made a thread the other day. I boxed it back up, before installing the cartridge or playing anything. A local store asked to purchase it, and gave me the other two as options. Still deciding with the help of audiokarma :thmbsp:

 

[luvvinvinyl]

The P3-24 is no RP-6. That would be an interesting shootout. I would want to hear that Rega before I chose the Marantz, especially since the stock cart on the Marantz didn't float my boat.

 

[cactuscowboy]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were restricted to only one table, all things for all records, as it were.

The original poster asked: "Which would everyone choose and why." The OP is in essence asking us to chose "only one table."

I offered my opinions, based on my needs and experience, directly addressing the OP's query.

Would it not be more constructive for you to simply address the OP's query and offer your opinion? Nobody is restricting any opinion or choice YOU make to be based on "all things for all records."

I can't say that I've ever been characterized as "a guy who does nothing but spin a few stereo LPs". Interesting experience, that.

I have absolutely no idea what you have in your record collection. I was not characterizing you or anyone else specifically. There's nothing wrong with having a small collection of nothing but stereo LPs. I was there forty years ago.

I'm glad that your table meets all your needs. Enjoy your table, and your music.

Thanks. It does and I will.

 

[cactuscowboy]

haha good logic, I have a Technics new in the box. I made a thread the other day. I boxed it back up, before installing the cartridge or playing anything. A local store asked to purchase it, and gave me the other two as options. Still deciding with the help of audiokarma :thmbsp:

I knew it! I may be an old codger but I'm still pretty sharp and I can read between the lines. I did not happen to see any previous thread you made on the subject.

NO SURPRISE the audio dealer wants to buy that Technics from you. They see pure profit... both coming and going. The profit they'll make from paying you wholesale for the Technics and then quickly selling it retail into a hot market with high demand for a used (as-new in box) Technics. Then another quick profit selling you either a Rega or Marantz at retail.

Nothing wrong with the dealer making a profit of course. That's the basis of capitalism after all. Just be aware that the motives of the audio dealer are based on their own best interests, despite any dubious claims that they might be helping you get a "better" turntable.

This all begs the question: Why have you not taken the Technics out of the box and played some records?

If you're seriously considering selling (or using as trade-in) the Technics and buying the Rega or Marantz, wouldn't it make sense to do a 'shoot-out' between all three turntables? Yeah, I think so. Pick out something challenging for the audition. A solo piano LP will reveal any wow and flutter issues that might be evident. Bring a strobe disc to check speed accuracy for the Rega and Marantz. Not necessary of course for the Technics as it has a built-in strobe.

Good luck whatever you decide.

 

[Bob_in_OKC]

haha good logic, I have a Technics new in the box. I made a thread the other day. I boxed it back up, before installing the cartridge or playing anything. A local store asked to purchase it, and gave me the other two as options. Still deciding with the help of audiokarma :thmbsp:

If the local store wants your turntable and is offering one of the others, maybe that should tell you something about your turntable. That said, I'd choose the RP6 just because its what I like. I would put an Exact2 cartridge on it and live happily ever after.

 

[illini]

Ya I figured this will turn into a fun debate, but it's the situation I'm left in, and I highly respect the opinions of this website.

Yep. Cactuscowboy is very smart and has tens of thousands of records and actually plays them. Just wait until a professor chimes in and sets everyone strait.

 

[gusten]

Don´t look at what You like about them, look at what You don´t like about them. Me I would most likely take the RP6.
gusten

 

[JohnVF]

I'd choose the RP6, simply because I've had the other two tables and wasn't in love with either of them. Also, I love the Rega arms and the RP-6 looks like a fantastic turntable, and I've liked what I've heard out of the upper end of the Rega line.

 

[ODS123]

When searching for a TT a year ago, I set my budget at $1500 or less. ..I didn't find anything that came close to the Technics in terms of build quality, including: Music Halls, Pro-Jects, Thorens, and Rega's. Unfortunately, the VPI Traveler wasn't available then, and I didn't come across any Clearaudios (or Marantz). That said, I see nothing different about their design that suggests they have some sort of technology advantage over the others. They are still basically a plank plinth w/a side-mounted motor turning the table via a belt.

People get hung up on the fact that the Technics was a mere $500 just a few years ago, so how could it possible compare with $2000 tables today? Well, economies of scale have a huge affect on pricing. Whereas Technics sold MILLIONS of SL1200s, and can allocate to each of those units just a tiny portion of their fixed expenses, Pro-Ject, Rega, Thorens, Clear Audio, etc. all must spread their costs for design and tooling over a mere a few thousand units. ..And it may be a stretch to think they will even sell that many of a $1500 TT today.

Out of curiosity, if a firm wanted to design it's own version of the SL1200 today, how much to you think it would cost to design, tool, and build the DD system, etc? ..And if they hoped to sell 5-6000 at MOST, how much would they have to charge to pay for all the design and tooling?

..There's a reason that ALL new budget TT offerings these days follow the same plank plinth, side-mounted motor, and rubber band design; it's b/c designing such a table is relative piece-of-cake compared to something like a 1200.

so I guess I'm saying, take the SL1200! ..Besides, it will hold it's value much much better, PARTICULARLY if you don't do any permanent mods or alterations.

 

[luvvinvinyl]

The original poster asked: "Which would everyone choose and why." The OP is in essence asking us to chose "only one table."

I offered my opinions, based on my needs and experience, directly addressing the OP's query.

Would it not be more constructive for you to simply address the OP's query and offer your opinion? Nobody is restricting any opinion or choice YOU make to be based on "all things for all records."
.

I did choose only one table from the context of his OP. I was referring to your statement that you found the one table to meet all your need. How very fortunate for you. I chose a different path, one that meets my needs and wants, and happens to include multiple tables, one of which is the Marantz. Each has its own job. My path is not that of another, only for me. That's why I didn't mention it. Of the three listed, I chose the one I preferred, and posted about it. No different than you, other than we happen to prefer opposite choices. For different reasons.

I have absolutely no idea what you have in your record collection. I was not characterizing you or anyone else specifically. There's nothing wrong with having a small collection of nothing but stereo LPs. I was there forty years ago.

When you posted your remark directly after mine, it did seem directed toward me. Perhaps more careful phrasing on your part will spare others the confusion about your intent, in the future.

Fifty years ago, most of my record listening was 78s. I came to stereo and lps later. And, understandably, my collection of several thousand is dwarfed by yours. You are right, though, there is nothing wrong with having a small collection of nothing but stereo lps. It's always best when someone enjoys what music he or she has.

Thanks. It does and I will.

"Music is the anchor that keeps me from totally drifting away." - E. O. T.

May it be ever thus, for all of us.

 

[JohnVF]

The economies of scale argument carries with it the assumption that the more complicated solution is the best sounding. When in fact, many of the trends in turntable design have assumed that its not actually the drive method that was the problem but controlling resonance and vibration, and you can't do that as well when you have a hollow plinth filled with the electronic wizardry of the SL-1200. So what you very well could have is a turntable built to the trends of the mid '70s when in fact, a few things about what actually has a bigger impact on the sound quality may have emerged in the past 30 years. And to my ears, that is EXACTLY what has happened, even with the Marantz TT-15s1, which is a very fine table that sound great, I just wasn't in love with some of the aesthetic and user-interface aspects of actually using it.

In other words, why hollow out the plinth to fill it with ICs and whatever else, when an offset motor that you can detach from the base (and therefor detach from vibrating the arm and thus vibrating the cartridge) will accomplish the same thing, by a simpler means, with the added benefit that you can do whatever you want with the plinth.Such as what Rega did...a rigid lightweight brace to lock the motion of the arm/platter without transmitting too much energy, and a lightweight base/surround to allow the quick dissipation of unwanted energy.

 

[ODS123]

The economies of scale argument carries with it the assumption that the more complicated solution is the best sounding. When in fact, many of the trends in turntable design have assumed that its not actually the drive method that was the problem but controlling resonance and vibration, and you can't do that as well when you have a hollow plinth filled with the electronic wizardry of the SL-1200. So what you very well could have is a turntable built to the trends of the mid '70s when in fact, a few things about what actually has a bigger impact on the sound quality may have emerged in the past 30 years. And to my ears, that is EXACTLY what has happened, even with the Marantz TT-15s1, which is a very fine table that sound great, I just wasn't in love with some of the aesthetic and user-interface aspects of actually using it.

In other words, why hollow out the plinth to fill it with ICs and whatever else, when an offset motor that you can detach from the base (and therefor detach from vibrating the arm and thus vibrating the cartridge) will accomplish the same thing, by a simpler means, with the added benefit that you can do whatever you want with the plinth.Such as what Rega did...a rigid lightweight brace to lock the motion of the arm/platter without transmitting too much energy, and a lightweight base/surround to allow the quick dissipation of unwanted energy.

So why then do Technics DD table consistently have lower rumble figures? ..Not to mention speed accuracy. Anyone contemplating a budget belt-driven table needs to bring along some piano music when they go shopping/comparing. One key strike and you'll know exactly what I mean.

There's no way that these basic plinth and band tables represent a technological improvement over DD. ..They are easier to build/design affordably.

 

[JohnVF]

So why then do Technics DD table consistently have lower rumble figures? ..Not to mention speed accuracy. Anyone contemplating a budget belt-driven table needs to bring along some piano music when they go shopping/comparing. One key strike and you'll know exactly what I mean.

There's no way that these basic plinth and band tables represent a technological improvement over DD. ..They are easier to build/design affordably.

How many times have we had this argument? Just listen to the tables side by side. But no, you'll never do that because you think you know what everything sounds like based on very basic specs that do very little to correlate every parameter together into a picture of how the table actually performs out in the real world. I have had 2 of the turntables in discussion, I have heard many Regas. I don't really like the lower end ones but the mid and up are very very nice tables.

If you haven't heard it, you don't have a qualified opinion on ANYTHING audio related. Numbers are only part of the story.

The economies of scale argument holds no water. There are plenty of cheap Chinese DD tables today, its not rocket science nor alchemy to get a platter to spin at 33 1/3 by a direct drive motor. That's modern day audio mysticism spun by the Technics clan. If it were incredibly hard to do, CEC wouldn't have been spitting out cheap DDs by the thousands in the '70s. There's NOTHING special about the SL-1200 compared to any number of other DD tables from the '70s, the only reason that it remained in production was that it by chance had exactly the right adjustments and features that a totally unintended market needed, DJs, which by chance was the only market who was still spinning records in large quantities in the 1990s.