• 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

I have ordered a Pioneer PLX-1000 direct drive turntable.....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Next, I could not achieve a parallel arm with the AT440MLa and the supplied mat, so I added mine, which is 3/32" thick (.094), 50 durometer open cell sponge EPDM.

I set the VTF using the old fashioned method of zero balancing, then zeroing out the dial, then setting it to 1.6 grams. I then used my calibrated digital scale and weighed the results, off by .06 for a 1.66 gram VTF. Close.

Next it was time to set anti-skate. As some of you may (or may not know), I use a blank disc to do this. If you do not like this method, that's fine with me, but it does show if the AS is working or not. At the recommended 1.6 setting, the arm ran to the pivot. I had to actually bring it up to 5.1 to get the arm to sit on the disc without movement. My Technics SL1200MKII is only slightly higher then the recommended setting (at 2.1) with this test. The good news is that I still had enough travel on the dial to get to where I wanted.

Photo of table running, stylus on acrylic disc, arm stands still:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=580672&stc=1&d=1425501649

To be continued.....
 

Attachments

  • Picture 675.jpg
    Picture 675.jpg
    43.6 KB · Views: 315
Last edited:
Some lingering notes on the physical parts of the table would be that I think the que drops a bit faster then I like, but its OK. The stylus doesn't bang on the record surface. I would have designed it so it dropped slower.

Torque: While Pioneer claims that the torque is even better then the Technics SL1200MKII, I say bullwack. I use a Discwasher brush, lightly damped with water and alcohol to remove lint before play and I can easily slow the platter down, more so then the Technics.

The Dust cover does not hinge, but rather just sits on it. It has a lip like the old AR-XA cover. Probably just fine. I don't use them, nor do I keep them on the tables that I have, so I don't really care.
 
I have no tools to measure platter flatness, but I would guess it to have a warble of about .003", probably not much difference between the Pioneer and the Technics on that one. The platter fits the spindle seat (it's tapered), very well.

I have also done a "rap" test, tapping on the plinth top while the record is playing and not playing. Almost all tables produce some sound with this test. I didn't think it was anything out the norm that I have heard before.

The speed indicator dots fluctuate in size, due to machining tolerances, but they do not seem to drift forward or backward. Looks pretty much like the Technics in this regard as well.

I have finished 1 LP while I have been typing this, Thomas Dolby's "The Aliens Ate My Buick" and I felt the sound stage and musical content was as the Technics, but I will do some heavy duty listening later.

On tap will be "Dead Can Dance - Spiritchaser" by MOFI, Genesis - Foxtrot from the 1970 to 1975 box set, XTC - Nonesuch and then hopefully Yes - Talk.

Wayner
 
How do you evaluate soundstage and musical content? I thought the latter was the prerogative of the musicians and producers concerned, and the former the product of careful microphone placement.
 
grottyash said:
How do you evaluate soundstage and musical content? I thought the latter was the prerogative of the musicians and producers concerned, and the former the product of careful microphone placement.
Click to expand...

Actually alignment can cause sound stage to be wider if the stylus is not at the right angle where one side of grooves gets played earlier.
 
WaynerN said:
Next, I could not achieve a parallel arm with the AT440MLa and the supplied mat, so I added mine, which is 3/32" thick (.094), 50 durometer open cell sponge EPDM.

I set the VTF using the old fashioned method of zero balancing, then zeroing out the dial, then setting it to 1.6 grams. I then used my calibrated digital scale and weighed the results, off by .06 for a 1.66 gram VTF. Close.

Next it was time to set anti-skate. As some of you may (or may not know), I use a blank disc to do this. If you do not like this method, that's fine with me, but it does show if the AS is working or not. At the recommended 1.6 setting, the arm ran to the pivot. I had to actually bring it up to 5.1 to get the arm to sit on the disc without movement. My Technics SL1200MKII is only slightly higher then the recommended setting (at 2.1) with this test. The good news is that I still had enough travel on the dial to get to where I wanted.

Photo of table running, stylus on acrylic disc, arm stands still:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=580672&stc=1&d=1425501649

To be continued.....
Click to expand...

Interesting even with VTA adjustment you can't get it parallel?
Although I have to say my AT-100E stylus is not 90 degrees to the record when the arm is parallel too. You have to actually look at the stylus to decide if your VTA is correct or not.

I like the look of that headshell.
 
The AT440MLa height is a tad bit short and it shows in the manual as well. The zero setting for VTA has the cartridge height at 19, but my AT is only 17, or maybe a hair less. Adding a thin soft mat on top of the stock mat is one of my DD tweaks anyway. It really takes any surface noise out, without killing the bass or muddying up the mix.

I should note that I've had to re-level the feet. They must be "settling in".

The Grado hum really bums me out......

The AT has zero hum, BTW.

'ner
 
Grado must be a hell of a diamond to have such following despite all that hum reports

Sent from my X10a using Tapatalk 2
 
David, on TTs where they dont hum they can make delightful music. I have some older carts with new styluses. For the money vs SQ they are a bargain IMO
 
I did a little tweak that I think everyone should do. That is putting a drop or two of 1000cst liquid silicone on the tonearm pivots. It changes things for the good. Just is a better idea to not have dry bearings. I also always put a tiny dot of plasticlay on the front end of the AT.

Now I heard some stuff going from right to left on the XTC LP that was interesting.....

I'm tired and need to end the evening.

I'm sorry I'm not a colorful reviewer, but I hope I did not disappoint too many with my drab review. I'm hell at numbers and geometry tho......

Good night.

'ner

(more music kind of reveiws tomorrow.)

BTW, yeah, its certainly the top of the heap for a $700 table. I would not waste my money on an AT-LP120 when you can have this one, unfortunately, it a bit more, but I think its worth it.
 
Do you really feel adding 1000cwt silicone to the tonearm bearings makes a positive difference? What do you hear and does it change any of the tracking test results on test records? I'd do it on my 1200mk2s but I don't want to be cleaning it out later if it messes up some other parameter.
 
Can you also please upload a 3150Hz W&F track? I'll run it through my Kenwood FL-140 W&F meter and post the figures.

(do several recordings and rotate the test disc a quarter turn each time on the platter- that will enable me to see the inherent eccentricity of the test record and rule that out)
 
Last edited:
restorer-john said:
Do you really feel adding 1000cwt silicone to the tonearm bearings makes a positive difference? What do you hear and does it change any of the tracking test results on test records? I'd do it on my 1200mk2s but I don't want to be cleaning it out later if it messes up some other parameter.
Click to expand...

My personal opinion on this is that these bearings should be dry. If they should be lubed they should be closed for dust.
 
Thanks for the review so far. I would like to know how the arm compares with the 1200MK2. Is the arm base and arm posts (part where arm is held in the gimbal) made of plastic?
 
WaynerN said:
Some lingering notes on the physical parts of the table would be that I think the que drops a bit faster then I like, but its OK. The stylus doesn't bang on the record surface. I would have designed it so it dropped slower.

Torque: While Pioneer claims that the torque is even better then the Technics SL1200MKII, I say bullwack. I use a Discwasher brush, lightly damped with water and alcohol to remove lint before play and I can easily slow the platter down, more so then the Technics.

The Dust cover does not hinge, but rather just sits on it. It has a lip like the old AR-XA cover. Probably just fine. I don't use them, nor do I keep them on the tables that I have, so I don't really care.
Click to expand...


My atlp1240 uses the same motor, if you wait for the platter to cover a rotation or two that is at 33/45rpm, then yes the torque will be substantially higher.

Like you, i also noticed this, brush-to-record weak torque situation. but then I also noticed once the platter had gotten up to speed, it was a LOT harder to slow down.
 
trueno92 said:
My atlp1240 uses the same motor, if you wait for the platter to cover a rotation or two that is at 33/45rpm, then yes the torque will be substantially higher.

Like you, i also noticed this, brush-to-record weak torque situation. but then I also noticed once the platter had gotten up to speed, it was a LOT harder to slow down.
Click to expand...

There is no wait on a Technics it gets up to speed right away. Clearly sounds like the platter was up to speed when he applied the brush. This is typically what I do with a carbon brush.
 
I agree its kinda weird, but its worth trying. Many reviews do comment that the torque is higher than the original sl1200.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom