Arkay
Lunatic Member
Earlier this evening I happened to be in the shop where I got my GT-2000 turntable, when the guy there decided to swap out the transformer in a GT-750, replacing the 100V one (standard voltage in much of Japan) with a 220V one (standard voltage in Hong Kong).
[I like hanging around places like this when I have time, as I get to experience things like this sometimes. While this was happening, CDs were being played through Wadia and Mac gear and huge Mitsubishi studio speakers that were state-of-the-art in 1949 ... and which are still running the ORIGINAL 1949 crossover caps (presumably oil caps, with the whole crossover potted in one single block!). I got a kick from realizing how much I was enjoying the sound of 60-year-old components!
]
Getting back to the story...
He unscrewed the bottom panel and removed it, and I got my first look at the underside/insides of a GT-750. I've seen the GT-2000 insides on previous occasions.
As soon as I looked inside the GT-750, my first reaction was...
...and not in the most positive sense. Yes, the platter has a big-enough sized motor driving it, although not "huge". But what about the plinth/base itself? The GT-2000 plinth is built up from compressed-and-glued layers of MDF (or something like that), with room for the motor and control boards and such carved out of that. Very massive, very heavy, very impressive. I always assumed, from the similarity of their outward appearances, that the GT-750's plinth had a very similar construction. But no, it doesn't.
What stared me in the face was a simple hollow box of 1" MDF, with a few smaller strips/blocks reinforcing the construction joints. A barely updated version of all those old "hollow box" plinths from the 60s and 70s (before plastic hollow boxes took over in the 80s). It is NOT built up from horizontal laminated layers of MDF (as is the GT-2000 plinth) at all. There is no steady dissipation of vibration through a massive block here. There is not constrained-layer-damping effect from thin glue joints. It's just a BOX made from the same stuff, with a single layer across the top, strips around the sides, and a thin pressboard-like bottom plate!
I couldn't help but think of some of those 1980s BPC units that look big and complex, and are actually empty shells with one circuit board rattling around inside. This was NOT actually that bad --not by a LONG shot!-- but since I had expected something like the GT-2000, I couldn't help but think of it.
What was worse was what was in it... a really PUNY looking transformer, even for just 100V, driving just a couple of relatively small and relatively simple circuit boards. Everything looked under-done, almost minimalist for the outward size and appearance of the thing. Nothing remotely like the respectably beefy transformer (even at 100V) and large, heavy and complex boards in the GT-2000. I know there are supposedly high-end TTs out there than make a marketing virtue out of their simplicity, but this shouldn't be one of them, not with the GT ("Gigantic and Tremendous") prefix on it!
I've compared the platters of both models before, and was struck then at how much inferior the GT-750's platter was; a typically "hollow" cast shell instead of a pressure-cast and machined solid slab. There was a big difference in weight in the platters. Now I know that there is also a similar difference in weight in the plinths, with about twice the mass in the GT-2000, even though outer dimensions are similar for both.
After seeing all the guts --qualitatively and quantitatively impressive-- in the GT-2000, it was a real let-down to see how puny and anemic it's younger sibling seemed in comparison. It's almost as if Yamaha said with the GT-2000, "Let's see how good we can make this thing, without worrying much about cost", and with the GT-750, "Let's see how much simpler and cheaper we can make this one, while still keeping a close outward resemblance to the bigger model."
To be fair, I should point out that the plinth, while a big box and not a big block, is still made from thick slabs, thicker than the walls on most other TTs out there. That thickness, and the overall size of the thing, still make it more massive than most TT bases. The platter, even if "hollowed", I think still has more metal in it than a "heavy" platter Lenco, thanks to its larger size, and probably more intertial mass, thanks to both its size and the way the mass is distributed. The GT-750 is absolutely no slouch, in comparison with MOST TTs, and I'd still recommend grabbing one if you see it.
BUT, in a head-to-head comparison with the GT-2000, there just is IS NO COMPARISON. The differences run deeper and are greater than I previously realized. If you're looking at getting a GT-750, it's still a fine performer, and honestly will outperform most of the TTs discussed around here, already. But if you are looking at getting a GT-series TT, and are wondering whether the step up from the GT-750 to the GT-2000 is a not-worth-it "diminishing returns" thing... it isn't. The similarities are as much cosmetic as real, but the differences are REAL and BIG and SIGNIFICANT, way beyond "diminishing returns", I'd say.
P.S. -- to give you an idea of how impressive the original 100V transformer in the GT-750 was (it steps down to 30V; the circuitry takes it the rest of the way down to the motor's 24V), the guy handed it to me afterwards and said, "Here, you can have this if you want it." I was pretty sure I was just being used as a convenient trash can, and even I'm hard-put to think of a legitimate use for such a thing. outside of the inside of a GT-750 ... although with its copper tape, I might mount it on a little marble sample block base to add needed mass, and use it as a cute little paperweight!
[I like hanging around places like this when I have time, as I get to experience things like this sometimes. While this was happening, CDs were being played through Wadia and Mac gear and huge Mitsubishi studio speakers that were state-of-the-art in 1949 ... and which are still running the ORIGINAL 1949 crossover caps (presumably oil caps, with the whole crossover potted in one single block!). I got a kick from realizing how much I was enjoying the sound of 60-year-old components!
]Getting back to the story...
He unscrewed the bottom panel and removed it, and I got my first look at the underside/insides of a GT-750. I've seen the GT-2000 insides on previous occasions.
As soon as I looked inside the GT-750, my first reaction was...
...and not in the most positive sense. Yes, the platter has a big-enough sized motor driving it, although not "huge". But what about the plinth/base itself? The GT-2000 plinth is built up from compressed-and-glued layers of MDF (or something like that), with room for the motor and control boards and such carved out of that. Very massive, very heavy, very impressive. I always assumed, from the similarity of their outward appearances, that the GT-750's plinth had a very similar construction. But no, it doesn't.
What stared me in the face was a simple hollow box of 1" MDF, with a few smaller strips/blocks reinforcing the construction joints. A barely updated version of all those old "hollow box" plinths from the 60s and 70s (before plastic hollow boxes took over in the 80s
). It is NOT built up from horizontal laminated layers of MDF (as is the GT-2000 plinth) at all. There is no steady dissipation of vibration through a massive block here. There is not constrained-layer-damping effect from thin glue joints. It's just a BOX made from the same stuff, with a single layer across the top, strips around the sides, and a thin pressboard-like bottom plate! I couldn't help but think of some of those 1980s BPC units that look big and complex, and are actually empty shells with one circuit board rattling around inside. This was NOT actually that bad --not by a LONG shot!-- but since I had expected something like the GT-2000, I couldn't help but think of it.
What was worse was what was in it... a really PUNY looking transformer, even for just 100V, driving just a couple of relatively small and relatively simple circuit boards. Everything looked under-done, almost minimalist for the outward size and appearance of the thing. Nothing remotely like the respectably beefy transformer (even at 100V) and large, heavy and complex boards in the GT-2000. I know there are supposedly high-end TTs out there than make a marketing virtue out of their simplicity, but this shouldn't be one of them, not with the GT ("Gigantic and Tremendous") prefix on it!
I've compared the platters of both models before, and was struck then at how much inferior the GT-750's platter was; a typically "hollow" cast shell instead of a pressure-cast and machined solid slab. There was a big difference in weight in the platters. Now I know that there is also a similar difference in weight in the plinths, with about twice the mass in the GT-2000, even though outer dimensions are similar for both.
After seeing all the guts --qualitatively and quantitatively impressive-- in the GT-2000, it was a real let-down to see how puny and anemic it's younger sibling seemed in comparison. It's almost as if Yamaha said with the GT-2000, "Let's see how good we can make this thing, without worrying much about cost", and with the GT-750, "Let's see how much simpler and cheaper we can make this one, while still keeping a close outward resemblance to the bigger model."
To be fair, I should point out that the plinth, while a big box and not a big block, is still made from thick slabs, thicker than the walls on most other TTs out there. That thickness, and the overall size of the thing, still make it more massive than most TT bases. The platter, even if "hollowed", I think still has more metal in it than a "heavy" platter Lenco, thanks to its larger size, and probably more intertial mass, thanks to both its size and the way the mass is distributed. The GT-750 is absolutely no slouch, in comparison with MOST TTs, and I'd still recommend grabbing one if you see it.
BUT, in a head-to-head comparison with the GT-2000, there just is IS NO COMPARISON. The differences run deeper and are greater than I previously realized. If you're looking at getting a GT-750, it's still a fine performer, and honestly will outperform most of the TTs discussed around here, already. But if you are looking at getting a GT-series TT, and are wondering whether the step up from the GT-750 to the GT-2000 is a not-worth-it "diminishing returns" thing... it isn't.
The similarities are as much cosmetic as real, but the differences are REAL and BIG and SIGNIFICANT, way beyond "diminishing returns", I'd say.P.S. -- to give you an idea of how impressive the original 100V transformer in the GT-750 was (it steps down to 30V; the circuitry takes it the rest of the way down to the motor's 24V), the guy handed it to me afterwards and said, "Here, you can have this if you want it." I was pretty sure I was just being used as a convenient trash can, and even I'm hard-put to think of a legitimate use for such a thing. outside of the inside of a GT-750 ... although with its copper tape, I might mount it on a little marble sample block base to add needed mass, and use it as a cute little paperweight!
and is harder to get a hold of than rocking horse castings.This renders the relatively affordable diy Japanese power supply a super value upgrade of a 2000 series.I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has done a comparison between a Yamaha GT 2000(stock platter)with power supply and one with gunmetal platter only(no outboard power supply).We'll leave the gunmetal platter PLUS outboard power supply comparison aside for just this one moment.I'd be intrigued to weigh-up the differences of those two factory upgrade options.
