Let's mod a PL-41 !
- Thread starter Naptown Rob
- Start date
:thmbsp: A Highly regarded cart n stylus! The XV15 is one on my hit list. Found out about it..where else AudioKarma.com..... My notes have either the DCF200 with their 4500 ATE stylus ( elliptical) with a tracking of 1-5 grams or the DCF350 a conical stylus 4500M with a tracking of 3/4 to 3 grams.
I have an old Pickering manual on the XV15 and it does not show the 625.
But Pickering website gives her these specs:
Specifications are...
Standard ½ inch mount bolts
Standard push on color coded connectors
Diamond Elliptical tip 7.6 x 17.8
Output 4.4mv
Frequency range 10 to 25k
Tracking force .75 gram to 1.5 grams
Compliance 17 cu
Channel separation 35db
Load 47k 275pf
Mass 6.3g
Also saw a V15 cart that is a bit more in my price range that has good specs
14cu compliance...I have to drill down a bit more on the Pickerings and educate myself more on all the options, what is current / availability &c. Fortunately I have some time to search as my new stylus now has about 3 hours on her.
I guess I had better stock up on head shells too! I think I'm going to like this PL41 a lot, in fact I already do and fortunately there seems to be a lot of great choices for carts. Thanks for educating me on the 625! smoke:
darkxoxo666
New Member
Wow, so much information in this thread.
I'm new to the whole turntable thing. I just picked up a PL-41 recently, and while mechanically it seems to run fine (motor/belt speed, cueing action), but the actual sound coming out is distorted and imbalanced channel-wise. After reading up on how to set the tracking weight/height optimally and trying that it didn't seem to help much.
I was thinking I would just go ahead and outright replace the stock PL-C9 with a different cart. I'd like to try one of the Denon carts eventually, but I'm pretty close to broke right now so I was going to try one of the Audio Technica carts like the AT-95. The rest of my system is pretty modest so I imagine as long as I take good care of the table I could upgrade it as I upgrade the rest of my system.
Are there any other cheap carts you guys would recommend? Otherwise I think I will go with this guy right here http://www.needledoctor.com/Audio-Technica-95E-Cartridge
I'm new to the whole turntable thing. I just picked up a PL-41 recently, and while mechanically it seems to run fine (motor/belt speed, cueing action), but the actual sound coming out is distorted and imbalanced channel-wise. After reading up on how to set the tracking weight/height optimally and trying that it didn't seem to help much.
I was thinking I would just go ahead and outright replace the stock PL-C9 with a different cart. I'd like to try one of the Denon carts eventually, but I'm pretty close to broke right now so I was going to try one of the Audio Technica carts like the AT-95. The rest of my system is pretty modest so I imagine as long as I take good care of the table I could upgrade it as I upgrade the rest of my system.
Are there any other cheap carts you guys would recommend? Otherwise I think I will go with this guy right here http://www.needledoctor.com/Audio-Technica-95E-Cartridge
Hello,
Is the stylus the original that came with the turntable? It could be bad perhaps. Check the connections on the cartridge also.
when I first picked up my PL41 I bought a replacement stylus for the original PL-C9 cartridge as I worked on and tested the table.
Later I picked up a couple of RED ED elipticals and ran them for a while. I then went with the XV-15 Pickering and the d625 stylus but it had tracking problems on any record that had a slight warp, so I play the Red Ed and an Audio Technica AT110E whilst I too contemplate other cartridges.
I have some notes around here somewhere concerning cartridges / compliance &c. for this beautiful but fairly heavy armed PL41. If I find them I will post again. I do believe the at95e was one of the choices for an entry level cart... as with everything in this world the AT95's have their fans and their detractors. Believe me you will not stop with just one cartridge, part of the fun is giving others a go in the attempt to find that sweet spot down in the groove.
Have fun!
BillWojo
Addicted Member
Super long thread about modding a PL-41 and using a different tonearm but no real conclusion. One fellow used a Sumiko FT-3 tonearm but never really commented on it.
Given the nice construction, huge motor, and 5 pound platter with a really nice precision bearing I would think this turntable could be upgraded quite a bit and give some expensive belt drive TT a run for the money.
The only down side is the low platter height, a lot of tonearms simply don't adjust low enough. That could be solved by cutting a large hole in the top plate and mounting a cup type tonearm mount.
Or is the stock tonearm not going to be easy to beat?
BillWojo
Given the nice construction, huge motor, and 5 pound platter with a really nice precision bearing I would think this turntable could be upgraded quite a bit and give some expensive belt drive TT a run for the money.
The only down side is the low platter height, a lot of tonearms simply don't adjust low enough. That could be solved by cutting a large hole in the top plate and mounting a cup type tonearm mount.
Or is the stock tonearm not going to be easy to beat?
BillWojo
dontmindme
Creature
Running a DL-110 on mine great old solid table. Wouldn’t get rid of it for the world.
Metalownz
Audiophile? Getting there
I have a PL-41A and the arm on this table is hard to beat. Its such a beautiful sounding arm.
Attachments
flavio81
Turntable technician
Hi Bill,
Continuing this important thread.
For what it's worth, the SME 3009/II works just fine with the low platter height. The 3009/S2 Improved should, too, as well as the SME 3009/III.
I've done my research and it seems a Rega tonearm would not work, the platter is too low.
flavio81
Turntable technician
Here's my PL-41A, modified for SME tonearm mount.
It came modified that way, armless, and I had to source a SME tonearm, which I promptly restored.
If you want to modify a PL-41 for SME mounting, don't use this image as an example since the arm is way too near to the spindle. It needs to be a little further back. Thus, i compensate with the cartridge being further back on the headshell, closer to the tonearm pivot (see pic). In this way i can get correct alignment with no problem.
Cartridge is a made in USA Shure SC35C with original 1980s stylus, on a heavy (14g?) headshell. Match made in heaven, really.
Now i'm a bit worried that the motor runs hotter than what I'd like to (but then this is common to many belt drive tables, it seems). I will try configuring it for 120V and supplying with 100V. Currently I think it is set up for 230V and supplied with 220V. (It has a voltage selector of course).
It came modified that way, armless, and I had to source a SME tonearm, which I promptly restored.
If you want to modify a PL-41 for SME mounting, don't use this image as an example since the arm is way too near to the spindle. It needs to be a little further back. Thus, i compensate with the cartridge being further back on the headshell, closer to the tonearm pivot (see pic). In this way i can get correct alignment with no problem.
Cartridge is a made in USA Shure SC35C with original 1980s stylus, on a heavy (14g?) headshell. Match made in heaven, really.
Now i'm a bit worried that the motor runs hotter than what I'd like to (but then this is common to many belt drive tables, it seems). I will try configuring it for 120V and supplying with 100V. Currently I think it is set up for 230V and supplied with 220V. (It has a voltage selector of course).
Very interesting! Have you compared this to the stock arm with a cartridge suitable for it? I like mine with a Denon 103.
flavio81
Turntable technician
I don't have the stock arm, it came without it. The stock arm i've seen in pictures, it looks nicely built IMO. I would prefer the Pioneer stock tonearm to many tonearms, even would prefer it to a SME 3009/S2 Improved, but not to the SME 3009/II (pictured), which is IMO better. The Pioneer stock tonearm looks like it has a very rigid tonearm tube which is a very important thing. Now, i wonder how it would sound if somebody did a proper bearing service and readjustment on them.
The Shure SC35C in its original version is something like a "Denon 103 for the poor", being also a studio/radio/professional cartridge intended for heavy tonearms.
My comparison is going to be against my Sony PS-2251 with SME 3009/III + AT-VM540ML and another Sony PS-2500 with Rega RB303 + ATVM95ML. I can also mount any SME on my Lenco but right now my Lenco L75 is decomissioned.
However, this combination (the Pioneer) is doing really, really good on piano and classical.
Last edited:
flavio81
Turntable technician
Stock, and thoroughly serviced/refurbished/aligned and with a DL-103? Yes!!!
It is also not a fair comparison with the monster ultra-smooth torquey motor on the PL-41 @ 1800 RPM (tons of inertia due to big multiplication) and belt riding on the outside, versus the weak, sorry excuse for a motor on the Linn at -lol- 250RPM and that little belt riding on a subplatt
I mean, this little dime-a-dozen Premotec (or Philips) thing:
Versus:
"Suspended" also means there's less mass coupled to the armboard and turntable bearing, in my book a not so good thing.
Thus, my money goes to the PL-41. EDIT: But re-plinthed, ideally, on a more massive plinth.
Yes, this is a 13-year late reply, but so what.
Last edited:
I owned an SME 3009 II Unimproved and put it on a scratch built turntable using AR XA and XB parts. It used a Merrill motor and power supply and Linn springs which were mass loaded for ideal compression and bounce. For many years, I owned an AR which was modified with all of the George Merrill parts and my goal was to better it. I believe I did.
Not owning the Denon at the time, the best match was a retipped Grado Platinum, although it suffered the well documented Grado dance due to the undamped suspension in the cartridge and a possible problem in the knife edge bearings. A 1g dab of blue tack on the headshell fixed it. I found the arm to be overly finicky. I returned to a mostly stock AR and Shure M55E to good result. My life certainly got easier. A properly updated XA is a great turntable.
The PL-41:
Mine came to me with the lower horizontal bearing backed out so that none of the pins properly engaged. I disassembled the arm, carefully cleaned and oiled the bearings, rewired the arm and reassembled it. The bearings were adjusted as tight as possible without compromising any detectable movement. I first tried the stock cartridge with a replacement stylus and it sounded pretty good but not at all engaging. The Shure M55E was probably better, although it didn’t really come alive with the massive arm. The Denon immediately grabbed my attention with its delivery of tight, quick and detailed low end and lifelike midrange. Sure, the top end may be lacking but the overall presentation is big, detailed and engaging.
I agree that the motor on the 41 is part of its magic. It is massive, powerful and very, very quiet.
The PL-41 is well built, solid and dead simple design that delivers the goods.
Not owning the Denon at the time, the best match was a retipped Grado Platinum, although it suffered the well documented Grado dance due to the undamped suspension in the cartridge and a possible problem in the knife edge bearings. A 1g dab of blue tack on the headshell fixed it. I found the arm to be overly finicky. I returned to a mostly stock AR and Shure M55E to good result. My life certainly got easier. A properly updated XA is a great turntable.
The PL-41:
Mine came to me with the lower horizontal bearing backed out so that none of the pins properly engaged. I disassembled the arm, carefully cleaned and oiled the bearings, rewired the arm and reassembled it. The bearings were adjusted as tight as possible without compromising any detectable movement. I first tried the stock cartridge with a replacement stylus and it sounded pretty good but not at all engaging. The Shure M55E was probably better, although it didn’t really come alive with the massive arm. The Denon immediately grabbed my attention with its delivery of tight, quick and detailed low end and lifelike midrange. Sure, the top end may be lacking but the overall presentation is big, detailed and engaging.
I agree that the motor on the 41 is part of its magic. It is massive, powerful and very, very quiet.
The PL-41 is well built, solid and dead simple design that delivers the goods.
flavio81
Turntable technician
Just an update. I reported that the motor was getting hotter than i would like to. And i reported that the TT was set up at 230V and fed with 220V.
I was wrong, the turntable was set to 220V and my wall supply is 220V.
So, i have changed it to 117V setting and i'm supplying it with 100V (using a transformer), a 14% voltage reduction.
It runs much cooler this way, still warm, but now acceptably so.
I was wrong, the turntable was set to 220V and my wall supply is 220V.
So, i have changed it to 117V setting and i'm supplying it with 100V (using a transformer), a 14% voltage reduction.
It runs much cooler this way, still warm, but now acceptably so.
Have been following this thread for a bit since getting a great deal on a PL-41 at auction a few months ago. The one I bought unfortunately came missing the tonearm nut. I was able to get one made but read that while the stock arm is great, the PL-41 could be elevated with an upgraded tonearm. This thread has been massively helpful in finding a tonearm upgrade; through some of the recommendations I purchased and installed a Pioneer PA-1000.
The only thing left is covering up the holes from the arm holder and arm dropper and really liked your, @thedelihaus, suggestion of adding a badge to cover them up. I went ahead and created a CAD based on one of the badges you shared in an earlier post that I am hoping to get 3D printed to cover the 3 holes:
Wondering if anyone knows someone who has a 3D printer and would accept a fair price to have this mailed and shipped to me. Happy to share the STEP file if anyone else want to get it made.