• 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

Philips electronic 212 turntable

I already did a 5 minuet research and decided the 212 is nice but I much rather have a duel 701 when I do even more research I have a feeling there will be a dual 701 in my bedroom or living room. I might put the 212 in the living room any way thank you. You really a a great help.
Robert
 
stratmel speaks the truth about simplicity of maintenance with the 212.If the 701 isnt right,its much more complicated to work on,I hear.I wouldnt get rid of the 212.Its a very good sounding table.But I would get the 701,also,if you can.
Jimmy
 
audiobach said:
Does anyone know how many grams A Stanton EEE 681 cartridge need?
Robert
Click to expand...

Stanton recommend 0.75-1.5 grams, with 1 gram the recommended ideal setting for most tonearms. However, it depends if you are using the brush at the front, which lifts the cartridge, and lowers the tracking force at the stylus. If you are using the brush, add one gram to the tracking force and anti-skating settings, so the recommended setting would be 1.75-2.5 grams, with 2 grams the ideal setting. If it doesn't have the brush, which is removable, set it at 1 gram. Most probably 0.75 grams is getting a bit light - more record damage is caused by lowering the stylus force and causing mis-tracking than by having it slightly heavier, as long as it's within the limits recommended by the cartridge manufacturer.

-Don
 
What are the difference(s) between the 212 and the 312? I have the 312, which causes me to be curious.

:scratch2:
 
MaxSeven said:
What are the difference(s) between the 212 and the 312?
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for the inner and finer details, but the two are similar almost to the extent of interchangeability: Belts and lights are the same, and so is the exterior design and functions. 212s have green lights, 312s have red (but not all!); mat may be a tad different, too.

The way I understand it, the 312 is the successor to the 212 but with very few, if any (except for the color of the LEDs on most 312s) fundamental changes.

212:
212_PickUp.jpg

312:
Philips312%20001b.jpg
 
Njord Noatun said:
I cannot speak for the inner and finer details, but the two are similar almost to the extent of interchangeability: Belts and lights are the same, and so is the exterior design and functions. 212s have green lights, 312s have red (but not all!); mat may be a tad different, too.

The way I understand it, the 312 is the successor to the 212 but with very few, if any (except for the color of the LEDs on most 312s) fundamental changes.

212:
View attachment 111497

312:
View attachment 111496
Click to expand...

Ah ha - Thank you. I can see the tone-arm is different: Headshell, Gimbal Assembly and Counterweight appear to be made of different materials. Perhaps all metal on the 212 and then the 312 had some plastico-cheapifying elements introduced?
 
312 added an arm lift to the shutoff. Later 312s had LEDs instead of incandescent lamps in the touch controls. The materials quality in the 312 was a tad lower than the 212.

GA312.jpg

GA312flipsidepartial.jpg

philbro8.jpg
 
There was some controversy about the plastic replacement of some of the metal parts of the 212 and one explanation was it reduced resonances that were present in the 212. We tried t measure the differences and found none so either it was beyond the test instruments or marketing.

The 212 and 312 we used to say was what AR could have come out with for their table if they had wanted a really new model but based on the original table's engineering. The suspension is more touchy and delicate than the TD150/160 Thorens and the arm is superior than most arms on any table in the price range when new. It was one of the few arms and the on of the least expensive we found would track corectly an ADC XLM Super.

As for the 701 vs 212 debate, both are good but the basic engineering premises are different. You may find a difference in sound and scratch a bald spot on your scalp. You then may find out why there are 2 phono inputs on most preamps.
 
Okay. But I think I'll go for the 701. I love music and I like good quality the better the more I will be happy. I think I might be able to get it off my old man
Robert
 
Go for both. There is no law against more than 1. Heck, I have 3, 2 Thorens and an Empire. Like a car, there does not seem to be a perfect one for all occasions.
 
Hi,

Without brush optimum tracking force on Stanton 681 EEE-S Mk II or III is 1.2 grams, with brush 1.7-1.8 grams. Excellent combo. I used to own a 212, it was indeed a poor man's Thorens and quite excellent. :tresbon:
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Without brush optimum tracking force on Stanton 681 EEE-S Mk II or III is 1.2 grams, with brush 1.7-1.8 grams.
Click to expand...

You're probably right about the no brush setting, but wrong with the setting when using the brush. Stanton specify the no brush tracking force as 1 gram +1/2 -1/4, which means that they're saying the optimum tracking force is 1 gram, but like you, I generally run mine at about 1.2g. But, as the brush exerts upward pressure of 1 gram, you need to add 1 gram to the no brush tracking weight when the brush is used. It's not the same as the Shure cartridges, which only need an extra half a gram when the brush is used. So, with the 681EEE, if you use 1.2 g without the brush, you would use 2.2 g with the brush. It's specified in the 681EEE manual, "Arm setting with brush 2grams +1/2 -1/4". The manual is available on the vinylengine website.

-Don
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom