Sumiko Pro-Ject Perspective Turntable

[WmAx]

I have found that a fluid damper greatly reduces some resonances in the Technics arm. SME offered a similar damper for their 3009. The standard Technics arm isn't the greatest thing going. Having said that, there are much better arms than the 9C as well. You could swap the arm on the Technics and you'd be done. You could swap the arm on the Project and the Technics would still have better specs.

The fluid damper does not address structure borne resonances in the arm structure. It simply can not; it is not designed to do this, nor is it physically possible for it to have much of any effect to structure borne resonances. The fluid damper is only applicable towards overall arm motion oscillation in relevance to groove tracking. In addition, the fluid damper does not seem to make much of a difference for most tracking conditions. A friend of mine set up an ABX test, recording the same tracks, before and after the damper was installed on his SL-1200MKII with the same cartridge. On the track samples used, no audible difference could be easily discerned under blinded, randomized conditions. Perhaps there are some trouble recordings that benefit greatly, but nothing that was tried in this test made any real difference.

-Chris

 

[ehoove]

Interesting read! Good thread!
Regards,
Jim

 

[dokblues]

Great table and a Super arm. If you can pick it up used in excellent shape I certainly would go for it. Lots and lots of Great cart choices for that one.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

With a Pro-ject or a Rega, you need to spend close to $3k to better most things that a Technics SL-1200 does well. Want the best of both, tweak the SL-1200 and spend the difference on vinyl. Why not a mildly tweaked stock tonearm or an audiophile arm on it? A better option. A stock Technics SL-1200 arm is 99% as fine as many older SME tonearms (3009, et al). Those bearings are precision in their own right. Get some Isonoe feet on that SL-1200 and be impressed and put a nice Denon DL-103 on it. We did so and our Linn LP-12 tables get much less use.

 

[SLM3Tech]

...

 

[HypnoToad]

Someone suggested wrapping Teflon plumbers tape around the arm including the headshell nut to reduce what was described as "midrange bloom" caused by resonances.

I am going to give it a try tonight and will post the results tomorrow.

 

[WmAx]

Concerning your ABX test. I respect your findings. Wrong choice of words perhaps; however, whether it was oscillation or resonance, there was a very noticeable difference, for the better, on my deck. I have two of these decks. One has the damper the other has not. Given the same cartridge and setup I was easily able to tell the difference, blindfolded, spun around and back again. I would be interested in seeing the "numbers" on this as well. As I always say, opinions and preferences aren't much to go on, not even mine.

I guess I'll end my commenting here by saying, in the interest of truly comparing the two TT's, the OP and anyone else, owes it to themselves to do as accurate and evaluative a fact finding mission as possible. The only way to do that, honestly, is to seek out what are the true measurements because in some degree or great degree they will have a direct effect on what is heard. In other words compare, continuous watts to continuous watts instead of going by continuous watts to peak watts, or peak watts to what is someone's (anyone's) idea of loudness. That's going to provide the baseline. It clears up ambiguity and hype. After that, if subjective reasoning leads you to choose the Jaguar, great! If you choose the Mercedes, great! But at least the knowledge of the substantive differences between the two will be clear to you.

Unfortunately, I have no direct way to measure the tone arm resonance. While I do have an accelerometer, it's too big/heavy for measuring a tone arm. The accelerometer to measure a tone arm tends to a very high cost specialty unit with super low mass. I could also measure over-all resonant influence using an impulse or MLSS signal; unfortunately I don't know of any test records that have a proper impulse or MLSS signal recorded so that I can analyze the result(s).

-Chris

 

[Mr. Lin]

With a Pro-ject or a Rega, you need to spend close to $3k to better most things that a Technics SL-1200 does well. Want the best of both, tweak the SL-1200 and spend the difference on vinyl. Why not a mildly tweaked stock tonearm or an audiophile arm on it? A better option. A stock Technics SL-1200 arm is 99% as fine as many older SME tonearms (3009, et al). Those bearings are precision in their own right. Get some Isonoe feet on that SL-1200 and be impressed and put a nice Denon DL-103 on it. We did so and our Linn LP-12 tables get much less use.

Where exactly are you getting all this from??? You're seriously going to try and tell us that Pro-Ject and Rega turntables under $3K are inferior to the SL-1200? I've got news for you guys, I have a $700 Pro-Ject, I've heard the SL-1200, and mine blows it away. Vinyl may be an old format, but the technology used to play it these days has changed, and I think you're deluding yourself if you honestly believe the Technics - I don't care how durable it is - is sonically superior to a new $1200 Pro-Ject turntable.

 

[cmb3366]

+1 Mr. Lin

Paper-specs mean very little IME with audio gear. No doubt the Technics is a solid performer, but it is not the end all, be all; and nor is the Pro-ject for that matter. Listening is the only way to decide what is an improvement and what isn't.

 

[SLM3Tech]

...

 

[WmAx]

There are several tables I would gladly own besides an SL-1200MK2. But they would have to best the SL-1200MK2 in measured performance in every way. The tables that actually do that are considerably expensive. I'm just looking at the specs.

Clear Audio, Marantz(another Clearaudio, made for Marantz) and VPI have some offerings that for just under, or right at $2k, outperform the SL1200MKII in almost every way. But that's about 4x the cost of a SL-1200MKII. However, they are 'slightly' less accurate in speed stability - but not enough to matter. Much better than many tables. But they are superior in terms of having very low resonance arm designs with superb low friction bearings. The chassis and platters are also of very low resonance design on these units. Self noise/rumble is extremely quiet.

-Chris

 

[cmb3366]

Okay... quickly disregarding more opinions and unsubstantiated claims, based purely on personal preference and dollars spent... and getting back to an honest evaluation and comparison of two different TT's.

In you opnion, how can one 'substantiate' opinions and claims one has regarding personal listening experince with different turntables? If you want to play the ABX or specs game, why even waste time with vinyl?, why not skip foreward to the technically superior (on paper of course) redbook CD or SACD? I notice the Bottlehead phono stage in your sig... wouldent a SS unit spec better; lower THD, etc?


If you can't trust your ears, why bother with audio reproduction/gear as a hobby?

 

[WmAx]

:scratch2: hmmm... okay, I'll go a bit more... Given that there doesn't seem to be an easy way to measure the tonearm resonance... on what are you basing your earlier statement?

Many of the arms that been discussed have been measured/anlayzed. I have read the technical analysis of many arms in a European magazine that quantifies performance. The Technics arm is very poor in regards to resonance, having several high resonant peaks, related to it's antique design. You would have to address the weak coupling points and apply suitable dampening to the primary modal excitation points of the structure in order to solve these problems.

There did exist several high end Technics arms, some of which 'may' compete with modern arms, but these had substantial differences form the SL-1200 arm and are very rare.

Could it be that it is not suitably damped for a cartridge it was not designed to work with? Shouldn't we then refer to the "white pages"? I've never seen them, so I don't know if they exist, and then compare the published specs of the other tonearm,

No. The arm simply is not a modern design (today arms are commonly designed with computer aided design to minimize these problems - and even many that don't use modern techniques to reduce resonance considerably). Substantial modification would be needed to derive modern levels of performance from the Technics arm. It's much easier to just install a modern arm. I have never seen anyone make such modifications to the Technics.

Most modern arms are so radically superior in this way, that you can use the crude tap test using a hard point, and the Technics will ring much louder/longer as compared to modern designs. Measurably, the difference is also radical. The turntable system is purely mechanical; and a resonant arm feeds directly back into the cartridge. The cartridge should ideally be attached to a structure with no feedback. Probably the highest performance in this regard is actually some select 80's Denon high end tables that used a CPU controlled full active feedback, using both an actuator and servo, to cancel arm tracking oscillation(s) and instability/warping and to cancel arm resonance vibration. But this was a special archive turntable, that cost about $10,000 in the late eighties. It was also ugly; purely utilitarian/industrial device - no audiophile cosmetics or frivolities. This was a device engineered/built by a multi-billion dollar majar tech corporation - you can't expect any small audiophile manufacturer today to ever match this level of engineering.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

In you opnion, how can one 'substantiate' opinions and claims one has regarding personal listening experince with different turntables? If you want to play the ABX or specs game, why even waste time with vinyl?, why not skip foreward to the technically superior (on paper of course) redbook CD or SACD? I notice the Bottlehead phono stage in your sig... wouldent a SS unit spec better; lower THD, etc?


If you can't trust your ears, why bother with audio reproduction/gear as a hobby?

It's unavoidable that many albums have the superior master on the LP version(and some older albums are ONLY on LP). As such, it is a valid goal to have a turntable that extracts the data from vinyl with as little audible coloration as possible. LP play is alto a physical experience that many people find more fulfilling than putting a small shiny CD in tray and simply press 'PLAY'.

-Chris

 

[grumpy]

I think some of you need to get a thread of your own and quit hijacking this one.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

I enjoy a Pro-Ject turntable at that level and higher. They're superb value for the money. I would really say that the only thing I wish they had was interchangeable headshells/tonearm wands. I would use one daily if that could be done easily. This turntable is very enjoyable. I really love their refined midrange and high end sound. No darkness to speak of. I would love to see their arm mounted on more turntables. It's superbly engineered and a joy to use and own. Carry on. But I do like more than one flavor of vinyl sound.

 

[SLM3Tech]

...

 

[KentTeffeteller]

For me, the ear is what matters most in the final analysis! If it sounds good, it is good! Yes, I plan on one day installing a better tonearm in my SL-1200. I do agree with the stock tonearm's design faults. It could be better. But the cost would increase as a result. It was a good budget arm for it's day. I would love to see a device like the Origin Live mounting plate work with the VTA adjuster on the stock arm board. That would be slick.

 

[SLM3Tech]

...

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Give me a record with held piano or guitar notes. If that record wavers in pitch even slightly, it's guaranteed to drive me nuts. It even drove me nuts when I was a 4 year old. My 5 year old adopted special needs son is the same way. I expect any turntable worthy of being called hi-fi to deliver pitch stability. Especially when it cost more than my first car I ever owned. The NAB spells out pitch accuracy guidelines for professional caliber turntables. Those precisely written guidelines (except for start-up time) I expect out of any quality instrument in today's world. Back in the 1960's the old, cheap, single speed AR turntable met or exceeded those (it cost less than US $75) then. Google NAB Standards for Phono turntables and be enlightened.