Technics SP10 mkII or Denon DP-80

[JP]

You do like to make yourself out as the only expert in threads JP and you are far from it. One of the best Techs is Warren IMO on another forum, I believe he was a Tech for Marantz for many years. Not doubting you know a bit about SP10's but you are far from a world authority on them or are in a position to cast dount on others ability. What Warren has done to his is mind blowing especially is latest inverted bearing.
4 tables at random over years is not extremely small sample size. If basket cases were common then either I have been extremely lucky or the other possibility is SP 10's with major problem are not as common as you say as it would be statistically very unlikely to get 4 good ones.

That's one hell of a non-sequitur.

The condition of the units I've seen didn't change based on my personal experiences - they are what they are. If people can add data that can be "validated" to that sample pool, the more informed the community becomes. That experiences differ, especially with small sample pools, is not remotely surprising.

If we want to turn anecdotal reports in to data we need a way to validate the anecdote. A criteria that, in this case, good/bad is being assessed in a compatible way. My asking the question didn't cast doubt, it's your refusal to answer the question that did that. Just as it was entirely up to you to create it, you're also the only one that can remove it.

In turn you've decided to resort to an ad-hominem in your last sentence. Why? In light of a larger data set shouldn't advice be reassessed with the new information? If you think there's an issue with the data perhaps try to qualify it? I note that your report inferred that three of your units spent their entire lives in Australia - the driest climate of any inhabited continent. IIRC Jon (that's his name) has reported similar findings with a slightly larger sample pool than yours.

I follow data, and my advice is based on that data. When new data is presented I validate it, incorporate it, and reassess that advice. My knowledge of these units has grown over time, and if you look you'll find that I've changed my position on a number of items related to them over the years, all due to learning new information.

And yes, Jon does make very pretty parts. What does that have to do with this?

 

[JP]

Hi, Having been to Japan several times & for a period worked there, I can assure you, no one who own's a SP10 lives in a wooden building. But most people in the class that would own a SP10 have the air-con & humidifier on 24/7.

Cheers

I believe the context was overall, not just the people actively using them. A brief perusal of Yahoo shows a significant amount of evidence that items stored in presumably unconditioned spaces in Japan do not fare well.

 

[Kit Carson]

I remember some years ago a not often seen Kenwood LO-7D was listed on Ebay, the sellers location was either Nantucket or Marthas Vinyard, checking photos of the table corrosion was evident from the island environment. I was very concerned it went beyond cosmetics and I passed on bidding.

 

[jdwk]

Not all. the Dual 701 and Yamaha GT2000 have quite heavy platters.

go look up how heavy the platter was on an SP10MKIII.

 

[stratokaster]

What a spectacular meltdown over such a simple question

Anyway, my two cents: I have worked on two SP10mk2s, both units I worked on had quite a lot of out of spec capacitors. If I remember correctly, there are at least three capacitors on the drive board that take a heavy beating, on my own unit they were way out of spec with very high ESR. Another capacitor that gave me grief was a large cap on the logic board used for decoupling the brake circuit, on my SP10 the solenoid was not properly engaging and that capacitor was the culprit. I don't have the schematic in front of me so don't remember their numbers, but I would definitely recommend replacing pretty much every capacitor on the PCBs, along with measuring the voltages and observing the waveforms with a scope to make sure that the turntable is working properly.

Regarding the motors: my own SP10 is an ex-BBC turntable that obviously had quite a lot of use, but the main bearing was in excellent condition. The other one reportedly had very low hours, and the oil inside the bearing basically turned into varnish. I had to spend quite a lot of time removing the mess.

 

[JP]

Another capacitor that gave me grief was a large cap on the logic board used for decoupling the brake circuit, on my SP10 the solenoid was not properly engaging and that capacitor was the culprit. I don't have the schematic in front of me so don't remember their numbers...

If you get a chance, I'd be curious which one that was.

 

[PabloX]

go look up how heavy the platter was on an SP10MKIII.

I actually did after I posted that. IIRC it was ~20lbs. I think the GT2000 might still win, but not by much.

 

[JP]

12lbs vs 22lbs. However the diameter is larger on the 2000 which substantially increases the moment of inertia.

 

[PabloX]

12lbs vs 22lbs. However the diameter is larger on the 2000 which substantially increases the moment of inertia.

I thought there was an optional copper platter that was 40lbs. I could be wrong.

 

[Mr Boochie]

What a spectacular meltdown over such a simple question

Anyway, my two cents: I have worked on two SP10mk2s, both units I worked on had quite a lot of out of spec capacitors. If I remember correctly, there are at least three capacitors on the drive board that take a heavy beating, on my own unit they were way out of spec with very high ESR. Another capacitor that gave me grief was a large cap on the logic board used for decoupling the brake circuit, on my SP10 the solenoid was not properly engaging and that capacitor was the culprit. I don't have the schematic in front of me so don't remember their numbers, but I would definitely recommend replacing pretty much every capacitor on the PCBs, along with measuring the voltages and observing the waveforms with a scope to make sure that the turntable is working properly.

Regarding the motors: my own SP10 is an ex-BBC turntable that obviously had quite a lot of use, but the main bearing was in excellent condition. The other one reportedly had very low hours, and the oil inside the bearing basically turned into varnish. I had to spend quite a lot of time removing the mess.

Can I ask, why do you think so many caps were out-of-spec? Is it the stock that Technics was using? Not enough cooling for these caps, in areas of use? Using under-spec'ed voltage ratings?

Do you upgrade the caps with higher voltage rated ones? Or use more expensive stock? How many hours would you expect an average re-cap job to last --- where same quality of caps and voltage ratings were used?

ありがとう
Arigatō!

 

[Ken Boyd]

As post be another member here, many of the SP10's out there were in commercial establishments so very likely have been thru the recap routine and possibly multiple times over the course of the table's life. So, finding av few out there that the caps are not really bad might only be because those were ones that had already been serviced in the past.

 

[Ken Boyd]

Can I ask, why do you think so many caps were out-of-spec? Is it the stock that Technics was using? Not enough cooling for these caps, in areas of use? Using under-spec'ed voltage ratings?

Do you upgrade the caps with higher voltage rated ones? Or use more expensive stock? How many hours would you expect an average re-cap job to last --- where same quality of caps and voltage ratings were used?

ありがとう
Arigatō!

It could be due to lower usage. Don't caps last longer on gear that is used reagularly?

 

[Mr Boochie]

As post be another member here, many of the SP10's out there were in commercial establishments so very likely have been thru the recap routine and possibly multiple times over the course of the table's life. So, finding av few out there that the caps are not really bad might only be because those were ones that had already been serviced in the past.

Most were used in studios and radio stations?

Thanks!

 

[Mr Boochie]

It could be due to lower usage. Don't caps last longer on gear that is used reagularly?

There's a theory about that. Not letting caps stay in a discharged state too long. And properly reforming those old, dormant ones.

Isn't this the reason some manufacturers design units to stay in a standby state, with power caps charged. Instead of fully discharging every time you turn the unit off.

 

[stratokaster]

If you get a chance, I'd be curious which one that was.

Found my repair notes — of course, I totally misremembered things. The unit that had problems with the solenoid had a defective transistor (TR213), the other unit had issues with electronic braking and that one had a defective capacitor, C204 according to my notes.

 

[stratokaster]

Can I ask, why do you think so many caps were out-of-spec? Is it the stock that Technics was using? Not enough cooling for these caps, in areas of use? Using under-spec'ed voltage ratings?

Do you upgrade the caps with higher voltage rated ones? Or use more expensive stock? How many hours would you expect an average re-cap job to last --- where same quality of caps and voltage ratings were used?

ありがとう
Arigatō!

Personally I think these capacitors are just old, plus some of them see high ripple currents. Their voltage ratings are perfectly fine, for example the drive circuit operates at 32.5V and all capacitors on the drive board are specced at 50V.

The quality of Matsushita capacitors varied quite a bit over the years, one unit I worked on was from 1976 and it had pale purple Matsushita caps that are very common in Technics gear from the 1970s, they were all physically fine (no signs of leakage) but quite out of spec. The other was produced quite late for an Mk2, in 1985, and it had those infamous dark blue capacitors that were already starting to spill their juice. Surprisingly, these caps all tested fine, even those that were leaky.

 

[Mr Boochie]

Personally I think these capacitors are just old, plus some of them see high ripple currents. Their voltage ratings are perfectly fine, for example the drive circuit operates at 32.5V and all capacitors on the drive board are specced at 50V.

The quality of Matsushita capacitors varied quite a bit over the years, one unit I worked on was from 1976 and it had pale purple Matsushita caps that are very common in Technics gear from the 1970s, they were all physically fine (no signs of leakage) but quite out of spec. The other was produced quite late for an Mk2, in 1985, and it had those infamous dark blue capacitors that were already starting to spill their juice. Surprisingly, these caps all tested fine, even those that were leaky.

Ripple from poor AC source? Or the external Technics PSU is putting out dirty DC?

Odd. Since I thought Panasonic (Matsushita) made good electrolytic caps. Would Nichicon or Rubycon be better in the SP10?

Thanks!

 

[stratokaster]

Ripple from poor AC source? Or the external Technics PSU is putting out dirty DC?

Odd. Since I thought Panasonic (Matsushita) made good electrolytic caps. Would Nichicon or Rubycon be better in the SP10?

Thanks!

Well, if you look at C2, C4 and C6 for example, you'd see that they take quite a lot beating — they sit between the 32.5V rail and the output of the drive amplifier, which means that they are constantly charged and discharged by the motor drive signal.

Panasonic makes good capacitors, I can assure you that Rubycon and Nichicon also produced some less than stellar capacitors in the past. Also it would be a stretch to expect electrolytic capacitors that are 35+ years old to perform at their best, regardless of the make.

 

[Mr Boochie]

OT: I used Tripp-Lite hospital grade SmartPro UPS-isolation units as sources for my hi-fi and guitar amps. I got them from our IT department, when they upgraded all the servers and UPS, at work. Those guys have me sold on hospital grade electronics.

Pretty sure running pure and quiet AC helps the pre-amps and turntables. Well... let's just say it comforts my gizzards. Especially, with these vintage units and guitar amps. 2 and 4KVA units.

Okay, back to caps!

 

[cafe latte]

That's one hell of a non-sequitur.































































































































































































































































The condition of the units I've seen didn't change based on my personal experiences - they are what they are. If people can add data that can be "validated" to that sample pool, the more informed the community becomes. That experiences differ, especially with small sample pools, is not remotely surprising.































































































































































































































































If we want to turn anecdotal reports in to data we need a way to validate the anecdote. A criteria that, in this case, good/bad is being assessed in a compatible way. My asking the question didn't cast doubt, it's your refusal to answer the question that did that. Just as it was entirely up to you to create it, you're also the only one that can remove it.































































































































































































































































In turn you've decided to resort to an ad-hominem in your last sentence. Why? In light of a larger data set shouldn't advice be reassessed with the new information? If you think there's an issue with the data perhaps try to qualify it? I note th





at your report inferred that three of your units spent their entire lives in Australia - the driest climate of any inhabited continent. IIRC Jon (that's his name) has reported similar findings with a slightly larger sample pool than yours.































































































































































































































































I foll







ow data, and my advice is based on that data. When new data is presented I validate it, incorporate it, and reassess that advice. My knowledge of these units has grown over time, and if you look you'll find that I've changed my position on a















number of items related to them over the years, all due to learning new information.















































































































































































































































































And yes, Jon does make very pretty parts. What does that have to do with this?























































































You clearly kniw little about Australia.

That's one hell of a non-sequitur.

The condition of the units I've seen didn't change based on my personal experiences - they are what they are. If people can add data that can be "validated" to that sample pool, the more informed the community becomes. That experiences differ, especially with small sample pools, is not remotely surprising.

If we want to turn anecdotal reports in to data we need a way to validate the anecdote. A criteria that, in this case, good/bad is being assessed in a compatible way. My asking the question didn't cast doubt, it's your refusal to answer the question that did that. Just as it was entirely up to you to create it, you're also the only one that can remove it.

In turn you've decided to resort to an ad-hominem in your last sentence. Why? In light of a larger data set shouldn't advice be reassessed with the new information? If you think there's an issue with the data perhaps try to qualify it? I note that your report inferred that three of your units spent their entire lives in Australia - the driest climate of any inhabited continent. IIRC Jon (that's his name) has reported similar findings with a slightly larger sample pool than yours.

I follow data, and my advice is based on that data. When new data is presented I validate it, incorporate it, and reassess that advice. My knowledge of these units has grown over time, and if you look you'll find that I've changed my position on a number of items related to them over the years, all due to learning new information.

And yes, Jon does make very pretty parts. What does that have to do with this?

It is clear you dont know much about Australian climate. Yes overall it is a dry country, but the population lives in the coast where it rains. Nothern Australia has monsoons and close to where I live is Tully which has an annual rainfall of 4000mm!! Western Tasmania can get 3000mm, Melbourne is around 700mm but you can often get four seasons in one day. To the uninformed Aus is a dry country, but the reality is "Harsh climate" is probably a better description, dry periods and then wild weather, North for example gets cyclones and months of rain. This sort of climate is not kind to electronics so my 4 SP10's 3 which spent a lot of time in Australia were a valid sample. Like I said PSU caps MUST be changed and as others have said bearing should be cleaned and relubed. I did go further and change all the caps, test and calibrate, but I am convinced from my experience that mosr units will be fine with a PSU recap and a good lube. The issue though with the PSU caps is when they fail they can damage components in the motor unit. My advice to people taking an old SP 10 out of storage is do not power it up until the PSU caps have been changed and the voltages checked. I dont doubt you have found issues in motor units but I dont think it is as common as you make out.
The reason I recapped my motor unit was it is easy to do and I had to totally dismantle it to respray it anyway. These are not complicated to work on, most hobbists could recap an SP10mk2 and test it they really are not rocket science.
Chris