The Official -Technics SL-1600/1700/1800- Owners Thread

[bobabode]

You're definitely living right!

Me? I'm good for an old fart, I guess.

So, where do you think you'll fetch up, the PNW or NorCal?

John

My vote is NorCal but the missus has veto rights and final say in most ev'rything. I'm dying to show her Crater Lake and the Rogue River (mmmmm, steelies!) She's liking Portlandia but anywhere green with some rain would suit us both. She let's me fill the living room with JBL's and Vandie's and so I don't complain about any of our feline hoard sleeping on them. They're smart enough not too use them for scratching posts, so far...ara:
Merrylander recently disabused me of the notion that closing in on '60 was old fartdom. He called me a child...that silver tongued devil.

 

[audiojones]

So really, this should be the Official Technics SL-1600/1610/1650/1600MK2/1610MK2/1301/1311/1700/1710/1700MK2/1710MK2/1401/1411/1800/1810/1800MK2/1810MK2/1501/1511 Owners Thread?

Forgetting any? If not, that's 19 models to keep track of.

How about just the "Floating Suspension Technics Owners Thread"?

 

[Stanton681EEES]

Updated the first post to include all those who had their names in by 10 pm EST. Of course, we were then joined by a couple more. Sorry, guys, you'll have to wait until tomorrow. This heat is killing me, and my laptop is just making it worse.

But it's good to see so many joining in the fun. And for those 1300/1400/1500's out there who were asking, I didn't forget about you. Check the first post again.

I hope you like it.

Keep rocking the free world, ladies and gents!

your rite about this dam Ohio heat ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh:thumbsdn:

 

[andylsun]

I have a Sl-1650 and SL-1700 - love them both, and while I have an SL-1200MK2 in my main rotation, I think the SL-1700 is just as good. May switch back over at some point. Will buy any SL technics I see on sight (lower than 1900 anyway).

 

[Rhetor]

"There are many like it, but this one is mine."

From the moment I started getting into vinyl several years ago, I knew I wanted to one day have a very nice, high-quality table that was reliable and would last a long time. When I discovered the Technics 1600, I knew almost instantly that this was what I had been looking for in a turntable.

It seems to come up on these forums a decent amount, and I know several people have them, had them, or aspire to have them. It may not be it's more famous cousin, but I think it's deserving of its own thread.

So, I'll add people as they want to join. But fans of this wonderful turntable, let's make some noise (with no audible wow & flutter!)

Thank you Roivas for making me an homered relative on the thread with my SL-1500 . . . That's class!

 

[Rhetor]

So really, this should be the Official Technics SL-1600/1610/1650/1600MK2/1610MK2/1301/1311/1700/1710/1700MK2/1710MK2/1401/1411/1800/1810/1800MK2/1810MK2/1501/1511 Owners Thread?

Forgetting any? If not, that's 19 models to keep track of.

You forgot the true 1500.

 

[winters860]

You forgot the true 1500.

No, I didn't.

The 1300/1400/1500 series was designed as a more economical alternative to the tables being discussed here. They've got their own thread here.

 

[montelatici]

No, I didn't.

The 1300/1400/1500 series was designed as a more economical alternative to the tables being discussed here. They've got their own thread here.

They were not designed as more economical tables as those here. They are the same class of Technics TT from a generation (1974) earlier and were the junior partners to the SL 1200 (original). The SL 1600-1800 are from around 1977-1980 depending on market and model.

 

[winters860]

They were not designed as more economical tables as those here. They are the same class of Technics TT from a generation (1974) earlier and were the junior partners to the SL 1200 (original). The SL 1600-1800 are from around 1977-1980 depending on market and model.

I stand corrected.

Nonetheless, while capable in their own right, the 1300/1400/1500 tables were not as ambitious or expensive as the 1600/1700/1800. By the time the MK2 models were released, they were firmly ensconced as a lower tier.

Like them, love them, avoid the notorious 1300MK2/1400MK2 or not, but I don't think they fit with the spirit of this thread.

 

[montelatici]

I stand corrected.

Nonetheless, while capable in their own right, the 1300/1400/1500 tables were not as ambitious or expensive as the 1600/1700/1800. By the time the MK2 models were released, they were firmly ensconced as a lower tier.

Like them, love them, avoid the notorious 1300MK2/1400MK2 or not, but I don't think they fit with the spirit of this thread.

Actually, the SL 1300 (full auto) retailed at $350 when it came out, and the SL 1600 (full auto) at $290 2-3 years later. The SL 1600MK2 retailed at $400 a few years later yet.


http://www.vintagetechnics.stereomanuals.com/turntables/turntables2.htm

 

[winters860]

Actually, the SL 1300 (full auto) retailed at $350 when it came out, and the SL 1600 (full auto) at $290 2-3 years later. The SL 1600MK2 retailed at $400 a few years later yet.


http://www.vintagetechnics.stereomanuals.com/turntables/turntables2.htm

I'm not sure if I trust the Vintage Technics site, which is riddled with errors. Besides that, are you really trying to argue that the 1300/1400/1500 series is better than, or even equal to the 1600/1700/1800?

 

[montelatici]

I'm not sure if I trust the Vintage Technics site, which is riddled with errors. Besides that, are you really trying to argue that the 1300/1400/1500 series is better than, or even equal to the 1600/1700/1800?

I work on all of those models. The 1300-1500 are easily equal in performance (the specs. are almost identical) and the automatic mechanism of the earlier series is actually heavier duty and hardly ever fails. The 1600 has a very common problem in almost all of them. Easily fixed, mind you, but the 1300s hardly ever have auto mechanism failures. The only major difference is the suspended platter/motor. Some like it some don't.

 

[Roivas]

Updated the roster in the first post, so let me know if you want in or if there's a typo. Until I hear otherwise, I am assuming we're all in and it's all good.

Sorry for the delays on the update. Work's been busy, but we're back in business!!

 

[Balifly]

Thanks for the update! :thmbsp: :thmbsp:

 

[CygnusDen]

Count me in! Proud owner of an SL-1700 MK2 here. An AK post from 2010 has a couple of photos and tells the story of how I was lucky enough to save it from going to the landfill.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4183364&postcount=10

This was definitely a testament to the solid construction of this model line. It remains my #1 TT, now running a Denon DL-110 cart instead of the Shure M97xE/SAS combo. It has never failed to work and is simply a pleasure to use and listen to.

 

[Rhetor]

So really, this should be the Official Technics SL-1600/1610/1650/1600MK2/1610MK2/1301/1311/1700/1710/1700MK2/1710MK2/1401/1411/1800/1810/1800MK2/1810MK2/1501/1511 Owners Thread?

Forgetting any? If not, that's 19 models to keep track of.

You included the 1501 and the 1511 . . . Why not the 1500? Rationale, please?

 

[Montycat]

Signing in with my 1700 MKII. I think it will get a refinish job soon but at the moment it is working just fine.


Technics SL-1700MK2 by Buhduh, on Flickr

 

[elcoholic]

I have a lowly SL-1950 so I can't join I will say that despite it's craptastic plinth at low to moderate volume levels this $26 investment sounds just fine in my bedroom system. Jazz at night and classical on Saturday mornings. Presently it has an Ortofon MC3 on it which cost 12 times what the table did. I'm told it shares it's innards with better kin. Someday it may get a concrete plinth if I get motivated enough.

 

[59volvo]

anyone who owns both a MKI and a MKII (1600/1700 or 1800) - can you comment on sound quality differences between the two given the same type cartridge?

 

[dlaloum]

anyone who owns both a MKI and a MKII (1600/1700 or 1800) - can you comment on sound quality differences between the two given the same type cartridge?

Not a really fair comparison - the difference in arm mass is substantial, and therefore there are cartridges that would be OK in one but would be only so-so in the other and vice versa.

the MKI's are firmly mid mass needing mid-low compliance cartridges for best results.

The MKII's are mid-low mass allowing them to play better with high-mid compliance cartridges. (still not ideal for high compliance cartridges)

The MKII's can be fitted with a fluid damping trough from KABUSA - which allows them to work well with high compliance cartridges as well. (no such accessory available for the MKI's)

A mid compliance cartridge would work well in either and either arms mass can be easily increased for lower compliance cartridges.

High compliance cartridges are unlikely to ever give their best in a MkI.

bye for now

David