The Technics 1200 Fascination?

[Erik Tracy]

I have the black SL-1200MKII (model year 2007) and the black SL-1210MK5 (model year 2010). The 1200 has an incandescent platter light, the 1210 has an LED platter light. The 1200 has an exposed on/off switch, the 1210 has this switch recessed. The 1200 has the simple speed slider with a locking center "0" speed (or dead-on) detent and LED indicator, the 1210 has no "0" detent, but has an extra button for dead-on speed. The 1200 is single voltage (120v) for USA, the 1210 is dual voltage. They also have different thickness record mats. I have also been told that the 1210 has "improved" tonearm wire, what ever that means.....

Yep, I got the black 1200 mk2 as well:

Is there any significance in the designation being MK2 vs MKII?

 

[WaynerN]

MK2 = MKII

 

[986s]

I have a 1200 MK2 that is dual voltage in silver.

 

[BobbyBluz]

I paid $50 for my 1200 M3D then did the groundless conversion & better RCA leads for $40. Anti-skate spring was still good and start-stop were dead on. I already had a collection of Stanton cartridges mounted in Technics headshells. After a proper setup (I worked for a Technics dealer in the 80's and had a bit of factory training on them) it became my main turntable for production use. The most expensive thing I've bought for it is a real Stanton Sterohedron stylus (thanks needlestein!) I ended up putting in a new Stanton 680 V3. It works fabulously well for my tastes and all parts are still available for it.

 

[muovimies]

This is a recurring issue that I have, I keep wanting to re-own a technics sl1200 mk2, preferably in black. This is not the first time that I have had this issue but it's something I want to be talked out of, or maybe diagnosed and cured of? So I am looking for all the good reasons why the 1200 is not good, that's right, not good. Before you reply please understand, I've had this unit before, in fact I've owned three at different times and each time I had one I sold it because of their lack of musicality.

Since you obviously love everything but the sound of a stock SL-1200mk2, it seems like a no brainer to get one and then enter the endless rabbit hole and money sink of upgrades and modifications until it sounds right. Btw. I agree with you, in stock form there is something wrong about them sonically. Not that they sound 'bad' per se, but they do sound a bit dead and lifeless and not in a 'wow, this turntable really disappears from the equation and is so transparent, just giving me what's there, not sugarcoating anything' way but in a 'wow, can't say what's wrong with this, but who killed the music' way I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me. I know the tonearm gets blamed a lot, but I think it might be as simple as the stock feet/mat or both, or either/both in combination with the chassis damping. Or actually it could be the tonearm too, or maybe it is one more thing that adds to it. You know like all these little things taking little nibs of sweet music out, until there's not much left there. But I know there are A LOT of folks really happy with theirs. Granted, a lot of them folks whose sonical tastes I don't trust, but also a lot of people whose I do, though those folks usually have at least somewhat addressed the issues with some choice upgrades. I believe feet, mat and the tonearm being the first to go.

If it were me, I'd probably start with the feet and mat and see where I'm at. Then either change the arm or rewire/add fluid damper to the original. Then perhaps a new bearing? New platter? New PSU? Basically keep throwing money at it until it sounds right, and if it never does, then sell it for a huge loss since realistically no one is going to pay what it cost for all the upgrades

Even assuming everything about it is 'wrong' except for the basic drive unit, it would still be decent value for money though nothing like the bargain it used to be. And you can sell an SL-1200mk2 in a heart beat if you so desire.

 

[Powertech]

Supply voltage should make much difference to the speed as they have servo controlled DC motors. The 1200 had a fairly rudimentary transistorised servo system and the 1200Mk2 had a full digital servo control system a bit like the system Pioneer developed in the late 70s. Pioneer left the original numbers on the control ICs and Technics had them specially printed with their own name on them so no one else could repair them - nice touch.

 

[bobins08]

The SL 1200 is one of the most debated turntables out there, very popular for good reason. It is a solid performer.

I have a SL 1600 mk II, fully auto cousin of the 1200. I think the looks are one of its least attributes. I do really like the easy VTA adjust, the quartz lock, and even has a sprung suspension. I don’t use it much but I won’t let it go either. I don’t think it sounds any better than my Marantz 6300 semi auto or my Kenwood KD 550. Yet, I’m going to hang on to it.

Musicality? Don’t know how to measure it but we all have an opinion on what we hear what we like. My fully marcmorinized AR sounds best to me and so does my modded TD160 w/ sme 3009 arm. I have a Dual 1019 that I like a lot too and I’ll spin that occasionally.

 

[empirelvr]

Since you obviously love everything but the sound of a stock SL-1200mk2, it seems like a no brainer to get one and then enter the endless rabbit hole and money sink of upgrades and modifications until it sounds right. Btw. I agree with you, in stock form there is something wrong about them sonically. Not that they sound 'bad' per se, but they do sound a bit dead and lifeless and not in a 'wow, this turntable really disappears from the equation and is so transparent, just giving me what's there, not sugarcoating anything' way but in a 'wow, can't say what's wrong with this, but who killed the music' way I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me. I know the tonearm gets blamed a lot, but I think it might be as simple as the stock feet/mat or both, or either/both in combination with the chassis damping. Or actually it could be the tonearm too, or maybe it is one more thing that adds to it. You know like all these little things taking little nibs of sweet music out, until there's not much left there. But I know there are A LOT of folks really happy with theirs. Granted, a lot of them folks whose sonical tastes I don't trust, but also a lot of people whose I do, though those folks usually have at least somewhat addressed the issues with some choice upgrades. I believe feet, mat and the tonearm being the first to go.

If it were me, I'd probably start with the feet and mat and see where I'm at. Then either change the arm or rewire/add fluid damper to the original. Then perhaps a new bearing? New platter? New PSU? Basically keep throwing money at it until it sounds right, and if it never does, then sell it for a huge loss since realistically no one is going to pay what it cost for all the upgrades

Even assuming everything about it is 'wrong' except for the basic drive unit, it would still be decent value for money though nothing like the bargain it used to be. And you can sell an SL-1200mk2 in a heart beat if you so desire.

Once upon a time for someone like you, the answer was to buy a SP-15 and play around with bases and tonearms without having to disassemble things or void warranties. The best of all worlds. Kind of sad that option isn't easily available anymore.

 

[JP]

MK2 = MKII

So I'm not the only one? Would you happen to know the date (year) Technics' switched from using Roman numerals?

 

[Guest126]

Not good? If its not good then how come used editions start at 600 bucks, and a new set (if you can find it) will cost.....who knows??? The 1200 is the quintessential turntable for the DJ genre, as well as a reference table for modern direct drive units. IMO it is among the most durable, precise and well built turntables available in the consumer's market. So good the design of the 1200 is, that I would give good marks to its knock offs (from reliable makers, of course).

 

[WaynerN]

So I'm not the only one? Would you happen to know the date (year) Technics' switched from using Roman numerals?

I used "II" to represent 2. Its done all the time. It has nothing to do with Technics........................

 

[JP]

Ah. I suffer neurosis from typo'd product models: MK2 instead of MKII, MKIII instead of MK3, etc.

 

[malden]

Do you guys use lower case "L" or upper case " i "...?...

 

[canadapuck]

Since you obviously love everything but the sound of a stock SL-1200mk2, it seems like a no brainer to get one and then enter the endless rabbit hole and money sink of upgrades and modifications until it sounds right. Btw. I agree with you, in stock form there is something wrong about them sonically. Not that they sound 'bad' per se, but they do sound a bit dead and lifeless and not in a 'wow, this turntable really disappears from the equation and is so transparent, just giving me what's there, not sugarcoating anything' way but in a 'wow, can't say what's wrong with this, but who killed the music' way I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me. I know the tonearm gets blamed a lot, but I think it might be as simple as the stock feet/mat or both, or either/both in combination with the chassis damping. Or actually it could be the tonearm too, or maybe it is one more thing that adds to it. You know like all these little things taking little nibs of sweet music out, until there's not much left there. But I know there are A LOT of folks really happy with theirs. Granted, a lot of them folks whose sonical tastes I don't trust, but also a lot of people whose I do, though those folks usually have at least somewhat addressed the issues with some choice upgrades. I believe feet, mat and the tonearm being the first to go.

If it were me, I'd probably start with the feet and mat and see where I'm at. Then either change the arm or rewire/add fluid damper to the original. Then perhaps a new bearing? New platter? New PSU? Basically keep throwing money at it until it sounds right, and if it never does, then sell it for a huge loss since realistically no one is going to pay what it cost for all the upgrades

Thanks for this reply muovimies, I think you have summed up the cycle that I have gone through whenever I get the 1200. I buy one and fawn over its design appeal (this is a subjective affliction) and then start spinning and when I really sit down to listen to something I start researching upgrades. At which point I lose steam because my collectors spirit pumps the brakes and says "original condition is everything".

Not good? If its not good then how come used editions start at 600 bucks, and a new set (if you can find it) will cost.....who knows??? The 1200 is the quintessential turntable for the DJ genre, as well as a reference table for modern direct drive units. IMO it is among the most durable, precise and well built turntables available in the consumer's market. So good the design of the 1200 is, that I would give good marks to its knock offs (from reliable makers, of course).

thanks for the reply ibls 1 I think perhaps its just a bit too harsh for me to say its not "good" because it really is good. Its a very love-hate kind of thing to me having heard what I perceive as better units sonically but that really lack in both the ease of use factor as well as they just aren't the design icon that the 1200 is. So in the end I let my ears do the talking and I keep selling my technics. Now is just one of those times that I started wandering again, even though everything is great at home my eye looks outward for new "sonic adventures". I hope my metaphor isn't lost here. Its like the 7 month itch...

 

[canadapuck]

This might be part of the problem. The Stanton and Shure cartridges are really too compliant to use in the 1200's stock arm, especially the Shure. Plus the V15 Type III needs to be loaded with over 400 pf of capacitance (an often overlooked detail about this cart) to sound as intended. The Nagaoka is more of a match mass wise BUT the instructions specify a 100 pf capacitance loading, and the 1200's cable has a capacitance of 120 pF just by itself and given a preamp/receiver's average of 125 pf capacitance loading in the phono stage you were also not hearing it at it's optimum.

From your previous cart stash, it looks like the Stanton 681 with one of it's heavier tracking alternative styli would have been your best match. And perhaps changed your opinion of the 'table.
I know you want reasons to NOT get another one, but it looks like if you like high compliance MM's (I know I do) the KAB damper would be necessary to get the best out of them with the stock 1200 arm. (and pay attention to loading!)
And don't confuse damping in this context with what you and others call overdamping because of the rubber base and mat. While not apples to apples, it's not exactly apples to oranges either. Maybe more like apples to pears.

I have been looking into an MC cart and of course fall on the Denon dl103 time and again, would that be too heavy for the stock technics arm? It is by most accounts an incredibly lively cart that could possibly counteract any flatness that I find.

 

[RickeyM]

I know the tonearm gets blamed a lot, but I think it might be as simple as the stock feet/mat or both, or either/both in combination with the chassis damping.

You may be on to something here. The stock feet and mat were designed for shock absorption rather than hi-fidelity. I've installed an aftermarket mat and feet and I think my deck sounds very musical.

 

[RickeyM]

So, does anyone have a suggestion for what the best mat upgrade is as long as we are here? I use the stock thick mat and have no complaints, but I'm always open to suggestions and testimonials.

One thing I recommend is replacing the rubber mat on the underside of the platter with a layer of Dynamat Extreme. Why? First, the stock platter is very poorly glued on. Second, Dynamat is going to damp that platter better than a piece of rubber and it'll make any mat you use more effective.

 

[empirelvr]

I have been looking into an MC cart and of course fall on the Denon dl103 time and again, would that be too heavy for the stock technics arm? It is by most accounts an incredibly lively cart that could possibly counteract any flatness that I find.

The Denon may be going too far in the other direction, despite it's 2.5 gram VTF recommendation, but using the auxiliary counterweight and maybe a heavier headshell it could work. (So much easier to add mass than to take it away...)

 

[Erik Tracy]

You may be on to something here. The stock feet and mat were designed for shock absorption rather than hi-fidelity. I've installed an aftermarket mat and feet and I think my deck sounds very musical.

Interesting tidbit just to toss out.

I was at the new SP-10/SL1000R demo at Alma Audio last month. Bill Voss VP US Marketing was giving a tech breakdown of the new SL-1000R which we heard.

He tossed out that Technics decided to use the same material as the old 1200 after testing a lot of different materials; it tested 'better' (whatever that means).

As I'm still running my stock 1200MK2 mat, I cannot attest to any sonic differences to mats.

 

[WaynerN]

Ah. I suffer neurosis from typo'd product models: MK2 instead of MKII, MKIII instead of MK3, etc.

It's a habit I have. My Empire is labeled 598MKII. The MKII is solely a revision designation to the parent model number. You'd think with my OCD that I would call it the MK2, but I just don't do it. If you want to look on eBay for tables, you have to spell it both ways (or leave the MK revision off your search word).