• 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

Yamaha PX3 or PX2?

kaplang

kaplang

Works for me !
If you owned a PX3 and had an opportunity to trade straight across for a PX2 would you? I have an opportunity to do this but I really like the PX3 and have never owned a PX2. Is their any advantage to having the PX2 other then the price difference? I would be able to keep my cartridge as part of the trade. I have tested the PX2 and it works perfectly and is in very nice condition

Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
George
 
Register to hide this ad
The tonearm assys are identical (excepting early PX2s-but not a plus) and so are the headshells (so keep your cartridge and headshell).
The PX2 has 2dB(?) less rumble than the PX3, the plinth is die-cast aluminum instead of a composite, and in addition to having a different shape, the dust cover is 1mm thicker material. The PX2 feet are distinctly different from PX3 feet and generally haven't decomposed which is usually a given with PX3 feet.

Edit: Didn't realize you might not know: the 2 is much heavier; the platter is much heavier and bigger diameter; the 2 motor is much more robust and the motor electronics section is much larger/complex. The 2 was a lot more expensive and rarer and commands 50-100% higher money on the market.
 
Last edited:
Here are some reasons why the PX2 is a better turntable than the PX3 (which was very good itself), assuming identical condition:
  • Higher new price – 20% higher (1982 Australian price list) or 34% higher (1982 USA price list)
  • Heavier platter (2.1 versus 1.6kg) with larger diameter (31 versus 30cm)
  • Lower wow and flutter (0.01% versus 0.015% WRMS, measured directly)
  • Improved signal to noise ratio (lower noise – 80dB versus 77dB weighted)
  • Heavier dustcover (1.3 versus 1.1kg)
  • Cabinets: PX2 - diecast aluminium cabinet, PX3 - BMC (Bulk Moulding Compound – a composite of fibreglass and other materials)
  • Heavier total weight (17 versus 12kg) - this helps resist acoustic feedback better
Note that I've listed the PX2 first for all the above points of difference.
 
I've owned, lived with and used both. The PX-2 sounds better than the 3. The GT 2000 is in another league altogether.
 
pfcs49 said:
The tonearm assys are identical (excepting early PX2s-but not a plus) and so are the headshells (so keep your cartridge and headshell).
The PX2 has 2dB(?) less rumble than the PX3, the plinth is die-cast aluminum instead of a composite, and in addition to having a different shape, the dust cover is 1mm thicker material. The PX2 feet are distinctly different from PX3 feet and generally haven't decomposed which is usually a given with PX3 feet.

Edit: Didn't realize you might not know: the 2 is much heavier; the platter is much heavier and bigger diameter; the 2 motor is much more robust and the motor electronics section is much larger/complex. The 2 was a lot more expensive and rarer and commands 50-100% higher money on the market.
Click to expand...

What pfcs49 said, all the above true. The finest of the Japanese tangential trackers sold here to boot. The PX2 is a Yamaha Gem. Only bettered by the Japan only GT 2000.
 
Actually the PX-2 is also bettered by the Ultra rare PX-1. As to which is better between the PX-1 and the GT 2000, I personally think that if the PX-1 was never made, we wouldn't ever have the GT 2000. I can see a lot of what went into the GT 2000, in the PX-1 which was a 5 years earlier design. i have seen that a particular chap who was residing in Japan(might have married there) and he had a spectacular collection of THE BEST Japan-only turntables including the Yamaha PX-1. He said that if the PX-1 lacked anything sound wise from the others, it wasn't much and the sheer delight and convenience of the turntable conspired to make it the one that he most used and enjoyed. There were better but he preferred using the PX-1.

Oh. I forgot to say that this fellow didn't have a GT 2000. He had said though that he regarded the GT 2000X as a great turntable even if he didn't own one. Never even saw him mention the GT 2000. Could be, that it was because he really only pursued the Top Of The Line turntables.
 
Be that as it may, I have the PX2 on my left and the B&O 8002 on my right with the Soundsmith Voice in it (shame on me! how absurd you say) and the 8002 is my go-to deck.
I AM right handed, but that's not why I choose it-it's just ergonomically much more satisfying and sounds very great.
I even engineered an ultralight "headshell" which required a 33% lighter counter-weight to run PX2 as a low mass deal, but the Voice worked just as well where it belonged: the tonearm it was engineered for years ago in the 8002!
I hope I haven't offended any audio snobs with my peasantry.
 
pfcs49 said:
Be that as it may, I have the PX2 on my left and the B&O 8002 on my right with the Soundsmith Voice in it (shame on me! how absurd you say) and the 8002 is my go-to deck.
I AM right handed, but that's not why I choose it-it's just ergonomically much more satisfying and sounds very great.
I even engineered an ultralight "headshell" which required a 33% lighter counter-weight to run PX2 as a low mass deal, but the Voice worked just as well where it belonged: the tonearm it was engineered for years ago in the 8002!
I hope I haven't offended any audio snobs with my peasantry.
Click to expand...
You have been consistent in that opinion for a while now. There is no reason why anyone should doubt you when you have both examples compared side by side.
 
Agreed there. And the PX2 fits your needs so very well. So, I respect you highly. The PX2 in great order is a very fine automatic tangential tracker. And so are the B&O offerings. And you preferring the B&O for The Voice there's nothing I can disagree about, that cartridge was born for a B&O Beogram 8002.
 
KentTeffeteller said:
Agreed there. And the PX2 fits your needs so very well. So, I respect you highly. The PX2 in great order is a very fine automatic tangential tracker. And so are the B&O offerings. And you preferring the B&O for The Voice there's nothing I can disagree about, that cartridge was born for a B&O Beogram 8002.
Click to expand...
I have not owned a PX-2 for 7 years. I sold my PX-2, my C2x and my B-2 to Aussie AKer and decades-old friend timofred.
 
I own both a PX2 and 2 PX3's. Can you keep the PX3 and still get the PX2? My PX3's are basically new and have hardly been used but I fear the day will come when the PX2 will die in a way that cannot be fixed. For example some traces and pcb's are disintegrating slightly and one day something will fail. The PX3s are more common and you can usually find a donor in case something bad happens. I use the PX2 every day and all is well after a recap but some if the boards are not looking so good. My only worry is finding a donor for the boards if a problem comes up. The tonearm assemblies can be made to live with using PX3's if needed. I do have the old tonearm with the worm drive. Sonically the PX2 is better but not omfg better.
 
Crazeehorse said:
I own both a PX2 and 2 PX3's. Can you keep the PX3 and still get the PX2? .
Click to expand...


Before the PX2 came along I had 2 PX3s for the same reason you have both. I felt I needed a backup. I just sold one of the PX3s and now have both a PX2 and PX3 just in case.
 
If I am not mistaken, the PX2 might have the same tonearm, but the drive system for the tone arm is quite different, with the PX3 having a number of small belts to operate the drive while the PX2 has one small drive belt which drives the larger flat belt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom