70's and early 80's Japanese Component: How good were they?

[FrantzM]

Actually no. The AR turntable beat the pants off the Technics. Sure you could stand on the Technics and the platter would spin, but the sounds was not the equal of the AR table of the day. I'd say that the Japanese arms and cartridges of the day fared much better such as the EPA, JVC (Aczel creamed over the 7045 arms--which was ahead of its time in many ways) and FR arms and cartridges

Even to this day, we don't necessarily hear the best the Japanese designers can produce. Some products simply are not exported from Japan. I'll never forget years ago hearing for the first time the WAVAC amps driving a JVC speaker (???) that blew me away. Now expect that no one would ever call JVC speakers audiophile qualit--but this speaker that was not exported out of Japan definitely broke with tradition.

Myles

I know we are dealing with subjective here but are your really serious?? .. AR and the seriously High End-now-everybody-is-raving-about-it Technics SP-10 !!! Come on!! I know in this hobby we are fond of hyperboles but are we talking about the AR Table? The AR Table !!!
We are talking about the SP-10!! for God Sake Man!! This is the same Table that everybody seems to want a piece of right this day.. For the record i owned a bunch of tables and the AR was the inferior to most of these ... Good Entry table but nothing anyone however subjective would call a definitive table even if you tweak to death .. The Technics reputation OTOH seems to be growing by the day ... I think you are pretty much alone in this opinion

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles

I know we are dealing with subjective here but are your really serious?? .. AR and the seriously High End-now-everybody-is-raving-about-it Technics SP-10 !!! Come on!! I know in this hobby we are fond of hyperboles but are we talking about the AR Table? The AR Table !!!
We are talking about the SP-10!! for God Sake Man!! This is the same Table that everybody seems to want a piece of right this day.. For the record i own a bunch of tables and the AR was the inferior to most of these ... Good Entry table but nothing anyone however subjective would call a definitive table even if you tweak to death .. The Technics reputation OTOH seems to be growing by the day ... I think you are pretty much alone in this opinion

SP10 wasn't the first Technics DD on the market

 

[FrantzM]

SP10 wasn't the first Technics DD on the market

Wel we were talking about the SP-10 and its japanese competition as being superior to many highly touted tables of their day .. That includes the aforementioned Pink Triangle , the AR and the Linn SOndek

 

[DaveyF]

One of the fellow a'philes in our group has a Nak TX 1000 TT. His name is Roger Gordon and he is one of the local audio writers/reviewers. I have heard his TT and it is VERY good. To see it calibrate the LP and adjust for the off-set of the hole for the spindle is really something else. Roger hunted high and low for this TT and I can see why.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Wel we were talking about the SP-10 and its japanese competition as being superior to many highly touted tables of their day .. That includes the aforementioned Pink Triangle , the AR and the Linn SOndek

Well I was talking about the first technics dd vs. the AR.

 

[mep]

I was thinking about this last night as I was listening to music. There is no doubt in my mind that with the exception of the exalted few, no belt drive turntable is ever going to have the speed stability of the SP-10 and therefore its sense of “DRIVE.” This table was designed for the commercial broadcast market which explains the crazy fast start and stop times it has. You can’t get your finger off of the power button before the table has come up to speed or has stopped spinning, but that is not something we audiophiles need. But I do think we need the speed stability and the sense of drive this table has.

Belt drive tables have a belt that fits around a pulley which is mounted to a motor and a platter. All four of them are moving which invites mechanical resonances and vibrations to come creeping in to your music. Belts are never perfectly flat unless A.J. Conti is grinding yours for you. Belt drive tables typically have low-torque motors which are fairly wimpy. When I bought a 300 RPM motor from VPI to replace my 600 RPM motor, I was amazed how small the actual motor is. When all you see is the pulley sticking out of a massive chunk of metal, you get the impression you have a massive motor. You don’t, you have a massive chunk of metal.

When I went from my VPI TNT with the SDS to the SP-10 MKII, it was a positive move. The SP-10 has a lower noise floor than my TNT did which of course helps nudge you on the road towards the fabled “black background” we all want. The SP-10 is a more powerful instrument than the TNT and it sounds like it. You would just have to hear it in your system to understand the differences. That speed stability shows up in tonal purity which you can’t get if you are having micro-variations in your speed caused by your motor, pulley, belt, and platter.

When we drop our strobe disc onto the platter and use our handy dandy strobe light to check and set our speed on our belt drive tables, we are setting the speed with no load. Sometimes even though your average speed looks steady, you can still see some “to and fro” movements going on. Imagine what it’s like when you drop a 180-200 gram thick biscuit on your platter plus your tonearm and cartridge mass. This is where the Technics SP-10 MKII shines.

At one time or another, we all have sold something and regretted it. Some of us have gone out and re-bought what we sold to rectify our mistake. I have not missed my TNT/SDS setup.

 

[FrantzM]

I was thinking about this last night as I was listening to music. There is no doubt in my mind that with the exception of the exalted few, no belt drive turntable is ever going to have the speed stability of the SP-10 and therefore its sense of “DRIVE.” This table was designed for the commercial broadcast market which explains the crazy fast start and stop times it has. You can’t get your finger off of the power button before the table has come up to speed or has stopped spinning, but that is not something we audiophiles need. But I do think we need the speed stability and the sense of drive this table has.

Belt drive tables have a belt that fits around a pulley which is mounted to a motor and a platter. All four of them are moving which invites mechanical resonances and vibrations to come creeping in to your music. Belts are never perfectly flat unless A.J. Conti is grinding yours for you. Belt drive tables typically have low-torque motors which are fairly wimpy. When I bought a 300 RPM motor from VPI to replace my 600 RPM motor, I was amazed how small the actual motor is. When all you see is the pulley sticking out of a massive chunk of metal, you get the impression you have a massive motor. You don’t, you have a massive chunk of metal.

When I went from my VPI TNT with the SDS to the SP-10 MKII, it was a positive move. The SP-10 has a lower noise floor than my TNT did which of course helps nudge you on the road towards the fabled “black background” we all want. The SP-10 is a more powerful instrument than the TNT and it sounds like it. You would just have to hear it in your system to understand the differences. That speed stability shows up in tonal purity which you can’t get if you are having micro-variations in your speed caused by your motor, pulley, belt, and platter.

When we drop our strobe disc onto the platter and use our handy dandy strobe light to check and set our speed on our belt drive tables, we are setting the speed with no load. Sometimes even though your average speed looks steady, you can still see some “to and fro” movements going on. Imagine what it’s like when you drop a 180-200 gram thick biscuit on your platter plus your tonearm and cartridge mass. This is where the Technics SP-10 MKII shines.

At one time or another, we all have sold something and regretted it. Some of us have gone out and re-bought what we sold to rectify our mistake. I have not missed my TNT/SDS setup.

mep

Great post. One can infer from that how good the SP-10 was. One point I am trying to get across is how good several TTs (and arms) of the same era and provenance have been. The TTs , I have mentioned, all DD were the competitors of the SP-10. In the opinion of many, these were at least its equal... with some arguably superior when you consider their plinth and suspension systems. The Kenwood approached the issue of suspension very well and apparently more thoroughly than Technics did... Denon, Pioneer and particularly Nakamichi went to great length to insure the TT could be played if needs be on a full range speaker as stand. All of these TTs some exported to the USA had an extraordinary low noise floor both objectively and subjectively. yet we approached these great piece of engineering as inferior; worse, to this day, we continue to approach them as inferior to the fabled Linn Sondek and other belt Drive of the same era., as a whole without giving them the chance of an audition. I know I did that, until recently when I began to research TTs , again. I know back then, t when I acquired my Basis in 2002TT I could have looked for one of those great Japanese in when I got the Basis I came across a Nakamichi TX-1000, I didn’t even care to ask for the price which I then remember was rather low but the Naka would not register on my Audiophile cred-o-meter. I also rejected a Kenwood L-07 in 1987 (How stupid can one be !!! ) and got myself in 1987 a Pink Triangle, the Sondek was priced out of my means then ….
These TTS were superior Their specs were impeccable. Their noise floor was low.. Wow, flutter and rumble were lower than anything we had then in Belt Drives. Some of these TTs were pitted squarely at the SP-10 in the Pro Market where the SP-10 was the King. Most if not all of them , especially the Denon DP-100M , the Pioneer Exclusive P-3 and the Sony PX-3 could turn at 33 rpm steady while you are cleaning the LP with a manual brush applying manual, thus variable pressure, and witnessing the darn thing coping with it in a hardly audible fashion.. . I mean, for these TTs Stylus drag was a laughing matter because Hand drags would not faze them !!!
I am not sure this stops at these fabled great TT. If a budding audiophile asks for a table with which he would like to grow and tweak and change arms, etc.. No self-respecting audiophile would ever recommend a Technics SL-1200 .. yet properly modified this table can run circle around many entry level audiophile-approved table and at a lower cost. It can be fitted with better arms and its design is , allow the pun very sound… Speed stability is a given but also low noise and low rumble rumble.. Could use better isolation and better suspension but that is the same for many entry-level ( and even some rather expensive ) TTs
Meanwhile there were those superb electronics from Accuphase, the aforementioned Tehnics, Luxman, Yamaha, Pioneer, Sansui , yes Sony and many others. Where they all that bad too?… Only serious audition with an objective look at ourselves as audiophiles and with an open mind will tell us ….
as for now .. The Yamaha C2 in the opinion of one member here is at least as good or likely superior to the fabled Counterpoint SA 5.1.

 

[Ki Choi]

Ok guys, you have done an excellent job at increasing my curiosity on Technics SP-10 Mk III. What would be the reasonable price for a good working and clean one these days with or/and without the plinth?

 

[microstrip]

Just one point. The standard SP10mk2 with the obsidian Technics plinth sounded poor compared to other high-end turntables. The standard plinth would kill the turntable sound. I have owned one and sold it - first the plinth, later the turntable as I did not want to enter the DIY plinth hobby or pay for the very expensive fantastic plinths available from known sources.

As far as I know the cult of the SP10 was established only after the "subjective" modifiers started using it as a base for their very good sounding turntables.

 

[microstrip]

(...) No self-respecting audiophile would ever recommend a Technics SL-1200 .. yet properly modified this table can run circle around many entry level audiophile-approved table and at a lower cost. (...)

Frantz,

IMHO, when properly modified almost any turntable can become an audiophile approved table. As you I often regret not having the time to get some old pieces and go the DIY route ...

Do you know of the stone soup tale?

 

[FrantzM]

Micro

let's get it straight the Nakamichi TX-1000 out of the Box was and remain an outstanding TT.. The Pioneer Exclusive P3 out of the Box is a superior TT, the Luxman PD-555 (I think real designation escapes me ), I had the opportunity to listen to it compared to a Goldmund Studietto, was a superior TT, the Sony PX-3, the Kenwood L-07 were and remain superior TTs.. However much we may want to obfuscate it remain an undeniable point , we have been unfairly putting a negative patina on products which deserve more. This may be a quixotic mission. The High End Audio scene is full of prejudices and of falsities that are repeated so often that they sem to become the orthodoxy ... that I don't expect this to change quickly. i will however say tha the tide is slowly turning .. it has become routine now that those with the best systems here or elsewhere have great rooms .. Coincidence? Not really.. Some have been honest enough to own some of the items I am talking about and respect or love them .. I know mep had an experience with the Yamaha C2 and I would like him to repeat what i think of it compared to the very highly esteemed Counterpoint SA 5.1. I also know Mike Lavigne had an SP-10. I believe Albert Porter is a member here and I would like him to chime on the SP-10.

If you believe that any properly modified TT can become great then by all means go for Frank's tales ... he tweaked an HTIB as to be the best Audio system on the planet

 

[mep]

Micro
I know mep had an experience with the Yamaha C2 and I would like him to repeat what i think of it compared to the very highly esteemed Counterpoint SA 5.1.

Having owned and loved the SA-5.1 since it first came out and having bought one brand new, I think I know this preamp well. Unlike other *tube* preamps that claim to be “pure tube” or something to that effect, the 5.1 really was pretty much pure tube. Tube rectification, tube voltage regulation, tube phono stage, and tube line stage. The last 5.1 I owned, I had over $5K invested in it with all of the upgrades I had performed by Michael Elliott. The phono stage was rebuilt, the line stage rebuilt, the power supply was rebuilt, all RCA jacks replaced, new DACT volume pot, and replacement umbilical cord with Cardas wire between the outboard power supply and the preamp.

The last upgrades I had done were the power supply, umbilical cord, and DACT volume control. I had to wait months for this work to be completed (that is another story) so I bought a Yamaha C2a to use while I was waiting because I thought it appeared to be a very serious Class A SS design with a phono stage and two sets of main outs. It would fit the bill and the price was cheap. I also thought I could move it back down the road when I was done with it and not lose any money.

As a *former* dyed in the wool tube lover that believed SS was the spawn of Satan, I was perplexed at first when I listened to the C2a. The damn thing sounded great with both digital and analog. The SA-5.1 sounded very good with analog, although I had to use the SA-2 head amp for phono which raised the noise floor more than I liked. The SA-5.1 didn’t sound good with my server though. I thought it was the cheap E-MU 0404 DAC that was causing the *problem.* I have said it numerous times that this DAC has a reputation as a giant killer and our own Steve Williams said it sounded very good in his system when Larry Toy brought it over for a test drive. When I heard this DAC with my 5.1/Jadis Defy 7 MKII combo, it sounded like ass and I told Steve what I thought. Steve could only shrug his shoulders because he knew what it sounded like when he heard it.

Imagine my surprise when all of a sudden digital had to be taken very seriously with the C2a in the playback chain. I just never saw that coming. The phono stage has lots of gain, is VERY quiet, and sounds really good. I just wish the MC side had adjustments for loading. I will tell you this, I bought the McIntosh C2300 preamp and even though it has more features than a Swiss Army knife, I didn’t care for its sound (or one too many colors on the front panel), and I would take the C2a any day over the C2300. So now both my digital and analog are sounding great with the C2a. My noise floor with vinyl was lower than it had ever been with the C2a in the mix.

Bottom line was that I didn’t feel too great about investing all of the money I had spent on the 5.1 only to have it get spanked by a Yamaha C2a (over $5K vs. $300). And for those of you who think that major new advances come out every year in the sound of preamps and power amps, you need to rethink that position. Passive parts such as capacitors and resistors have improved over the years with Teflon caps being all the latest rage, but circuits either SS or tube haven’t changed drastically over the years-and certainly haven’t made major advances on a yearly basis.

Many tube products on the market are based on 1950s/1960s designs with updated passive parts. In the case of tube amps, there are only so many ways and so many tubes to spilt the phase and drive the output tubes. Many of today’s *tube* preamps really only have a single pair of tubes that are preceded by FETs and have SS buffers on the output to lower the impedance. The ARC LS-17 that I owned was a classic case of that. It sounded more SS than good SS sounds.

I haven’t had the nerve to put the C2a back in my system since my Krell KBL preamp came back from the factory last October. You would think that a preamp that sold for $4500 wouldn’t be a fair comparison for the C2a…

 

[flez007]

Ok guys, you have done an excellent job at increasing my curiosity on Technics SP-10 Mk III. What would be the reasonable price for a good working and clean one these days with or/and without the plinth?

Ki - Sorry for not answering your question directly, but we tried an SP10 MK III fitted with a Straingauge cartridge here and compared its sound with the EMT 938/TSD15 and we liked the later for a large margin.

 

[cjfrbw]

I decided my great sounding Santa Cruz system deserved the vinyl leap. I have a vintage Sony PS X70 turntable on the way. I plan to pair it with a vintage Yamaha preamp for the phono section, probably for a total cost for the two coming in below $400. I can compare it at home to my SME30 setup before bringing it over.

I remember comparing my old Yammie preamp from the 70's to the Manley Stellhead when I got it, and didn't find the Steelhead was markedly superior, so it will be fun to check out this vintage system when it is place.

I was going to keep the Santa Cruz system digital, but, as usual, can't avoid the vinyl temptation.

 

[cjfrbw]

I got the Sony PS X70. It wasn't shipped optimally, but OK, at least the guy took off the platter and taped down the tonearm. The horror of getting vintage stuff, especially turntables, is that there is at least a 33 percent chance that the shipping will kill or destroy it.

The tonearm weight shaft was bent down, either from this shipping or a prior mishap. However, the functions of the turntable seem to be intact, and the tone arm bearing seems free and clear. The weight shaft just means that a gauge must be used to determine the cartridge down force, because the tonearm weight determining mechanism is no longer accurate.

Setting up an Ortofon Kontrapunkt A cartridge with the arm and running it through the phono input of the Yamaha RX Z9 AV Receiver resulted in very nice headphone listening, much better than I expected.

However, running the phono output through the much more resolving Allnic H 3000 phono amp made the shortcomings of the Kontrapunkt A cartridge vividly clear. A very nice cartridge, but a kludge on subtelties compared to its higher end brethren.

I have been suffering through my knee jerk audiophile OC disorder setting this up to test, she is like a martinet schoolmarm making every nasty rejoinder possible.

Placing the Allnic Verito cartridge on the sony deck and playing it through the Allnic H 3000 resulted in quite amazing sound through my main system, even though the turntable is set up on the floor right next to a big subwoofer. Headphone listening without speakers through a Stax Headphone setup is near faultless. Tonal stability on piano tones is quite decent, and much better than many mid fi belt tables I have heard.

The Sony deck on a vibraplane or some such would be a decent high end table, it is easily worthy of the Allnic Verito cartridge.

The Sony PS X70 certainly does not have the Stygian depth and subtlety of the SME 30/ Da Vinci/Allnic Puritas, but it is not so far off as I thought it would be.

It does what vinyl is supposed to do, emotional summoning and vivid music hallucinosis, I am really pleased so far with my slightly wounded 34 year old Sony turntable.

It will ultimately be paired in Santa Cruz with another unheralded, amazing phono stage, the Yamaha C 70 preamp. The combo without cartridge came in at about $400, Vintage Bliss.

The retail value of the Allnic Verito cartridge is about 6 times the actual cost of the delivered turntable/arm/ Yamaha phono section, but the Sony PS X70 does justice to the cartridge and vice versa.

When vintage is not a train wreck, with careful selection and shopping it can be great!

 

[kach22i]

I've been considering taking an old Direct Drive TT and converting it into my own work of art for a long time. The plinth would be a sculpture of wood of my own making, the arm would be best if 12" or longer for it to look like I want.

Here is the motor/controller donor list some on-line friends help me form.


Denon DP-59 thru DP-80...
Technic SP line...
Pioneer PL series 50L/70L and PL-L1 .....Pioneer P-3/P-10,...
Denon DP-100.... PL-L1.....
Mitsubishi LT-1....
Yamaha PX-1

My criteria included being able to add some dampening mass to the plater or casting/lathing my own as an option.

I will look into the other tables mentioned in this thread, thanks to all for posting on this topic.

 

[flez007]

Aren't you missing the EMT table?

 

[kach22i]

Aren't you missing the EMT table?

Look at the motor on this one, it's a freaking bull.

http://www.lammindustries.com/SHOWHIST/ces2002.html

In the Lamm Industries room was a beautiful EMT 927 F transcription turntable.

 

[the record spot]

Hi

I am wondering if we haven't been unfair to the components produced during the 70's. Especially the Japanese components.
Millions were invested to produce superior components (the Japanese companies in particular) For a long time they were derided by audiophiles... I am beginning to think however that we may have been prejudiced toward these.

For example Technics and Denon TT are highly sought after. The SP-10 and DP-67003(?) are researched actively by enthusiasts... let’s not even talk about the fabulous Nakamichi TX-1000, which remains pretty unique to this day, addressing a serious problem no current TT does (that of the off-center records, more common than one thinks). I am reading through the Internet that the Yamaha TTS were also very good and in demand right now... Each of these companies produced also a good number of MC cartridges.
The Technics RS-1500 RTR is very loved by R2R amateurs, so are the Teac and Pioneer.

We haven’t yet talked about some stalwart of Japanese SS equipment, namely the Luxman, Accuphase, Pioneer, Sony, Tehcnics, Sansui and Yamaha.
Recently a member here, mep, found the Yamaha C2 if not great was a very decent preamplifier... Enough to satisfy the previous owner of a Counterpoint SA 5.1 preamp!
The Studer A810 (or is it 820) used by our own Steve Williams for a while with stock electronics and with excellent results

Were these uniformly bad? How would they sound with today’s speakers? How would we coerce good sound from these? Back in the 70’s, 80’s we knew nothing of room interaction. Oh Yea a few luminaries would talk about Room Treatments but they were largely and roundly ignored. We went into tweaking, into cables and euphonic equipments before we start addressing the room problems and even today many an audiophile look at room treatments as a second thought, many would claim the solution worse than the problem!!!
What are your thoughts? Experiences? Advices? Opinions?

I'm late to this particular party, but having used some of Sansui's and Technics range, I can say - especially with the Sansui gear - that it performed admirably. I had an AU-717 amp which weighed in at about 17 kilos and played like a dream. Easily up there with Leema Pulse II, HK 990 (albeit tonally different) and effortless power on tap - 80wpc, but high current delivery. Still have an AU-217 which at 30wpc might seem weedy, but partnered with Mission 752s and my old Marantz CDP, produced a lovely sound.

The Technics was an early 1980s SU-V6 amp, another big steel box, 50wpc, but though good never felt like it delivered the goods fully. Never quite worked out what I liked or didn't like about it, but it went after six months or so.

Much like the current crop of equipment "out there", there'll be the good, the bad and occasionally, the truly great. For me, the AU217 was the good, the SU-V6 was the "not bad" and the AU-717 truly great. YMMV.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

There is discussion going on another thread about how good the Linn Sondek LP 12 was. It is a somewhat OT discussion since the thread in question is about the Vetere trend-setting arm (The trend it set? That tonearms will now cost upward of $20,000 routinely) There was also a mention of the Pink Triangle Turntable.

This reminded me of this forgotten thread . The Sondek was a decent table but now I can see it wasn't superior to the Japanese Turntables of the same era. Listening to a SP-10 MKII, I know now that a Linn Sondek LP-12 is not superior to a Technics SP-10 MKII, or a Nakamichi TT-1000 or the era plethora of competitive great designs from Sony, Kenwood, Sansui, Micro Seiki . No Way, no How. Not even close. There I said it. Our belovd LP-12 was already surpassed by the Japanese TT s of the late 70's by several miles.
An SP-10 MK II remains as good as any TT out there and in the right plinth, a superior one fully competitive with the greatest TTs around and for a fraction of their prices. The Linn Sondek is not in that league ... To this day I regret geting a Pink Triangle over a Kenwood L-07.. I didn't even carre to audition the Kenwood .. Just went with the prejudicial assumption that it couldn't compare to the audiophile-approved Pink Triangle