Technics Turntable --- NEW 2015 Prototype

I had an SP10 Mk3. If it's anything like as good as that, there may be a big market for it.

 

No, it's a completely different concept. In the SL-1200 motor (of which you have the coils pictured above), the ring magnet portion of the motor is part of the platter.

In the new turntable, the ring magnet is part of the motor structure. The big piece at the top of the motor spins. The platter seemingly will just be placed on top of it, sort of like how many belt drive turntables use subplatters.

 

You are totally wrong. It's very different. See my posts above for an explanation.

 

BINGO! The motor acts as a subplatter. The platter is NOT part of the motor as it is on the SL-1200. Glad somebody other than me gets it!

 

OK, lookie here, people:



As you can (hopefully, if you are not blind) see in the above diagram of the new Technics motor assembly, the magnets are within the top portion of the motor (called the "rotor"), and are NOT IN THE FRIGGIN PLATTER!

Please look at the diagram.

Rant over.

 

That could be true about the SP series, but there was no subplatter in the SL-1200. The ring magnet is bolted to the platter (the underside of the platter is on the left hand side of the photo, the plinth with the stators is on the right hand side--the photo is from a Super OEM turntable but same implementation as the SL-1200). Look at the underside of the platter--you can clearly see the ring magnet:



Fundamentally, they are different. In the SL-1200, the platter is part of the motor, truly being directly driven. No subplatter involved.

 

I get it. My head is sometimes denser than ring magnets. Sometimes you have to hit me with the whole turntable.

 

No denseness on your part. You just have to be wary of getting me on a roll. Sometimes I start beating a dead horse.

 

No **** - the subplatter has magnets vs the platter - not that much different. Magnets attached to platter/subplatter - you can have a sl1200 setup that way.

 

They are on the SUBPLATTER - lighten up dude. The platter will fit onto the subplatter - so the magnets are on the bottom of the subplatter - the piece that attaches to the magnets - spin with the platter - so it is not that much different than the normal Technics motor - we just have two pieces here. FunkFirm apparently set this up for the 1200 to use their platter and subplatter.

It is pretty much the same idea - just looks cooler - and beefier. The coil piece like on the 1200 is stationary with the circuit board.

Cheers.

 

I actually own five SL-1200MK2's among other Technics quartz DD TT's. I'm kinda familiar with them... from all angles. I already stated the difference between the SP and SL in the post you quoted. We'll have to agree to disagree as, no, they really are fundamentally the same. That is, if you accept Merriam-Webster's definition of the word "fundamental". And, that is, if you accept Technics stated design goals: direct drive system where "the turntable platter spindle is, in fact, the shaft of an ultra-slow servo-controlled motor". That part has not changed. Dividing the platter into a platter and sub-platter is not a fundamental change. It is ancillary.

Looking at the diagram is not the same thing as understanding what you're looking at.

 

All pedantry aside, could this mean one could put a sweet looking acrylic platter on this thing? Yes I'm aware of the issues that may crop up regarding resonances and rumble from the motor, but it couldn't hurt to experiment. Especially if this is very high torque, it may be able to handle something massive.


Add a replinth to that, something super massive and snazzy looking… mmm

 

Currently, both Mike New Audio and Funk Firm offer bespoke platters for the SL-1200MK2. It's certainly conceivable that the same could be fashioned for Technics' new TT. Having said that, massive platters (those substantially heavier than original spec) have met with some negativity. Mike New offered an aluminum/copper heavy platter for the 1200. Some complained that it was too much (audibly) for the control circuit to cope with, especially at 45 rpm (some didn't). He no longer offers the heavy platter, as I understand it. Whether this would be an issue with Technics' new offering or not, is way too early to tell (for me anyway). It's still a prototype; so... much of what we say/think now, is purely speculative.

 

They said the same thing about Rick Allen..

... They'll make it work.

 

That's what I was thinking!

 

Very true. I think if I felt compelled to tinker I would be more interested in doing it on an SP-10 rather than an expensive new turntable (which I'm only hoping meets the level of the sp-10 as of this point)
I'm all for voiding warrantees, but maybe not on a purchase like this the SP-10s on the other hand are available for not much money at all, relatively speaking.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree on whether the difference is "fundamental" or not. What I think we can agree on is my statement that started this discussion, that Technics has abandoned the "platter as motor" design implemented in the SL-1200.

 

I disagree that it is the same idea, but we are getting into semantics rather than a substantive discussion. However, I do want to point something out. You asked me to "lighten up." I guess what didn't come across is that I'm always "light," not pissy.

 

We should make this debate even more productive.

Here, I'll start:

The new design is clearly superior to the old one. It definitely looks more expensive, therefore it is better. I can hear how much better it is just by looking at the protoype pictures, the objective specs are wrong. My blind-blind testing proves it to be more expensive.

 

Agreed.

 

Agreed. Never argue with someone that just doesn't understand.

 

I agree completely.

 

I do have an NAD preamp that was made in Singapore ...

Singapore is a city-state with close tie to Malaysia but they are separate nations.

 

Nice table except the arm. Never care for any S-shaped arm ...