I have the Pioneer and have heard the Technics demoed in a Technics system which I would guess was not optimal. The AT -LP120 I haven't heard but the in built electronics and pictures showing lack of build quality would suggest an inferior product as one would expect for the price. Plenty members on here who have heard the Pioneer and AT. I think there is likely a fairly small gap in SQ between Pioneer and Technics from what I heard though technology and construction looks more advanced having seen the latter. Significant differences in these decks below the surface.
Yup. I've owned both. I've had the same cartridge installed on both. The Pioneer is in a completely different league, both in build and performance.
Me too as I posted on MANY pages back in this thread a couple years ago. The AT is a nice budget deck but the Pioneer is better in pretty much every way...unless the 78rpm is a must.
If you haven't tried the AT-LP120 yourself, then, as we say, you are grasping at straws. The majority of people lambasting the AT haven't even touch one. I have never seen any pictures of an AT which would indicate inferiority. By in built electronics, maybe you mean the built-in pre-amp? I've never used the built-in pre-amp so I have no opinion or expertise on that. What I can tell you is that EVERY pre-amp produces a different sound. The AT has a bypass switch so you don't have to use the built-in pre-amp. Some aren't even satisfied with that and wire around it. What I can tell you is than I use one of my AT's in my quadraphonic system. There is a discrete record format know as CD-4 which operates at a carrier frequency of 30khz, much higher than a human can hear. The CD-4 compatible cartridges have an even wider frequency range of 5hz to 50khz. With the AT in the bypass mode, it has no problem playing CD-4 quad records accurately. Using a special test record, the AT in bypass mode easily can hit the 5hz to 50khz. You should hear the dogs howl in my neighborhood, just like when I play a Yoko Ono record. I have run across a few TT's costing multiple times the AT which can't pass through the CD-4 carrier. Most of these TT's come out of the same factory in China, using similar parts. Those TT's manufactured elsewhere in the world use some parts from China, like the motors.
I consider the AT-LP120-USB the best brand-new turntable you can buy with the least amount of money. But just curious: Have you tried the Audio-Technica AT-LP1240-USB? I consider it the best Technics-style turntable you can currently get in the brand-new market without breaking the bank. It's noticeably more robust than the AT-LP120-USB.
Maybe one should ask if you've tried the Pioneer. But then you'd certainly say that there's no point in that, because it doesn't play 78s. So what's your reason for participating in this thread?
It's possible that they come out of the same factory but they certainly don't use equal quality parts. Go to your local Guitar Center and check this out for yourself.
AT Lp120 is plastic build with a light plinth made to feel heavy with a steel plate at the bottom. Also plenty info on removing the USB/ phono stage electronics because it is universally accepted that even when switched out the internal electronics still hamper sound. Also have you heard a PLX1000 or any of the new Technics turntables (which are substantial in build and weight with platter damping). If not you have no basis for claiming that it is as good. Your information about playing CD4 records is pretty irrelevant to the argument as any competent record deck should do so. How accurately as opposed to accurately enough to please you is another argument. A better TT and arm will play even more accurately and a £250 TT is unlikely, or be expected to reproduce records to anywhere near the maximum possible from the medium.
To each is own, obviously, but, me, I much prefer the Technics-style utilitarian esthetic than some of the very bling looks audiophiles seem to favour (like the Thorens wedding-cake on page 85 : talk about an indigestion !). The Clearaudio Concept / Ovation line, however, I find really irresistible.
No, I have not tried the AT-LP1240-USB. I've seen that some of the records companies and pressing companies use the AT-1240 as well as the AT-120's. For vthat matter, record companies and mastering facilities often use Technics SL1000's for critical inspection. The specs seem fairly close, so I'm not rushing out to buy one. It doesn't have the 78 speed, but another TT which looks great is the AT-LP5. It comes with an AT cartridge, and as I've banned AT cartridges on my turntables, I'd have to through the cart in the trash.
As I previously explained, switched into the bypass mode, there is absolutely no difference in sound quality or frequency capabilities. I have one AT with USB and one without. As with the pre-amp, I don't use USB either. As I couldn't possibly hear the higher frequencies, I use an oscilloscope to monitor them. A CD-4 discrete quadraphonic records is very difficult to track. It is best for the stylus to remain centered in the groove for best separation. The AT-LP120 tracks flawlessly and has allowed me to make good quadraphonic R2R tapes.
Nope, I've owned both. Even the counterweight and headshell leads are of much higher quality. It's plain as day, and you'll understand this if you ever get your hands on a PLX.
Not sure if you are talking about the 1240 or the SL1000. The AT-LP1240-USB does have 78 RPM capability.
I refer you to this thread. The whole gubbins must be removed and a substantial improvement in sound is reported. Accurate tracking is the basic requirement of an arm/ cartridge. Because it reproduces the full frequency range doesn't mean more upmarket products won't give better audible sound. Audio-Technica AT-LP120 Preamp Removal (Detailed Instructions Video)
I have listened to the PLX-1000 at a dealers, my brother in law's AT-LP120 & of course my own Technics SL1200G. The PLX-1000 is closer in sound to the Technics than the AT turntable but nevertheless the AT is a perfectly nice, lower budget offering. Having heard one, I won't criticise it & if someone who owns it is happy, then that's great. I think it's respectful to accept that - we probably all have different tastes in food, cars, partners etc anyway!
As I've previously said, and being a tinkerer, been there, done that, no difference. Full frequency range is full frequency range. Accurate tracking is necessary for playing CD-4 discrete records, which is best described as the stylus not only following the groove but remaining centered in the groove.
Yes. both the 1240 and the current 1200 have 78 rpm. Older 1200's have been modified by companies like KAB to play 78 rpm and other varied speeds.
Fortunately, some of the better TT's have interchangeable headshells, a feature I use because of the variety of record formats that I play. As a result, it has allowed me to try different brands of headshells, most notably to differentiate among the different cartridges I use. I have headshells probably higher quality than you could imagine. I'd venture to guess that gold-plated terminals on highly compliant wire might be the top. With Shure M97xe's mounted in that and a regular AT headshell, no real difference in the normal human hearing range.
Then why did you bother to come here to claim the ATLP120 is just as good as the PLX? It seems to me that you merely came here to tell folks they're wasting their money and they should be perfectly happy with a $250 turntable.
I received shipment of my new PLX-1000 yesterday. No problems with loose bearings. Looking forward to getting it fully set up and dialed in this weekend. I will report back. So far I feel that it is a great TT. It already blows away my Pro-Ject Debut Carbon that I am moving on from...
