There must be a reason for the explicit warning not to run the motor without the platter attached... @keiron99, I just wouldn't do it. Test it fully assembled. I'm sure it will be fine.
I don't know, the GR still has the rotor magnet on the platter underside, right? Maybe the warning is really meant for that model but got in both manuals. Or maybe it's just about the control dynamics we talked about above. Ask Technics, they should know
I am baffled by your experimentations? Why would you want do this when the instructions explicitly state not to? The 1200g is a precision instrument, costs good money and needs to be treated exactly as instructions state. Please post your rationale, as I might be missing something key here?
I hope this is not too far off topic. I have been waiting since the introduction of these new Technics SL1200s to see some direct comparisons to the older designs. I have read several forum threads and online reviews, but did not come away with a clear understanding of the audible performance differences/improvements with the new designs. I have several turntables, but one of my favorites is the SL-1210M5G. I installed a KAB tonearm damper and the thick Technics platter mat on it. I run a range of different cartridges. Will I hear a difference between the 1210M5G and the new 1200GR? What further improvements will I hear with the 1200G? The specifications for rumble and wow & flutter are comparable. Of course that doesn't tell the whole story.
No need to be quite so arsey, mate! You're making it sound like I'm insistent that I "experiment". I'm not. I got a duff unit / one that may have been damaged in transit (by the way, I'm not the first to have one with the same problem). So, having already agreed to send it back, I did some testing. The main problem was noise around the platter area. When I removed the "platter", I could hear it was from the motor - I had previously thought it might be the "platter" catching. I'm putting "platter" in quotations because the instructions say "Do not press [START-STOP] when the turntable is removed." I'm honest enough to admit I did not read to page 24 and see this in the notes until after I had discovered I had a problem. But even then, when I did read to this, I didn't understand the statement. Who on earth calls the "platter" a "turntable"? So, the instructions are not that "explicit". Only on reflection can I see in the diagram at the beginning of the instructions do they call the "platter" the "turntable". Odd terminology, if you ask me. And in any case, if it was that important, wouldn't you think they'd put this message - in plainer English - on page 1, rather than tucked away under the section at the end about updating the firmware? Anyway, that's the end of the matter. I've got a replacement and all is OK.
I think your system will be very telling of that. The general feeling I got after reading about it is that if you have one of the older models, the new ones are better, but maybe not by enough to rush out and buy the news ones, especially the GR. It's not like the old ones are garbage suddenly. But can you hear it? That's a lot of variables in play. Is it worth it? Depends on how much $1700 hurts to be missing. Now if you're looking at the G, I would expect that to be better, especially if you're dealing with higher end cartridges and a highly revealing system.
I agree their terminology is odd... In any event, I'm glad the replacement is alright! It's really a great turntable.
Arsey? Noooo but confused, yes. My observation was valid; if you made the mistake on your first 1200g then why would you consider repeating it on your 2nd? Anyway, you’re happy now.
I haven't heard the GR, but I have heard motor cogging on a regular SL-1200MkII in the past. I didn't hear any at first glance on a GAE and G (though I might if I had one at home), but eliminating cogging is one of the things the engineers were going for in the redesign.
OT please excuse me. Buy an SL-1000R for $16,000 with only one arm, or buy 2 SL-1200G for $8,000 with spares for tweaks and many LPs. Which offers better value for money?
If you are measuring purely by value for money, spending 50% on two components that will give you more than 50% of the performance of the other item has to win out. On the other hand, $16k on the 1000R will most likely get you better performance.... how much is down to each listener.. This is a subjective & personal hobby so only you can answer your own question I'm afraid.
I think it would be helpful if Technics themselves had an information page on this player: Personally, I’d like to know why the platter needs no oil and is the oil impregnated shaft maintenance free for life? Why is it not reccomended to spin the motor without the platter, the engineering behind this? Why the arm height adjuster can turn below zero, yet is uncallibrated by minus markings? Technics themselves are quite unhelpful if you email them any questions on the 1200, in the UK, at least. Both email queries I sent about availability of spare head shells or advice on anti-skating were responded to by advice I contact local Panasonic TV service agent.
The Charisma/Denon DL103 sounded wonderful, and the Dynavector Karat 17D3 sounded wonderful. Nothing held back. Nothing missing. Excellent experiences. Not sure about your concern. My SL1200G was packed as well as any turntable I’ve ever seen. It’s not a suspended turntable so there’s nothing to spin around or bash around in transit. The platter is very well protected too, and not mounted either, so there’s no stress on the bearing or spindle shaft.
I don't think anyone has heard an SL1000R apart maybe at a show. Is it even available before the autumn?
It’s already available, though the first batch has already sold out. Not sure when batch two arrives.
These are great questions. I have mounted an Ortofon 2M Black on my 1200G that I received a few days back and the only way to achieve a somehow parallel tonearm with it was with the arm height below zero.
Would anyone be willing to post a picture of the underside of a 1200G's platter? I'm very curious to see how it differs from the 1200GR platter's underside. Does the 1200G have the circular magnet mounted to the underside of its platter as well, or is that all self-contained inside of the motor assembly on the 1200G?
Perhaps you’re not making your intentions clear, or perhaps Technics is simply unable to understand the reason for your questions? I know I don’t. Platters on turntables don’t need oil. That’s a fact. Oil on a platter gets everywhere and quickly becomes a real mess. Anyway, I’m not sure that’s exactly what you meant. Sealed motor assemblies and sealed motor shaft (e.g., spindle) assemblies are nothing new. The better the seal, the smoother and longer lasting the motor. The Technics SL1200G motor and spindle shaft are very, very good indeed. The Technics SL1200G platter couples directly to the motor shaft, not to a subplatter. So there’s no thrust plate (the little, hardened or alloyed or ceramic bit at the bottom end of the spindle) to be lubricated, and there’s no ball bearing or bronze bushing or anything like that to be lubricated because the turntable is not a belt drive design but rather a direct drive design. In a direct drive design with a sealed motor and shaft assembly, there’s simply no place for a spindle shaft thrust plate or a well bearing and no need for periodic lubrication. Turntables, as everyone knows, are intrinsically record playing machines. As such, they can only be used with platters in place of sufficient size, shaft dimension and weight appropriate to their specific motor and spindle shaft designs and appropriate to the size and clearance of the plinth or chassis on which everything is assembled. Speed - accurate speed - is relevant for the entire assembly, or more appropriately, for the entire assembly in place along with an LP on the platter. It’s perfectly reasonable to expect direct drive turntable motor (that is engineered to be speed stable on its own) with an automatic speed control mechanism to be designed only with a narrow range of adjustment relevant to the full and completed assembly (including platter, mat and LP). Implying that a turntable is somehow deficient or otherwise a matter of concern when speed control is difficult or impossible without at least the correct platter in place doesn’t make sense. Running a mechanism that is designed specifically to operate with a minimum load that includes a platter and platter mat without its minimum load simply ignores the limitations of the control systems built into the turntable’s electronics. Suggesting or implying that such a limitation is wrong basically begs the question about why on Earth anyone would think a record player should be speed checked without at least its platter and mat in place. Inquiring minds would like to know. Of what use is a record playing turntable without its platter and mat installed? The arm height adjustment can be set below nominal only because arm assembly at the factory requires some play in order to calibrate the arm. There’s is also negative play in arm bearings and mounting shafts on all the tonearms I’ve ever installed. These are not matters of concern, IMO. As for Technics’ advice to contact a local dealer, I’m not sure why you’re complaining. Any local service technician at a dealer can sell you spare Technics headshells by the gross (or just one). Frankly, Technics and Technics-compatible headshells are all over the place. OEM headshells, Ortofon headshells, KAB headshells, Fidelix-Mitchaku headshells, etc. Technics UK won’t sell you anything directly - you can’t bypass your local dealer by going to Technics/Panasonic itself. As for anti-skating adjustment, either follow the user manual’s recommendation or try different settings to find out if you can hear a difference that you prefer. If you’re expecting Technics customer service to know the best setting for some particular cartridge, you’re mistaken. The adivce is in the SL1200GR/G/GAE user manual as well as some cartridge makers’ web site. You won’t harm anything or invalidate your warranty by using no anti-skate at all if you prefer that.
If your arm height is set below zero with an Ortofon 2M Black installed, then the arm height is incorrect. Sounds like you made the tonearm parallel to the platter or to the platter mat. The tonearm should be parallel to an LP surface. I use an old, messed up LP for the purpose because I can place my metal, millimeter ruler direcdtly on the LP surface to check the arm height accurately. When checking and adjusting arm height, whether you’re sitting or standing, the tonearm and platter have to be at your eye level. Otherwise, you will be able to accurately see the measurements near the headshell and further back. Most of the arm height problems I’ve come across and corrected resulted from someone doing the adjustment from an uncomfortable position and/or a poor viewing angle. In several situations, the arm height had been adjusted parallel to the bare platter or the platter + mat. In all cases, the height was incorrect, resulting in a severely tail-down arm while playing an LP - excess bass, nasal midrange, terrible.
I have a Pioneer PLX-1000 which arm is a SL1200 replica and it's height adjustment goes beyond zero until something like -0.6. I also have a Technics SL-1210GR and in my GR the height adjustment starts exactly at zero position. It's impossible to rotate it below zero.
Thanks, I will have to double check to make sure. My arm with the Ortofon 2M black was set with a 180 g LP and it is very slightly tail-up with the arm height adjustor all the way to the left that is below zero.
Are you holding your GR platter in the air while tapping it? My G platter is utterly dead. Might as well be made of lead.
