The Technics SL-1200 GAE/G/GR general questions thread

Pre mounted AT carts are set to a 52.5mm stylus to headshell tail distance so they must be re-set by user to 52mm stylus to headshell distance to realize Technics tracking error scheme. I also found my AT HS-10 headshell did not sync to the Technics VTA adjustment settings. At any rate, I now prefer the AT LH11H headshell, which sets the cart to Technics tracking error scheme via solutions for squaring cart to headshell, adjusting stylus to headshell tail distance, and azimuth.

 

Good to know, since the technics headshell seems to be harder and harder to find (OEM), I'll have to start thinking about alternatives for my next cart.

 

I get my new Technics headshells from Encompass Parts. They stock Technics headshells. I bought two several weeks ago. The headshells are relatively expensive, about $106.

 

Another option is to go vintage. Much cheaper and there should be many out there.

 

I get 5.977, so I guess I could round to 6z.

 

Indeed, I bought an AT-LH11H the other day and I am so pleased with its feature set, to easily and quickly assure Technics tracking error scheme, I will likely buy more of those in future should I have the need. I am thinking about using one to support an AT-OC9XML. The resonance would peak at 5.977 Hz.

 

Cool, but I was speaking of Technics vintage shells, there must be many out there as they were used on many tables.

 

How come you are using more than one username now? Gets kind of confusing, but no matter

I think it would be in the mid 6-7Hz range based on calculations we talked about before (or maybe that was on AK?), but some of the calculation numbers are just guesswork since they aren't specified. The resonance has been measured though, and it seems to match the old SL-1200 with same cartridge (notably there are measurements for the AT-VM540ML on both old and new arms), so we do have ballpark values...

Stock Technics headshell with wires = 7.6g
AT-LH11H headshell with wires = 11.5g
Technics SL-1200GR tonearm mass with stock headshell = 12g (this has been confirmed by Technics per earlier in this thread)
Technics SL-1200GR tonearm mass with AT-LH11H headshell = 15g (approx, difference is 3.9g but much of that is near the connector and away from stylus, so maybe around 75% increase)

AT-OC9XML with short AT screws = 8.1g
AT-OC9XML compliance in the 10Hz region = 25cu (approximate based on a few resonance measurements)

So with tonearm mass = 12 + 8.1 + 3 = 23.1g and compliance = 25cu the resonance = 6.6Hz

 

i have put correct quantities into two programs at this point and get from 4.8 to 5.9 using the AT headshell.
I am using 9.1 tonearm, 11 headshell, 7.6 cart, and 25.6 compliance figures at 16 dynamic x 1.6 two user names since one is on computer snd other is on phone.

 

I understand, but the tonearm without headshell is much lower than 9.1g, I was just trying to give you more accurate approximations. In the end, no big deal, the resonance frequency will be a fairly low value with the heavier headshell.

 

I thought the tonearm without headshell was 9.1? And, yes I appreciate your input

 

No, probably closer to 5, but there is no spec for it.

 

My next cart will probably be lower compliance and require a heavier headshell. Regardless, for that money, I'd go with something made of better materials.

I'm really glad this has been cleared up. I always assumed the ~12g was without headshell.

 

I wish someone could clear this up (really not a big deal lol).


Theses 2 articles both put the eff mass for the GR at ~9 gm

The Technics SL-1200 GAE/G/GR general questions thread

 

The PM lab report doesn't list any context or test methodology, so would be hard to clear up from that perspective, and they made no mention of it in the GAE review. The other reviews just echo that value, they don't do any measurements on their own. When Technics engineering was asked, they responded 12g as reported earlier in this thread, and that seems to be backed up by some of the cartridge reviews and actual user measurements reported in this and other threads here.

So take your pick, but in the end it is a simple matter to just lower the stylus onto a stationary record, turn off the subsonic filter if you have one, record a few seconds, and then look at the spectrum. One issue with a cartridge like the OC9XML is that it has a very high lateral compliance, so unless you play it with a nearly perfectly centered record, you are going to get a pretty big rise in the very low subsonic range unless using a very light arm.

Or check with @junkculture on the method used when he reported the resonance frequency on a bunch of AT carts on the GR earlier here ... The Technics SL-1200 GAE/G/GR general questions thread

 

Searched every post 'effective mass'
A dealer told someone, but not sure
Someone sent an email to Technics, no response
An 'insider' told some 12, but not for the GR

LOL

 

Damn!
I feel like a novice. I just pick a cart and see if I like the presentation.
No way have I to hook to a computer.
And no test discs.
Oh well...

 

Sure, but if someone is gonna drop $500 or $1000 on a cartridge, it would be nice to know before purchase if it is a good match. It's a pretty simple exercise if the values are specified, just takes a few seconds, but I think many of the cartridge and turntable manufacturers would prefer we do it your way

 

I was referring to the post from @oregonalex where Technics engr told him 12g, I'm pretty sure it was in reference to the G or GR, but if not, he could clarify.


Here's what the OC9XML looks like with my Micro Seiki arm, it is pretty lightweight so I get around 9-10Hz resonance. It's kind of noisy out now, some construction in the neighborhood so a little ragged in the 20-30Hz region, this just with the stylus on stationary record, 60dB gain in phono to USB to computer, little bit of 60Hz hum and overtones, though pretty low in level, silicone oil damping on arm...

 

This is the guy who said 9 gm in his lab report.

He designs audio testing gear for a living.
Graduate degree in engineering.
Does work for Naim, Chord, etc.
I'm not sure a guy like that would put out a number he has not verified? The GR tested was supplied Technics UK, whom he does testing for! He could have easily asked them.
Confusing

Paul Miller

another test by him
Looks like he always gives the eff mass?
https://henleyaudio.co.uk/shop/product/viewfile?FileId=5289&ProductId=1044

 

Well, I do.
I just trust that most modern tables and carts are a good match.
And with different weight shells you can fine tune?
Besides, my current poison of choice is 2M Ortofon, which is supposed to mate well.
I've decided to steer clear of MC carts.

 

That's fine, whether it is 9 or 12 grams isn't really gonna change the results that much. The resonance testing I've seen seems to point closer to 12 since the results appear to match the old arm, but not that big of a deal. I was just correcting the other post because he was using the 9g number as the effective mass of the arm alone without the headshell.

 

Bust my chops po boy's test

Had a few minutes today to screw off so played with my test record.

<500 Hz no compensation required
>500 add 6 dB/oct
1000, 2000, 4000, 8000...4 octaves
The slope is ~ 24 dB from 500 to 8000
Scaled off picture
6 dB/ oct., flat
1 kHz +6 dB, 2 +12 dB, 4 + 18, 8 + 24

Phone mic rolls off at 12 kHz, same slope until then.

 

Well, when GAE came out originally and I got mine, I had a problem with loose dust cover hinges. I emailed about this issue back and forth with the Director of Technics Engineering for North America. In the process, I inquired about tonearm effective mass. He replied that it is an unpublished spec, but it is 12g. It would definitely apply to G as well, as it has the same arm, but I am not certain about GR. That's all I know, but I'd tend to take his word over a dealer's or a 3rd party tester.