Is a Technics SL-1200 suitable for playing quad LPs?

fredblue said:

Ahh.. lets hope so Duncan, they're all tucked up snoozing in their sleeves at the mo, bless them..
..not got any Joni yet, waiting til I find them locally (or at least in Europe) on the cheap but not falling to bits!
It might all end in tears anyway and I never get it going.. (even if it does and I can't get CD-4 to work at all, I will probably just end up running them thru the Surround Master as fizzywizzy suggested, for fits 'n' giggles if nothing else! )

Click to expand...

...the quest for discrete vinyl, a journey few mortal men have conquered and then returned. Ears crossed but not out of phase of course. Sincere thanks for posting the experience!

himey said:

...the quest for discreet vinyl, a journey few mortal men have conquered and then returned. Ears crossed but not out of phase of course. Sincere thanks for posting the experience!

Click to expand...

Haha.. You're welcome himey

There's some Quad gods round these parts who've tamed the CD-4 beast (and how!) I'll never be able to handle it the way they have but I'm going to plod along regardless and have a go in my own "unique" way.. and see what happens.. if anything!

Meantime, if you're still reading this jazzop, hope some/any of the stuff posted here in your thread as the chat has evolved has been useful to you in your quest for SL-1200 Quad suitability knowledge! (even my ramblings, maybe.. )

fredblue said:

Well I guess I'll find out soon enough if I can get any of this stuff working with CD-4..
(just been on a bit of a shopping spree.. oops.. ..easily done isn't it..?
Ordered tonight an SL-1210 Mk2 (supposedly the one in the pic below, w/all the accessories in a box, think from the serial number; GE2DXXXXX its an April 2002 model?), a JVC 4DD-5 CD-4 demodulator (from the pics appears to be a 50hz/220v model; seller is based in Italy so seems promising), an Audio Technica AT-440MLb cart, a JVC CD-4 setup record and a Pro-Ject VC-S record cleaning machine (figured those finicky CD-4 records could do with all the cleaning help they can get! ).. so that's me wiped out for the rest of the year, see you in 2017..!

Click to expand...

Adam, have you had a 1200 before? I bought one to replace an old turntable which didn't have a lid to make it more child friendly (two broken stylii suggest that a lid is not all that is required) and because I was intrigued about changing the arm on it. Anyway, long story short, I really enjoy playing records on it, and the AT440Mla - and I suspect the Mlb - is a good match for the arm. I have the VTA tail end down to try and tame the cart a bit. Enjoy! (I went back to a stock arm.)

Hi. fredblue

I just remembered with some of the early Test CD-4 JVC "4DE-203" LP`s had a technical fault with them if the number on the top right hand corner has the number 4DE-205 you should be OK.

PS. When calibrating with this the JVC unit turn the unit onto its side to get access to the 30khz. screw & the CD-4 Adjusting screws at the back of the unit, get a friend how will be twiddling the screw why`ill you listen, to get the right set up sound, I did the procedure on my own and nelly went bold...
Bill.

fredblue said:

Oh and I just ordered this other JVC CD-4 adjustment record too (I didn't know which one was best for the 4dd-5 demodulator so I got both versions! )

Discogs: JVC CD-4 Adjustment Record

Click to expand...

That would be intriguing as to what the Surround Master does with the decode for the baseband 20Hz-ish to 15kHz (so below the CD4 19kHz pilot tone) the Left groove should hold LF & LR and the Right RF & RR. The Left and Right above the Pilot tone contain LF-LR & RF-RR if I remember correctly. CD4 being essentially 2x FM stereo radio channels on an LP.

fredblue said:

Ahh.. lets hope so Duncan, they're all tucked up snoozing in their sleeves at the mo, bless them..
..not got any Joni yet, waiting til I find them locally (or at least in Europe) on the cheap but not falling to bits!
It might all end in tears anyway and I never get it going.. (even if it does and I can't get CD-4 to work at all, I will probably just end up running them thru the Surround Master as fizzywizzy suggested, for fits 'n' giggles if nothing else! )

Click to expand...

What you see is a 220V / 50Hz unit. Can't say for what market is was produced.

My 4DD-5 reads "AC 100, 120, 220, 240V 50/60Hz" on the black sticker. It has the voltage switch inside the unit, you have to open it to switch the voltage.

-Kristian

What great information! Thanks, everyone!

It's good to hear that all I probably will need is the Shibata stylus, which I already knew I would need to obtain. My 1200s are late-80s/early-90s vintage, so they are not subject to that late-model cabling change mentioned here. I was concerned that if I had to rewire for low capacitance it would create issues when the turntable is used for scratching, which I presume generates some signals/noise that wasn't anticipated by the designing engineers.

I plan to have the capability to play all quad formats, so to answer the question about which format I want to play: Yes.

One follow-up question:

One of my turntables is a EU-market model with the integrated switched transformer. The native power plug is the standard Euro round 2-prong job. I use a simple physical adapter on it and the internal power supply handles the US power with no problem. Would this unit be better, worse, or no different for playing quad LPs, or should I use my US-model 1200 for that purpose?

Hi all,

new member here. Replying because I have almost the exact same question as the OP. Would a Technics SL-1650 be suitable as well, or did they use different tonearm wires on the 1650 from the 1200? (1650 is very similar to 1200 original - not Mk2 - but it's fully automatic and a changer.)

Alternately if it is not suitable I might consider rewiring the tonearm on my AR XA and if I go down that road what wires would you recommend? Need to be fairly light and un-jacketed for that application.

I would be using this with a yet undetermined receiver or decoder (I have a Kenwood KR-9940 that I found in a Goodwill but it is not in good health; it may be cheaper to get e.g. a working Sansui QRX-something than to have it repaired) and I also have a Sony 4 channel discrete R2R. My thought was to hook this up in the bedroom with an Oppo 103 downmixing 5.1 and 7.1 to 4.0 to make a "vintage surround system" and also add the capability of 4 channel record playback which I currently don't have in any system.

Is the Audio Technica AT440LMB the go to currently available cart for CD-4 reproduction? I'm getting that impression from the searching that I've done.

I don't know about the turntable but I can say that I use the AT440 as my cartridge with excellent results. I have a 1200 mkII with that cartridge.

Is it possible for me to measure the capacitance of the system myself and determine whether or not it'll work as is? I do have several meters that can measure capacitance (although not one that will do ESR; need to find one of those, but I'm getting off topic) what I haven't found is a hard number as to what the cutoff for total capacitance headshell to RCA is that will permit the CD-4 signal to pass well enough to be decoded. Or does it vary by receiver/decoder?

I think it's somewhere in the region of 100 picofarads? that's what I read iirc, it's been a while since I was looking into it so please don't take my word for it (did you Google "SL-1650 capacitance" or "SL-1650 picofarads" already?).. I've no idea how you measure the capacitance btw but I think that's the target to have it as low as possible?

what's the stock RCA cables with your SL-1650 look like?
also what was your turntables' date of manufacture? (you can determine when your turntable was made by looking at the series of numbers and letters in the serial code on the label on the rear of the unit) seems if it's a 70's-90's model you're possibly in luck.

fwiw I've had no end of struggles with CD-4 but the Technics and AT440MLb combo seems to be less crucial than I feared, swapping out an eliptical Ortofon stylus for the microline Audio Technica has brought improvements in sound and tracking all round, reduced instances of inner groove distortion, big dynamic swings now no sweat (there's a bit at the end of one side of the Return To Forever Quad SQ LP that used to make my Pro-Ject/Ortofon combo jump wildly out of the groove every time, now it plays flawlessly) and the AT cart has given some improvement to feeling of separation (I've not measured but it sounds like it) to SQ and QS matrix vinyl decodes.. so even if in an absolutely disastrous case scenario that your turntable isn't compliant for CD-4 and you've bought a 440MLb I would say you will reap benefits for your other SQ and QS records (and general Stereo listening too of course )

..my main bugbear with CD-4 has been the 4DD-5 demodulators (one's got a problem in the pair of Left channels which wouldn't separate front left from rear left so one half of the room was just double stereo.. and the other demodulator doesn't work 100% as FR channel is lower volume than the other three..) ah CD-4.. happy days! Not!

100 I may be OK.

I was all worried that I'd committed a cardinal sin and used a 6' extension on the TT. I measured it (old Monster Cable interconnect that I got "free" with a cheap used Oppo DVD player) at 50-something pF before I installed it. I neglected to pull the headshell and measure the TT though.

On another forum someone said I needed to keep it under 75pF for best SQ/less high end roll off. So if the stock cables are no bueno I will have to move the table to another system or else use some of my Mogami stock and make up my own of the right length needed - I think W2965 is something around 17pF/ft? hopefully I can get it where it needs to be if the tonearm wires are good enough. I definitely would not be using it on the system it's on now if I used it for quad - it's actually hooked to the AVR in the living room, which is why it had to go on a side table as the AVR is under the TV and there's no place for the table there - so I would try to get it closer to whatever it's hooked to if that were the case.

I'll have to remember to measure the capacitance of the tonearm wires/RCA cable combo next time I get a chance. I'm ASSuming it's the same as a 1200 Mk1 but you know where that gets you.

My particular table was only made in 1976-77, and the cables appear to be bone stock original (as does everything about the table save for the cartridge which was replaced at some point by a Shure M91ED; I actually got two of them with the table so I am relatively happy with that.)

well it sounds like you're all set to go n8nagel :upthumb

if your experience with a Technics/AT440 combo is anything like mine then I can't see a lack of treble's gonna be a problem.. CD-4 roll off maybe but with Stereo & matrix Quad records if anything the AT440MLb is a bit bright and bass shy for my tastes, especially noticeable with Surround Master SQ vinyl decodes, less of an issue with QS Surround Master stuff and CD-4 demods seem to have less top end kinda sparkle and more low end bloat but just an observation, your experience and that of others here may and probably does/will differ.. its all good)

ahh.. never ASSume indeed..

Adam, the AT shouldn't be bass shy, however the more pronounced top end can give an impression of less bottom end. You might be able to tame it a bit by adjusting the VTA (I'm not certain how/why that would work) are you at 1 or lower - that's where I'd recommend if you're using a standard Technics head shell with no additional weights between the ceiling of it and the cartridge.

Mike the Fish said:

Adam, the AT shouldn't be bass shy, however the more pronounced top end can give an impression of less bottom end. You might be able to tame it a bit by adjusting the VTA (I'm not certain how/why that would work) are you at 1 or lower - that's where I'd recommend if you're using a standard Technics head shell with no additional weights between the ceiling of it and the cartridge.

Click to expand...

Oh I dunno Mike.. I thought I'd got that mutha set up as best as I can muster!

Re your setup recommendations, here's the boring bit(s) in response;
Standard Technics headshell,
no additional weights,
with a felt slipmate on top of the thick rubber mat (some of the vinylengine guys advise that to tame platter ringing, etc..)
VTA = 0.5 (is what gets the top of the headshell level/parallel with the record surface..)
VTF = 1.5..
Anti Skate = 0.8..
overhang set so that the stylus point is aligned with the arrow on the little white plastic thing that came with the turntable..

..in short, I don't know what else I can do..!?

the super cheapo Behringer pre-amp is the weak link by far, though I chose it because it is said to be an accurate RIAA with a pretty flat sound..

I can't overstate that my main bugbear is with SQ decodes thru the Surround Master (as that's what I do most with the turntable)

..strangely QS decoded stuff is alright (pretty close to the QS 2-ch sound), CD-4 stuff when demodulated has more bass and less treble than the same record in Stereo..

but with SQ its totally weird.. the SQ LPs played in Stereo are fine, great in fact with nice EQ balance... but as soon as they are decoded things kind of sink like a souffle, volume is seriously lowered (like by as much as 10dB with some albums of SQ 4-ch Vs SQ 2-ch!) treble is boosted and bass diminished by comparison.

I can post a 30-sec comparison clip of something to show what I mean?

The Technics table were well engineered, the thick rubber mat is a thick rubber mat because that is the ringing tamer. I'd be inclined to drop the felt mat. Would it introduce any reduction in friction between the disc and the platter? If so, that can't be a good thing. Anti-skate I have at around the same as (or slightly more than) the VTF. For the Mla it's 1.4g. I didn't get a plastic ring with my table, but I have got a template for cart alignment, including tracking angle. The wrong pre-amp can make the 440Mla (I know yours is a b) sound unpleasantly top heavy. If the bass is inconsistent across different formats that suggests an issue with the format or the decoding to me. If your cart is not angled correctly that's got to make a difference with phase, hasn't it?

Hope that's some help.

fredblue said:

Oh I dunno Mike.. I thought I'd got that mutha set up as best as I can muster!

Re your setup recommendations, here's the boring bit(s) in response;
Standard Technics headshell,
no additional weights,
with a felt slipmate on top of the thick rubber mat (some of the vinylengine guys advise that to tame platter ringing, etc..)
VTA = 0.5 (is what gets the top of the headshell level/parallel with the record surface..)
VTF = 1.5..
Anti Skate = 0.8..
overhang set so that the stylus point is aligned with the arrow on the little white plastic thing that came with the turntable..

..in short, I don't know what else I can do..!?

the super cheapo Behringer pre-amp is the weak link by far, though I chose it because it is said to be an accurate RIAA with a pretty flat sound..

I can't overstate that my main bugbear is with SQ decodes thru the Surround Master (as that's what I do most with the turntable)

..strangely QS decoded stuff is alright (pretty close to the QS 2-ch sound), CD-4 stuff when demodulated has more bass and less treble than the same record in Stereo..

but with SQ its totally weird.. the SQ LPs played in Stereo are fine, great in fact with nice EQ balance... but as soon as they are decoded things kind of sink like a souffle, volume is seriously lowered (like by as much as 10dB with some albums of SQ 4-ch Vs SQ 2-ch!) treble is boosted and bass diminished by comparison.

I can post a 30-sec comparison clip of something to show what I mean?

Click to expand...

I had about the same impression of SQ decoding, thought it was just me or my setup because everybody raves about how good it it.

Did you have good SQ decoding with a different TT going through the SM?

quadsearcher said:

Did you have good SQ decoding with a different TT going through the SM?

Click to expand...

Hmm.. good question..

I'm getting better sound and general feeling of separation with SQ thru the Technics/AT440 combo than my old Pro-Ject/Ortofon but I was never happy with the sound of the old turntable anyway from the day I got it.. it's not as if I'm unhappy with it now, I just think to do Quad vinyl stuff properly you need a really great setup costing an arm and a leg and all records in as pristine nick as you can find and at this point neither things a real proposition and I'm probably being too fussy.. so I'm compromising and enjoying the Quad music a lot (lot lot!) which is really what it's all about isn't it?
I think it's sometimes too easy to get too sidetracked with all the tech specs and whatnot..