Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

always listening
Post Reply
cafe latte
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Australia
Posts: 11278
Joined: 11 Oct 2009 04:27
Location: Cattle property near Ravenshoe Qld Australia

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by cafe latte » 03 Mar 2017 08:31

Something I forgot to post before, apart the Technics arm being easily replaced, and there being loads of options like sme, Rega etc the bearing on the Technics arm are some of the best out there, who else publishes the friction of the turntable bearings? The bearings are accurate to 1 micron, about the size of bacteria how many can claim this?
Chris

antennaguru
broken record
Posts: 350
Joined: 21 Aug 2016 15:28

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by antennaguru » 05 Mar 2017 07:12

If the Technics tonearm is so great, then why do you claim it needs aftermarket damping or it can't be compared to any decent high-end turntables/tonearms?

The Technics tonearm is a substandard tonearm compared to the Goldmund, Graham, Helius, Jelco and the Fidelity Research tonearms that were on the turntables that were just compared to the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on my very revealing system - Audia Flight Dual MC Phono Stage (balanced) - Ayre preamp (balanced) - Ayre power amp (balanced) - biwired to Sonus Faber loudspeakers - awesome revealing listening room (layout per George Cardas guidance) with structural floor reinforcing, natural wood wide plank flooring over plywood sub-floor, thick wool oriental rug, bookcases for diffraction, minimal absorptive treatment, etc. The Linn Sondek LP-12/FR was the lowest caliber of the turntables that beat the Technics SL1200 Mk2 hands down when it came to naturally reproducing music with well miked piano and percussion. I consider the Linn Sondek LP-12/FR as only a benchmark to the entry level of high-end turntables, therefore the Technics SL1200 MK2 was NOT high-end (nor was the former radio station idler drive). The other far better turntables in the comparison made the Technics sound far worse by comparison (with the exception of that one very heavy duty idler drive former radio station turntable which the Technics did beat). There was one other direct drive turntable in this comparison, two idler drives, and four belt drives, so all drive systems were considered and compared. Every other turntable had a platter that weighed many times what the Technics platter weighed, so NO the Technics platter is not heavy by comparison to those it was tested against. As previously mentioned, three turntables compared were suspension-less, in keeping with the limited suspension of the Technics SL1200 Mk2. Better sounding direct drive turntables are out there than a Technics, and they all have much heavier platters for the benefit that higher inertia brings to a direct drive turntable playing dynamic music. The Technics is fine for DJs who need quick start-up time (light platter with strong motor) and slider speed control, which are quite useless features in a high-end audio system and only add compromises to the sound. An important key to accurate record playback is being able to handle percussive dynamic groove modulation which platter inertia clearly benefits - many papers have been written on this. Steady state constant test tone speed stability testing tells us nothing about dynamic performance with heavy groove modulation during percussion and piano, and only tell us about reproducing a steady state constant test tone (which is NOT music).

You've talked about your lesser electronics and you're home-made clone loudspeakers in the past. My system is all higher quality genuine components at every stage and simply more revealing than yours, plus my room is more revealing having seen the pictures you posted of yours. It's just fine that you happen to like a lower performance turntable like the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on your lesser system, and maybe you also like it for the value proposition it offers you (bang for the buck your budget allows) - but don't go around saying that the Technics SL1200 Mk2 beats any of the turntables it was just compared to because it simply doesn't. Better turntables are just that - BETTER! The Technics SL1200 Mk2 is not a better turntable, nor even a high-end turntable. Some people like me are looking for higher quality sound, and are willing to expend the effort to get it. We often don't get lost in the bang for the buck argument that almost gets you to not quite high-end sound, and ultimately proves disappointing long-term since it soon leads to a constant cycle of upgrading and hoping for satisfaction at the next upgrade...

cafe latte
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Australia
Posts: 11278
Joined: 11 Oct 2009 04:27
Location: Cattle property near Ravenshoe Qld Australia

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by cafe latte » 05 Mar 2017 07:30

antennaguru wrote:If the Technics tonearm is so great, then why do you claim it needs aftermarket damping or it can't be compared to any decent high-end turntables/tonearms?

The Technics tonearm is a substandard tonearm compared to the Goldmund, Graham, Helius, Jelco and the Fidelity Research tonearms that were on the turntables that were just compared to the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on my very revealing system - Audia Flight Dual MC Phono Stage (balanced) - Ayre preamp (balanced) - Ayre power amp (balanced) - biwired to Sonus Faber loudspeakers - awesome revealing listening room (layout per George Cardas guidance) with structural floor reinforcing, natural wood wide plank flooring over plywood sub-floor, thick wool oriental rug, bookcases for diffraction, minimal absorptive treatment, etc. The Linn Sondek LP-12/FR was the lowest caliber of the turntables that beat the Technics SL1200 Mk2 hands down when it came to naturally reproducing music with well miked piano and percussion. I consider the Linn Sondek LP-12/FR as only a benchmark to the entry level of high-end turntables, therefore the Technics SL1200 MK2 was NOT high-end (nor was the former radio station idler drive). The other far better turntables in the comparison made the Technics sound far worse by comparison (with the exception of that one very heavy duty idler drive former radio station turntable which the Technics did beat). There was one other direct drive turntable in this comparison, two idler drives, and four belt drives, so all drive systems were considered and compared. Every other turntable had a platter that weighed many times what the Technics platter weighed, so NO the Technics platter is not heavy by comparison to those it was tested against. As previously mentioned, three turntables compared were suspension-less, in keeping with the limited suspension of the Technics SL1200 Mk2. Better sounding direct drive turntables are out there than a Technics, and they all have much heavier platters for the benefit that higher inertia brings to a direct drive turntable playing dynamic music. The Technics is fine for DJs who need quick start-up time (light platter with strong motor) and slider speed control, which are quite useless features in a high-end audio system and only add compromises to the sound. An important key to accurate record playback is being able to handle percussive dynamic groove modulation which platter inertia clearly benefits - many papers have been written on this. Steady state constant test tone speed stability testing tells us nothing about dynamic performance with heavy groove modulation during percussion and piano, and only tell us about reproducing a steady state constant test tone (which is NOT music).

You've talked about your lesser electronics and you're home-made clone loudspeakers in the past. My system is all higher quality genuine components at every stage and simply more revealing than yours, plus my room is more revealing having seen the pictures you posted of yours. It's just fine that you happen to like a lower performance turntable like the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on your lesser system, and maybe you also like it for the value proposition it offers you (bang for the buck your budget allows) - but don't go around saying that the Technics SL1200 Mk2 beats any of the turntables it was just compared to because it simply doesn't. Better turntables are just that - BETTER! The Technics SL1200 Mk2 is not a better turntable, nor even a high-end turntable. Some people like me are looking for higher quality sound, and are willing to expend the effort to get it. We often don't get lost in the bang for the buck argument that almost gets you to not quite high-end sound, and ultimately proves disappointing long-term since it soon leads to a constant cycle of upgrading and hoping for satisfaction at the next upgrade...
Pull your head in and stop being rude. Totally correct ATC scm 100's clones and CJ amplification and DNM is hardly sub standard and my listening room was purpose built for my hifi and it is 9mx8m.
Go and find bearing friction data for the arms you mentioned, you wont be able to for most if not all. Nothing substandard about the Technics arm, but it should have had oil damping from the start, adding it transforms the TT and for not much money, or you can just change the arm which you claimed was not possible.
You are starting to rant too, calm down it is a hifi form, and no need to get rude.
It is not like I dont have any other TT's to compare to, my SP10 has a Eminent Technology arm for Petes sake, I know what a good arm can do. I also know what a difference a cart can do too and what sounds good on what. I must have about 6 or 7 1k plus carts, two sound amazing on my sl1210, some great and others just ok.
Chris

antennaguru
broken record
Posts: 350
Joined: 21 Aug 2016 15:28

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by antennaguru » 05 Mar 2017 14:58

"Pull your head in" ??? Not sure what that even means, I was going to suggest that you "pull your head out", and refrained - trying not to be rude like you have become. I have heretofore only said what simply is true.

Issuesman666
senior member
senior member
Trinidad & Tobago
Posts: 596
Joined: 10 Mar 2014 20:05

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by Issuesman666 » 05 Mar 2017 15:44

I guess I should fill my Technics arm with oil then...

How does one do this?

I read somewhere that the arm on my lowly Technics SL 210 is the same arm as the SL 1200 mk 2...

macnoob
long player
long player
Posts: 1183
Joined: 09 Apr 2014 03:07

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by macnoob » 05 Mar 2017 16:10

The oil damper is an aftermarket addon from KAB.

cafe latte
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Australia
Posts: 11278
Joined: 11 Oct 2009 04:27
Location: Cattle property near Ravenshoe Qld Australia

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by cafe latte » 05 Mar 2017 22:55

antennaguru wrote:"Pull your head in" ??? Not sure what that even means, I was going to suggest that you "pull your head out", and refrained - trying not to be rude like you have become. I have heretofore only said what simply is true.
Actually you have said a lot that is anything but true, for example you said the Technics arm is not replaceable, not true at all loads of people replace it with all sorts, you also said the bearings on the Technics are of low quality, again not true, they are accurate to 1 micron and Technics even publish friction specs they are so confident of the consistency of their bearings. I am not aware of other manufactures who do this.
You have made a lot of statements, few have been true. I really should not have risen to the bait..
Chris

cafe latte
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Australia
Posts: 11278
Joined: 11 Oct 2009 04:27
Location: Cattle property near Ravenshoe Qld Australia

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by cafe latte » 05 Mar 2017 23:05

macnoob wrote:The oil damper is an aftermarket addon from KAB.
Yes the Kab damper widens the compliance of the arm and helps the stylus track the groove. Many arms have it built in, Kab made an add on and it works very well indeed. Much of the criticism of the sl1200 being dark or narrow I feel can be laid at the door of the Technics arm without the damper. I see why many replace the arm with something else, but just fitting the damper fixes the issue. I had every intention of changing the arm on my Technics when I bought it as I read it was the way to go. I was originally surprised how good the stock arm sounded, but as time went on I recognized the limits of the arm especially with my better carts. I gave the damper a try and wow what a difference, it is the best Technics mod IMO.
Chris

Gaslight
member
member
Netherlands
Posts: 64
Joined: 14 Apr 2016 18:26

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by Gaslight » 06 Mar 2017 07:49

antennaguru wrote: You've talked about your lesser electronics and you're home-made clone loudspeakers in the past. My system is all higher quality genuine components at every stage and simply more revealing than yours, plus my room is more revealing having seen the pictures you posted of yours. It's just fine that you happen to like a lower performance turntable like the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on your lesser system, and maybe you also like it for the value proposition it offers you (bang for the buck your budget allows). Some people like me are looking for higher quality sound, and are willing to expend the effort to get it. We often don't get lost in the bang for the buck argument that almost gets you to not quite high-end sound, and ultimately proves disappointing long-term
I think this is what Caffe Latte meant with "rude". I personally think this paragraph would make a fine addition to wiktionary for their article on "condescending"

cafe latte
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Australia
Posts: 11278
Joined: 11 Oct 2009 04:27
Location: Cattle property near Ravenshoe Qld Australia

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by cafe latte » 06 Mar 2017 08:03

Gaslight wrote:
antennaguru wrote: You've talked about your lesser electronics and you're home-made clone loudspeakers in the past. My system is all higher quality genuine components at every stage and simply more revealing than yours, plus my room is more revealing having seen the pictures you posted of yours. It's just fine that you happen to like a lower performance turntable like the Technics SL1200 Mk2 on your lesser system, and maybe you also like it for the value proposition it offers you (bang for the buck your budget allows). Some people like me are looking for higher quality sound, and are willing to expend the effort to get it. We often don't get lost in the bang for the buck argument that almost gets you to not quite high-end sound, and ultimately proves disappointing long-term
I think this is what Caffe Latte meant with "rude". I personally think this paragraph would make a fine addition to wiktionary for their article on "condescending"
Well said, interesting how he can hear how my music sounds in my room after seeing a picture of my unfurnished room, before rugs etc, that is really rather clever.. He has never heard a Technics with an arm damper or a psu, or one with a Decca, or my other carts, my amps which I have several but he know how they sounds too...
Chris

Schtick

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by Schtick » 06 Mar 2017 15:11

raphaelmabo wrote:Mr H. callahan, regarding the AT-LP5 - I commented with my personal listening experience. The AT-LP5 really sounds better than the AT-LP1240 and the AT-LP120. Even with the same AT-95 mounted the AT-LP5 shows up a more musical, well balanced and detailed presentation. The AT-LP5 differs from the 1240 and 120 in many ways, perhaps the most significant difference is the use of a higher quality tonearm, and that the DJ features, sliders and knobs are removed so less things that can resonance and vibrate and have a negative impact of the sound. Reading professional hifi-reviews of the AT-LP5, 1240 and 120 (for example What Hifi, and the swedish Ljud & Bild) confirms my personal, if brief, listening experience that the AT-LP5 is the better sounding 'table.

I'm not into numbers, I will never select a product from the technical specifications. My interest is listening with my ears. I don't listen with my eyes reading a technical data spec. :)
I agree, on all counts.

Also, it seems to be conservatively spec´d by AT. Look here: http://www.avhub.com.au/product-reviews ... est-430461

"A measured wow and flutter test result of 0.09% RMS unweighted is an excellent result."

H. callahan
senior member
senior member
Posts: 870
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 17:59

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by H. callahan » 07 Mar 2017 03:43

Well, if it´s really that good i give my congratulations but... why don´t they tell then, so picky guys like me don´t complain? :wink:

This is from the test-article (and by the way i think its great they´re doing tests again) from the link:

"TesT RepoRT
Newport Test Laboratories measured the rotational speed of the Audio-Technica T-LP5 as being exact at both 33.33rpm and at 45rpm, so that when replaying a test record with a 3000Hz test tone at either speed, the measured frequency was exactly 3000Hz. The lab also measured wow and flutter to several of the half-dozen standards in common use. CCIR unweighted wow was measured at 0.2%, and CCIR unweighted flutter at 0.07%. Using the Australian standard for combined wow and flutter measurement, Newport Test Labs reported a measured wow and flutter test result of 0.09% RMS unweighted. This is an excellent result."

Hm. I don´t know about the "Australian Standart measurement" but it seems to be veeeeeeeery forgiving.
Don´t get me wrong, if you like the tt i´m the last to tell you that you´re "liking the wrong tt"; but as i don´t have the possibility to hear this tt myself specs still give me a hint of the direction this tt is heading.

Schtick

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by Schtick » 07 Mar 2017 07:11

H. callahan wrote:Well, if it´s really that good i give my congratulations but... why don´t they tell then, so picky guys like me don´t complain? :wink:
Have you listened to a LP5? If so, how did you find it? Did you detect any wow/flutter?

rich12
senior member
senior member
Posts: 347
Joined: 15 Mar 2010 17:44
Location: US

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by rich12 » 07 Mar 2017 21:05

H. callahan wrote:s like me don´t complain? :wink:

This is from the test-article (and by the way i think its great they´re doing tests again) from the link:

"TesT RepoRT
Newport Test Laboratories measured the rotational speed of the Audio-Technica T-LP5 as being exact at both 33.33rpm and at 45rpm, so that when replaying a test record with a 3000Hz test tone at either speed, the measured frequency was exactly 3000Hz. The lab also measured wow and flutter to several of the half-dozen standards in common use. CCIR unweighted wow was measured at 0.2%, and CCIR unweighted flutter at 0.07%. Using the Australian standard for combined wow and flutter measurement, Newport Test Labs reported a measured wow and flutter test result of 0.09% RMS unweighted. This is an excellent result."

Hm. I don´t know about the "Australian Standart measurement" but it seems to be veeeeeeeery forgiving.
Don´t get me wrong, if you like the tt i´m the last to tell you that you´re "liking the wrong tt"; but as i don´t have the possibility to hear this tt myself specs still give me a hint of the direction this tt is heading.
How can it be forgiving if it's "unweighted?" Most specs are weighted, not unweighted, making them appear better. With weighting, the Audio Technica will measure even better.

Schtick

Re: Audio Technica AT-LP1240 or AT-LP120

Post by Schtick » 07 Mar 2017 21:10

H. callahan wrote:Well, if it´s really that good i give my congratulations but... why don´t they tell then, so picky guys like me don´t complain? :wink:
Have you listened to a LP5? If so, how did you find it? Did you detect any wow/flutter?
Sorry, I read your post hastily. You´ve not heard the ATLP5 but disses it out offhand based on some figures you´ve read. Mymistake.

Post Reply