Page 1 of 1

Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 17 May 2010 06:27
by fromans4
I don't know anything about this table. I just bought one on fleebay for $58. The reason I purchased it was for the Grace F-9 cartridge body that it comes with!! I already have a Grace RS-9E stylus and I have been waiting for a good deal on the cartridge body. I plan on installing the completed Grace F-9E on my Thorens TD-160 mated to an SME 3009 II. I think it ought to be a really nice combo. I have an AT440MLa that I could put on the Technics SL-Q202 if it is worth the effort. :?:

What do you think?

Posted: 17 May 2010 07:17
by Alec124c41
The Technics is a decent entry-level deck. Mount the 440 and see what you think.
The F9E on the SME/160 should be excellent.

Cheers,
Alec

Posted: 17 May 2010 07:58
by fromans4
I have a DL-160 on the TD-160/SME now. I am planning on mounting the F-9E to another headshell and do some comparison listening. Should be fun. :)

Posted: 18 May 2010 00:37
by lini
Alec: Imo, the SL-Q202 is better than just entry level - I'd rather put it into the same league as other decent middle class direct drives, e.g. the Dual CS604.

f4: Yup, worth the effort.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

Posted: 18 May 2010 04:03
by Alec124c41
Lini, I'm going on the assumption that almost everything I have is entry-level to good sound, or perhaps decent mid-fi, by some standards. I don't count the bottom-feeders on the market now as entry to anything.
The SL-Q202 is a decent deck, that will make good music, and with the quartz speed controller, should be rock steady.

Cheers,
Alec

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 09:35
by dlaloum
lini wrote:Alec: Imo, the SL-Q202 is better than just entry level - I'd rather put it into the same league as other decent middle class direct drives, e.g. the Dual CS604.
Hi Manfred,

How would you compare/contrast the SL-Q202 to a Revox B795?
(Thinking about a 2nd table while the Revox is at the doctors, maybe something that would handle low/mid compliance cartridges to contrast with the Revox using mid/high compliance)

thanks

David

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 12:41
by Virak
I had one for a little while, and was surprised over how good it was. It's not an SL-1200Mk2, but still a nice deck.

Posted: 25 Oct 2010 20:19
by lini
David: Well, the SL-Q202 sure isn't high-end, but nevertheless a good and pretty solid model. So, if the offered exemplar is in good condition and you can get it for a decent price, I could imagine that you'd be pretty pleased with it...

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

Posted: 25 Oct 2010 22:12
by plyscds
The Q202's owner's manual is in the VE library. If you read the Q202's spec page you will see that the figures for wow and flutter, rumble, and tonearm friction match the SL-1200s. The tone arm, while not the same as the 1200s, has the same effective length and overhang, so the 52mm Technics overhang gauge will work on it. The Q202 also has an overhead bracket and mounting point for the tonearm, similar to the 1200s, which helps keep the cartridge properly positioned. I have a D303, also an e-bay prize which has had some repairs done to it. It seems to work well with any reasonably priced cartridge I have tried on it. I also have a belt drive B303 from this vintage that has never had a more serious problem than needing an occasional platter drive belt. I am a fan of this vintage Technics turntable, the last year before the P-mounts. I have nothing against the P-mounts, but I like the variety of cartridge choices the slotted headshell affords.

Re: Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 07 Oct 2011 18:38
by joesh
I'm a bit late on this one, but I couldn't help noticing the SL-Q202 reference.

I'd be interested to know what the difference is between the SL-D models and the SL-Q models. I imagine that the Q stands for quartz? If so what does it all mean for the quality of the TT, is a SL-D better than a SL-Q etc (or vice versa).

Re: Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 04:34
by scaffolder
joesh wrote:I'm a bit late on this one, but I couldn't help noticing the SL-Q202 reference.

I'd be interested to know what the difference is between the SL-D models and the SL-Q models. I imagine that the Q stands for quartz? If so what does it all mean for the quality of the TT, is a SL-D better than a SL-Q etc (or vice versa).
The Quartz Technics were a big improvement on the D-series. The D-series were servo units. I have 3 Q-2's that are rock steady. Any D-series I have are dead. It's funny I remember buying the one Q-2 new in 1980 for $200 and the salesman saying the table would last for years. I was skeptical. I'm not now.

Re: Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 04:41
by fscl
joesh wrote:I'm a bit late on this one, but I couldn't help noticing the SL-Q202 reference.

I'd be interested to know what the difference is between the SL-D models and the SL-Q models. I imagine that the Q stands for quartz? If so what does it all mean for the quality of the TT, is a SL-D better than a SL-Q etc (or vice versa).
IIANM "D" tables have / allow for pitch adjustment. "Q" locks on to a set speed.

Fred

Re: Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 13:59
by joesh
Big thanks, it's good to know. In fact I was thinking of getting rid of my Q202, and thus keeping my D3. However, I now know that if anything it will be the opposite.

Re: Anyone have the scoop on the Technics SL-Q202?

Posted: 02 Sep 2019 14:39
by Iliya20
Does anyone knows what is the platter weight on this turntable? It seems to somewhat lighter than a SL-Q2 platter. For some reason, Technics has not provided neither motor torque or platter weight for these models.