Dual 1009 vs 1015F

twice the fun
Post Reply
Tinkaroo
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Canada
Posts: 7514
Joined: 04 Feb 2011 20:00
Location: Pixie Hollow by The Bay

Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by Tinkaroo » 19 Jun 2014 12:29

I would like to hear some opinions on the differences between the original 1009 and the 1015F.

How does the 1015F stack up against the earlier model?

Dualmaniac
member
member
Posts: 231
Joined: 21 Mar 2014 10:18

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by Dualmaniac » 19 Jun 2014 23:24

My thinking is the 1009 would be a couple of years older, but top of the line at that time. The 1015F would be newer but mid-line. They are both pre-plsticized metal consruction built to run forever. The 1015FF was my first Dual in 1969 and it is a showpiece to today. I would use it every day except I do like a 12" platter.

dualcan
long player
long player
Canada
Posts: 3564
Joined: 15 Nov 2013 22:53
Location: Sorel-Tracy Quebec
Contact:

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by dualcan » 20 Jun 2014 03:59

Hi,
Any Dual changer with a 9 as a last digit, is the top of the line in its class, in its time. The magic number 9 must have come into use because it is the highest single digit, and subsequently played such an important role in the original era of Steidinger Dual, up to 1981.
It starts of course with the 1009, the big break-through. In Europe, there was no 1009sk of 1009F but rather the 1016, with the 1019 at the top spot. The North American market just was in love with the number 1009 so it had to stay...
Next top spot is the 1209 for the small platter units and the 1219 for the big platter with the improved subsequent 1229 and 1229Q. Now the belt drives come in with the 1249, with the 1239 for the small platter.
The only changer that would have deserved a "9" in my eyes was the 1218, a truly great unit. I guess the thought was that 18 is twice as good as 9...... Units with lower numbers are the changers that would go into music consoles: 1010 1210 1224 1234 etc. Mid (price)level would see the 1015 1016 1215 1235 etc. There is also a class reserved for industry such as Sony Grundig etc. These would be units with a some mechanical variation (smaller motor or platter). Later you see the 1220/1222 and finally the variants to the 1234/35 G(rundig) and T(elefunken) units.
Post 1979, we see many variants and the numbering gets somewhat confusing. There is no more magic with the 9 after this unfortunately and the company is starting to get into financial problems around this time.
The manuals are another story. The first manual is the humble 295 with a plastic arm and a small chassis conceived to go into the the top of the typical German table radio of the fifties. The 300 and 400/410/420 are modernized versions of the same thing. The last small unit from Steidinger is the 430. These units all are small chassis and have ceramic carts only.
The new manual TT era starts with direct drive 701 and very soon after the belt drive 601. This six hundred/belt drive and seven hundred direct drive nomenclature stays for a long while, until the EDS 500 shows up.
With the addition of a "bare-bones" belt drive manuals of the 500 class (502) fairly soon after the 601 introduction, the last generation of TT has
It is interesting to note that today Fehrenbacher makes the 500 series (505/4) with the same chassis plate as the Steidinger unit and it is the only original Dual albeit with different motors etc.
A good listing of the various units with a timeline can be seen at:
http://wegavision.pytalhost.com/dual.html
The first section is Plattenspieler -record player/Manual TT. the second set is Plattenwechsler- Record changer.
The general outline of the number scheme listed here goes haywire after 1982 when Thompson-Brandt, Schneider and a slew of other start using the Dual logo.
Hope his sheds some light into the numbering system
Regards,
k

Dualmaniac
member
member
Posts: 231
Joined: 21 Mar 2014 10:18

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by Dualmaniac » 20 Jun 2014 05:50

Thanks Klaus. I have been waiting on just this post from you. I had guessed quite a bit of this number-clature, and your explanation is great.

Tinkaroo
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Canada
Posts: 7514
Joined: 04 Feb 2011 20:00
Location: Pixie Hollow by The Bay

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by Tinkaroo » 20 Jun 2014 11:46

Thank you both for your valued input.

I would like to know a bit about the difference between the motors too if anyone can shed some light on that aspect.

Here is what I have been able to figure out.

Dual 1009:
-produced from 1964-66
-Has 4 speeds (1015F has 3, although most people wouldn't need the 16 RPM).
-Has a heavier platter (7 Lbs vs 4?)
-Tonearm balancing weight is better for precision adjusting, although the 1015F works OK once you figure it out.
-The rumble figures as listed are not very good at <38 DB.
-Both have pitch control.

Dual 1015F:
-produced from 1967-68
-Has 3 speeds (1009 has 4 speeds)
-Has anti skating vs none on the 1009.
-Has cue lever vs none on the 1009.
-rumble listed at <56 DB which is better than that on the 1009.

I'm not sure why the rumble figures are so different for these two models, but the 1015F has a newly designed motor. Perhaps it is due to the rating method, weighted vs unweighted?

PS-Before getting a 1015F I wondered about the 10 inch platter vs a 12 inch one as used on the other models I had, particularly about the slight overhang when using LPs. I found that it doesn't really make a great deal of difference since the overhang is not a significant factor, and about 1/2 inch of that is the lead in grooves.

dualcan
long player
long player
Canada
Posts: 3564
Joined: 15 Nov 2013 22:53
Location: Sorel-Tracy Quebec
Contact:

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by dualcan » 20 Jun 2014 17:39

Hi Tinkeroo,
You hit all the bells with your analysis.
The rumble is indeed weighted versus unweighted. Keep in mind, the central platter support with the bearing is the same in both, both platters are dynamically balanced, and the round motor is definitely superior to the open frame, just in start up rotation alone. The outcome must therefore be close but ultimately fall on the side of the 1009. Also consider that the lab measuring might have taken a bit of an upgrade with the 1015-perhaps...
I would take the 1015 over most of the plastic/masonite junk available today. Perhaps put a PE open frame motor....
Regards,
k

Tinkaroo
vinyl addict
vinyl addict
Canada
Posts: 7514
Joined: 04 Feb 2011 20:00
Location: Pixie Hollow by The Bay

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by Tinkaroo » 21 Jun 2014 16:04

Before I owned a Dual I owned a PE, but it was during the time that they were part of Dual.

I currently own the 1015F which unfortunately doesn't get as much playing time as it deserves since I have the 701 and 721 in the starting rotation. Their performance is stellar, and it is an unfair competition, sort of like Pele vs a sandlot player.

It is good to know the relative merits of the various models for future reference. The motor in the 1009 is definitely better and very highly regarded among idler turntable buffs.

dualcan
long player
long player
Canada
Posts: 3564
Joined: 15 Nov 2013 22:53
Location: Sorel-Tracy Quebec
Contact:

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by dualcan » 22 Jun 2014 03:48

.....yet not as good/quiet as the PE 2040 or the stellar PE 33 motor....
When PE "joined" Dual, they where just producing their new 3000 range and it still was almost all PE parts, specifically the motors with a very few Dual Items (spindles, ceramic cartridge and the mounting screws) Dual at least took the PE motor seriously and changed their open from bridges to the cast types as PE had done for quite a while already.
Regards
k

mrow2
long player
long player
United States of America
Posts: 3435
Joined: 25 Aug 2010 03:05
Location: San Clemente, California

Re: Dual 1009 vs 1015F

Post by mrow2 » 16 Jul 2019 21:13

I'm reviving this post because I'd like some clarification on precisely which of the early 10xx through to 1229 models have one of the (quiet) round motors? I was under the impression that 1015F (a re-issue of 1009 for US market?) had one; I have not seen one of these however. I believe 1009 has the round motor (I've serviced some of those), and of course the 1019, 1219 and 1229 models have versions of the round motor as well although there were distinct design changes since the 1019 motor. I'm mainly unclear about the incarnations of the 1015 and 1016, and any others which might have it. Any assistance appreciated. I've looked over this thread and the 1015 SMs, still have doubts. -- Cheers --

Post Reply