[78-L] TURNING THE TABLES, (was New Cheap Turntable

[David Lennick]

I wish you'd identify the turntable! No secret police on this list (he said, 
looking over his shoulder and under the bed). Of course DJ turntables are meant 
to play music where wow and flutter wouldn't make a bit of difference. You 
could also play twelve-tone music, Weill's "Mahagonny" and everything recorded 
by Joseph Szigeti after 1940 and never notice any problems....

dl

JD wrote:
> As there has been much discussion here of late about cheaper and/or "DJ" type turntables  I offer my less than ideal and rather disappointing experience with one, not too long ago.
> 
> A few years ago  I decided to try one of the so-called "DJ" three speed turntables in order  to be able to utilize a single turntable with variable speed for my LPs & 78s. The one I chose was an obvious copy of the costly and industry standard Panasonic (model  1200 I believe). It was, at the time one of the few and possibly one of the first of the Panasonic clones. Curious as to whether it might actually be manufactured by Panasonic as a stencil brand  I asked the US office of the manufacturer and was told that it wasn't. I had some reservations but considering that this might be the ideal turntable for my requirements if it performed well I purchsed one from a local  authorized dealer with the understanding that I could return it if dissatisfied.   As it turned out this was a fortunate decision. Lest I upset the manufacturer and possibly leave myself open to who knows what and maybe upset any owners of this brand I won't identify the name other than to say that its model
s h
>  ave been mentioned here often among the various other similar turntable brands and have apparently  become quite popular.  Also, I'm not trying to make any owners of this brand unhappy; chances are that if they own one they're satisfied or oblivious of any problems I mention which hopefully have since been corrected. 
> 
> As I unpacked and set it up I was much impressed with the apparent quality and heft of the thing. Playing LPs on it, unfortunately was quite another story and revealed an array of GROSS problems.  One of the first LPs I tried was  a classical Mercury Living Presence Stereo that began with  solo clarinet. I don't remember the disc or the piece, It just happened to be the first LP I pulled from  the rack to play on the new turntable. As probably everyone knows, those Mercury recordings are near legendary for their audio fidelity. As the clarinet passage began  I was greeted with what seemed a nvery obvious flutter effect. WHAT!!!??? This can't be! I couldn't believe that any decent turntable of any vintage would exhibit this level of flutter. It had to be something else.  I then played the disc on both my turntables (a Technics SLQX 300 and an old Empire 108)  and the playback was flawless, as I expected. I concluded that the flutter effect was of course, not flutter but mor
e t
>  han likely caused by some sort of arm resonance due to less than ideal design. Let me add that I was using an excellent cartridge, properly mounted and that I'm experienced enough in audio and music (a professional in both) to know what I'm doing and certainly what I'm hearing. Further listening revealed two more gems of problems; a very obvious and disturbingly high rumble leve, even at moderate listening levelsl (most unusual and truly inexcusable for a direct drive turntable) and a platter that did not (repeat: DID NOT) rotate in a flat plane indicating that the spindle might be canted or the platter  grossly defective (even more inexcusable!).  Seeing the edge of the turntable (and the disc and arm) rise and fall as it rotates is not something one expects to find in a record player, not even the cheapest of the cheap..  Once again I called the manufacturer and mentioned the platter problem. I was told that they were aware of it but they didn't offer a fix or solution.
 I 
>  did not mention the arm-resonance effect as that would probably have been a dead end unless I was able to speak with a design engineer and Ididn't want to get inviolved any further in what appeared to be a lost cause. with a turntable that I now realized should have been a Cracker Jacks prize Of course  I returned it and vowed to cforever avoid this brand in the future and to be very leery of so-called  "DJ" turntables or anything that seems too well priced to  be true. In  later years I checked the platter rotation of similar turntables (rotating them by hand)  at a Sam Ash store display area and IIRC  also of this particular brand and found them to rotate in a flat plane as they should. Without taking one home I had and have no way of evaluating potential arm-resonance problems or rumble levels so I decided to stay with my trusty and perfectly performing older units which do not have "DJ" credentials and which were designed by engineers who obviously knew what they were
 do
>  ing and marketed by companies that still cared about their products. I believe that in the early days, at least, these so-called 'DJ' turntables were intended to attract DJ wannabes and space cadets, most of whom wouldn't know a musical sound or quality audio reproduction if it bit them in their proverbials. 
> 
> Bottom line; turntable and in particular, tone arm design is serious science and there is plenty of room for fudging or screw-ups. For those who are serious about aidio reproduction and can hear the difference, the usual caution applies, caveat emptor!!! 
> JD
>