|
R.I.P Technics SL-1200 & SL-1210 turntables (Merged with other 1210 thread) (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DjWoody |
| quote: | Originally posted by Schadenfreude
I emailed Panasonic Canada yesterday, and the response i got from them today pretty much said that this is completely false and that the company will issue a statement concerning this false rumour this week. |
I got the same response from Panasonic USA.
--------------------
Dear MR MARTINEZ
Thank you for contacting Panasonic. We truly apologize for the delay in responding to your inquiry and we hope that this has not caused you any inconvenience.
Technics turntable is not discontinued that is why there is no website for the "Official Announcement". You may still check and purchase Technics turntable from the Panasonic Website.
www.panasonic.com
We hope this information is helpful to you.
Thank You,
Panasonic Consumer Support
In our effort for continuous improvement, we would appreciate your
evaluation of the service we have provided. Please take a minute to
complete a brief four question survey by contacting us at: |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
Glad to hear it - hmmmmm, me thinks pioneer are paying games.....
| quote: | Originally posted by skip
Thank god I've got my MK5s already and thank god they're not discontinuing all models (if something ever were to happen to my techs:nervous: ). I wouldn't want the MK2s or the M5Gs though…
|
Why not the m5g's? Top of the range IMO..... |
|
|
| skip |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Why not the m5g's? Top of the range IMO..... |
I think they look horrible. Blue LEDs. :nervous: Shiny black finish. :nervous:
Also the pitch is digital, so it has a resolution unlike the analogue pitch slider of the MK5. I dunno what the resolution is and I dunno if anyone has ever really found it out or how much it affects the precision of mixing. But I thought that it's better be safe than sorry and get the MK5s instead as they look loads better and the only thing on the M5Gs that might be useful for me is the possibility to use a larger pitch range (±16%), which I've never needed so far at least. Also the MK5s are over 100€/piece cheaper, so I didn't want to pay around 250€ more to get something less than I want. ;) |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by skip
I think they look horrible. Blue LEDs. :nervous: Shiny black finish. :nervous:
Also the pitch is digital, so it has a resolution unlike the analogue pitch slider of the MK5. I dunno what the resolution is and I dunno if anyone has ever really found it out or how much it affects the precision of mixing. But I thought that it's better be safe than sorry and get the MK5s instead as they look loads better and the only thing on the M5Gs that might be useful for me is the possibility to use a larger pitch range (±16%), which I've never needed so far at least. Also the MK5s are over 100€/piece cheaper, so I didn't want to pay around 250€ more to get something less than I want. ;) |
I knew that myth would come up.
I hate to break this to you but the digital pitch just controls the steadiness of the selected pitch and the motor speed - it's still an analogue pot(slider) that controls the pitch so increments are the same, it's just that you don't get pitch deviations. The previous models uses an analogue circuit to control the motor speed and quartz circuit (like a cheap digital watch) to control the pitch, but the m5gs use a purely digital, solid state circuit to control the fix of the pitch and motor speed.
Again, to clarify, the pitch slider itself and speed adjustment, for all intents and purposes is analogue, apart from the method used to keep the pitch accurate from wow and flutter. There is no resolution problem as such.
If anyone tells you there's a resolution issue with m5g's I'm afraid they don't know what they're talking about. |
|
|
| palm |
| THANK GOD! Im getting one before its too late. |
|
|
| skip |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
I knew that myth would come up.
I hate to break this to you but the digital pitch just controls the steadiness of the selected pitch and the motor speed - it's still an analogue pot(slider) that controls the pitch so increments are the same, it's just that you don't get pitch deviations. The previous models uses an analogue circuit to control the motor speed and quartz circuit (like a cheap digital watch) to control the pitch, but the m5gs use a purely digital, solid state circuit to control the fix of the pitch and motor speed.
Again, to clarify, the pitch slider itself and speed adjustment, for all intents and purposes is analogue, apart from the method used to keep the pitch accurate from wow and flutter. There is no resolution problem as such.
If anyone tells you there's a resolution issue with m5g's I'm afraid they don't know what they're talking about. |
Can you post more info and some sources on this? I didn't quite understand what part of the pitch is digital and what isn't, but the quote from Panasonic leads me to believe it's more than just one part. "-- an all-digital pitch control --". Also the Panasonic website tells us that the M5G has "Quartz direct drive accuracy", so they probably haven't replaced the quartz crystal on the M5G with something more expensive and accurate. What would that even be? An atomic clock? :eek:
Also as far as I can see, pretty much everything that is digital has some sort of a resolution. It's an entirely different thing if that resolution will affect the speed of the record or not (as I have no idea what part is digital and what isn't).
Also, isn't wow & flutter mostly caused by other things in the turntable than the pitch slider? |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by skip
Can you post more info and some sources on this? I didn't quite understand what part of the pitch is digital and what isn't, but the quote from Panasonic leads me to believe it's more than just one part. "-- an all-digital pitch control --". Also the Panasonic website tells us that the M5G has "Quartz direct drive accuracy", so they probably haven't replaced the quartz crystal on the M5G with something more expensive and accurate. What would that even be? An atomic clock? :eek:
Also as far as I can see, pretty much everything that is digital has some sort of a resolution. It's an entirely different thing if that resolution will affect the speed of the record or not (as I have no idea what part is digital and what isn't).
Also, isn't wow & flutter mostly caused by other things in the turntable than the pitch slider? |
IMO, this whole thing was a marketing up by technics, trying to compete with pioneer against their ever expanding range of CDJ's.
My sources; Me
I'm a technics (amongst other brands) qualified service engineer and used to support myself by repairing and services decks.
Here's how it works, in laymens terms: The old 1200's just usea resistance value based on the position of the pot (slider) which is then sent to the motor control circuit, which in this case is glorified relay turning the resistive value in to a voltage to drive the motor. So basically the resistive value was send to another transformer (via a calibrated internal pot, hence why you can actually make old techincs go to +50 pitch if you really wanted) and it directly sends the voltage to the motor. The problem with this is that as pots degrade (and any one of the other 2 dozen comenets that aloow pitch change to happen in a 1200) the accuracy of the pitch degrades. Even things like temperaute affect resistors and caps
The m5g's take the resistive value of the pot to a fully digital cicruit which effectively constantly calculates the correct voltage to send the motor the motor. Yes, theorectically with any digital control there is always a argument of resoltion or steps in the process, but this is actually more accurate than the resistive error margin of resistors in the all analogue system.
Furthermore, you could not physically move the pitch slider a small enough distance to fall between the resolution steps (you can see the most tiny but relative changes if you hold a ohmeter over the internal calibration pot contacts on a m5g).
Please note I'm using the term resolution steps for no other reason that to give an understandable picture of what I'm trying to explain (the terms is technically incorrect in this instance but you hopefully get what I mean)
What I'm saying is the m5g's are more accurate than any other previous version.
They're still analogue in every way apart from how the motor control voltage is managed. |
|
|
| Ravist |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
IMO, this whole thing was a marketing up by technics, trying to compete with pioneer against their ever expanding range of CDJ's.
My sources; Me
I'm a technics (amongst other brands) qualified service engineer and used to support myself by repairing and services decks.
Here's how it works, in laymens terms: The old 1200's just usea resistance value based on the position of the pot (slider) which is then sent to the motor control circuit, which in this case is glorified relay turning the resistive value in to a voltage to drive the motor. So basically the resistive value was send to another transformer (via a calibrated internal pot, hence why you can actually make old techincs go to +50 pitch if you really wanted) and it directly sends the voltage to the motor. The problem with this is that as pots degrade (and any one of the other 2 dozen comenets that aloow pitch change to happen in a 1200) the accuracy of the pitch degrades. Even things like temperaute affect resistors and caps
The m5g's take the resistive value of the pot to a fully digital cicruit which effectively constantly calculates the correct voltage to send the motor the motor. Yes, theorectically with any digital control there is always a argument of resoltion or steps in the process, but this is actually more accurate than the resistive error margin of resistors in the all analogue system.
Furthermore, you could not physically move the pitch slider a small enough distance to fall between the resolution steps (you can see the most tiny but relative changes if you hold a ohmeter over the internal calibration pot contacts on a m5g).
Please note I'm using the term resolution steps for no other reason that to give an understandable picture of what I'm trying to explain (the terms is technically incorrect in this instance but you hopefully get what I mean)
What I'm saying is the m5g's are more accurate than any other previous version.
They're still analogue in every way apart from how the motor control voltage is managed. |
makes me want to ditch my mark 5's for the M5G's
I have a question Dj Rann, is it possible to change the tonearm? Because I was thinking of replacing the tonearm with a straight one, ive read it does less skipping on the record as all audiophile turntables have straight tonearms. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ravist
makes me want to ditch my mark 5's for the M5G's
|
Don't bother - you really won't notice the difference, unless you want the blue leds and have the money spare.
| quote: | Originally posted by Ravist
I have a question Dj Rann, is it possible to change the tonearm? Because I was thinking of replacing the tonearm with a straight one, ive read it does less skipping on the record as all audiophile turntables have straight tonearms. |
Replacing the tonearm is fairly straightforward, only the soldering is a bit of bitch as the contacts are tiny.
But don't go for a straight one. I've heard arguments on both sides, and my experience is that straight cause greater lateral wear on the needle and record at it's extremes - the audiofile oes are designed so the tonearm cradle accomodates this but it doesn't with technics, so IMO, don't do it. |
|
|
| Ravist |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Don't bother - you really won't notice the difference, unless you want the blue leds and have the money spare.
Replacing the tonearm is fairly straightforward, only the soldering is a bit of bitch as the contacts are tiny.
But don't go for a straight one. I've heard arguments on both sides, and my experience is that straight cause greater lateral wear on the needle and record at it's extremes - the audiofile oes are designed so the tonearm cradle accomodates this but it doesn't with technics, so IMO, don't do it. |
no way to make it so that the technics accommodate to straight tonearms? Or dont bother at all? |
|
|
| skip |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
IMO, this whole thing was a marketing up by technics, trying to compete with pioneer against their ever expanding range of CDJ's.
My sources; Me
I'm a technics (amongst other brands) qualified service engineer and used to support myself by repairing and services decks.
Here's how it works, in laymens terms: The old 1200's just usea resistance value based on the position of the pot (slider) which is then sent to the motor control circuit, which in this case is glorified relay turning the resistive value in to a voltage to drive the motor. So basically the resistive value was send to another transformer (via a calibrated internal pot, hence why you can actually make old techincs go to +50 pitch if you really wanted) and it directly sends the voltage to the motor. The problem with this is that as pots degrade (and any one of the other 2 dozen comenets that aloow pitch change to happen in a 1200) the accuracy of the pitch degrades. Even things like temperaute affect resistors and caps
The m5g's take the resistive value of the pot to a fully digital cicruit which effectively constantly calculates the correct voltage to send the motor the motor. Yes, theorectically with any digital control there is always a argument of resoltion or steps in the process, but this is actually more accurate than the resistive error margin of resistors in the all analogue system.
Furthermore, you could not physically move the pitch slider a small enough distance to fall between the resolution steps (you can see the most tiny but relative changes if you hold a ohmeter over the internal calibration pot contacts on a m5g).
Please note I'm using the term resolution steps for no other reason that to give an understandable picture of what I'm trying to explain (the terms is technically incorrect in this instance but you hopefully get what I mean)
What I'm saying is the m5g's are more accurate than any other previous version.
They're still analogue in every way apart from how the motor control voltage is managed. |
That still doesn't sound very sensible to me. I mean, if the signal on the M5G is controlled by a similar pot, which will degrade too, then how will the digital circuit know what the correct signal is if it's being fed a similar degraded signal as on the MK5? From what you're saying I understand that the signal is being converted to a digital one and then that digital signal is used as the control signal. That makes no sense to me, unless the signal is being processed in some way, but I can't understand how it would be processed. Based on what data would they change it?
Also I don't really see how it'd be important to keep the absolute pitch value correct over time. I wouldn't care if the real value would be 3,5% if the slider is at 3,3% or something like that as long as it stays constant and doesn't jump around 3,3% and 3,5% for example.
Does it state anywhere on the digital parts that how many bits it is? From quick calculations i got the maximum resolution for a 16-bit slider for a ±8% pitch slider to be 0,0244140625%, a 24-bit one would have a max resolution of 9,536743164062* 10^-5, but somehow I'm doubtful that Technics would use such a precise slider for the M5G as they used a slider with 0,1% steps for their CDJ, the SL-DZ1200, which was introduced a few years after the M5G, if I'm not mistaken and is twice as expensive too! :eek:
Overall I'd like to know exactly what parts they replaced with digital ones and what exactly the digital ones do and how.
It doesn't make much sense to me to replace the pitch slider with a digital one, which would make the turntable more imprecise, so I doubt they really did that, but I also can't trust it isn't so unless someone can provide some strong facts backed up with good evidence.
edit: Had messed up the calculations, so I corrected them. |
|
|
|
|
