SP10 Mk II vs Mk III


A couple of guys here were planning to do listening comparisons of the Technics SP10 Mk II vs the Mk III, in their own homes and systems. Has anyone actually completed such a comparison? I am wondering whether the "upgrade" to the Mk III is actually worth it in terms of audible differences between the two tables. Possibly mounting either table in a well done wooden or slate plinth mitigates any sonic differences that would otherwise be heard. I am thinking of Albert Porter and Mike Lavigne in particular, who were going to do the comparison. Thanks for any response.
lewm

Showing 8 responses by pryso

Strobe adding noise? Wish I understood more about electronics to judge if this is likely.

KAB offers a strobe disabler switch for the 1200 series tables. In response to my questions on this idea for the SP-10 series, friends with electronics knowledge scoff at the idea saying it is such an overbuilt and sophisticated design that disabling or switching out the strobe would not have a sonic impact.

So, anyone here who has actual experience with this mod to share with the rest of us?
Lewm, allow me to reiterate my understanding of both Albert's and Raul's designs, having communicated with them. This may stimulate their responses if I misunderstood either one.

Albert installed a brass rod that attaches to an iron block at the bottom of his plinth. The rubber plug on the bottom of the protective pan under the table has been removed to allow the rod to firmly contact the bottom of the spindle bearing housing, thus draining or sinking away vibrations.

Raul installed the three AT footers under the pan itself. Since the pan does not touch the spindle housing, his system provides an overall suspension.

Therefore, Albert's system is high mass, with a design to specifically sink motor/bearing vibrations. Raul's system is low mass, designed to firmly suspend (pneumatic) the entire tt system. So I think they defined very different endpoints.
Ralph, your less than favorable comments on the "OEM plinths for the Technics" must have been intended for the Teak plinth. I first read it wrong, thinking you meant to reply to Lonestarsouth on the SAEC SBX-7 since that was an OEM plinth. That confused me further since the SAEC is so similar to your earlier description of a desirable plinth. To me the Teak looked like something anyone with basic woodworking skills could produce.

Like Lew, I'm also wondering about your possible reference to the EPA-100. I've read nothing but good reports on its construction and performance. If fact, with the adjustable damping feature, it could work with higher compliance cartridges than would otherwise be expected for an arm of that mass, as well as medium and low compliance, meaning it is very versatile.
Re: number of electrolytic caps

The Service Manual for my SP-10 Mk2A identifies 24 'lytics in the main unit section and 8 in the power unit section. So, not much difference from Peter's count except he didn't include the power section which I've been told is most critical for 'lytic replacement. Of course the 2A replaced the multiple boards of the 2 with a single main board so removal should be easier.

Also, all caps are identified by a V, no WV or W.

Now, since I know so little about electronics, is there a consideration for replacing any of the diodes with new (faster) parts?
Hiho, you say you have "a functional power supply" and "two extra bad supplies". Are these all SH-10E(A) original equipment units? Since they seem to be quite rare separate from the tables is why I ask.

If you have anything other than original power supplies, do they supply all three voltages that Lewm identified?
Lew, not to muddy the waters but I believe there was more than one mat for the Technics. My Mk2A has the matching mat as the parts list, SFTG172-01. I saw another on a Mk2 that had more circular ribs and seemed to be lighter/less hard. I don't know if that was stock or not.

Also, does anyone have a stock Mk3 mat to compare part numbers against the one above?

I also have an AT-666 stabilizer (metal) mat that Raul recommended. I'm long overdue in trying it due to continued delays with a proper plinth for my Mk2A. Hopefully not much longer now.
Lew, wild guess here. On Vinyl Asylum there has been some discussion of boiling rubber tt belts to restore original tension, apparently as recommended by VPI. I'm wondering if you could boil your warped mat in an appropriately sized pan to see if the rubber "remembers" its original shape? You might begin with three minutes in boiling water, then try longer times in one minute increments to see if that does not fully do the job. I can't see how this would hurt your situation and it might help.

Good luck.