2. analog
  3. 1435851947

Any Love for the Pioneer PLX-1000 Yet?

Early in the year, Steve Guttenberg (C-Net, formerly S'phile and others) and Herb Reichert (longtime high end figure; new to S'phile) posted favorable reviews of the new (released last year) Pioneer PLX-1000 direct drive turntable.

Although the PLX-1000 is obviously filling the gap left by the discontinued Technics SL12x0 series, Guttenberg and Reichert reviewed the table from an audiophile standpoint, and not as a DJ deck.

Reichert and Guttenberg auditioned the turntable together but wrote about it separately, so their reports mention the same electronics and cartridges as well as the other turntables they compared the Pioneer to. Both reviewers came away with an enthusiastic recommendation and consdiered this the one to beat at $2K and under. Not bad for $697.

Now in my latest issue of Stereophile, Reichert wrote a followup, where he revisited the turntable on his own, made sure he used LPs he's familiar with, tried out a bunch of his own cartridges, and compared the Pioneer with yet another group of turntables.

His conclusion? The Pioneer is even better than he thought the first time around.

I found it encouraging that the Pioneer improvements were very similar to what I did to my SL1210 M5G--damped the tonearm and replaced the feet. I also got the KAB fluid damper and record grip and a discontinued Oracle sorbothane mat. However, the Pioneer has a couple of other improvements I couldn't perform--a higher torque motor and extensive internal damping between (I think) the plinth and chassis. Also, the plinth is a zinc alloy now, which should be more rigid and sonically inert than the Technics' aluminum.

Has anyone here heard the deck yet? Thoughts? Feelings? Opinions?
johnnyb53

Showing 1 response by raymonda

raymonda
855 posts
 
Biggest falsehood ever in audio was Japanese DD/s were somehow inferior to Euro and American belt-drives.

Hold on! It is much easier to make a good sounding belt drive than a good sounding direct drive. Many cheap and terrible sounding DD table were produced.

Also, idler wheels, which is basically a high torque motor with a rim drive was implemented way before the Japanese improved and then mass produced DD tables. Which today, some feel sound better than both.

All of these approaches, when implemented properly, can produce great sound. However, when implemented improperly, or cost cutting is involved, can produce an undesirable outcome.

For cottage companies, it was easier to get great results from belt drives, thus eliminating the cogging effect inherent in many motors. It also was a way to decrease vibrations coming directly from the motor and all at reasonable cost and without a large investment in R&D.

I've owned both DD and BD. I've never owned a BD that I couldn't listen to but I have had a few DD that left me flat. I have also owned DD that I really enjoyed, too.

Bottom line was that it is easier to properly implement a belt drive when cost and R&D is a factor. You could get to your desired outcome easier, faster and save a ton of money in the process, thus increasing your bottom line.
More to discover