You've probably seen the "shoot-out" (hate that term) that was done by a Japanese magazine in the 80s, wherein two reviewers listened to about a dozen of the top TTs of the day and ranked them according to certain qualities. (Someone will no doubt post the URL; I can't find it right now.) In that article, the P3 was tied with the EMT 930 (I think) for top rank. Those two were ranked well ahead of all others in most categories and came out on top in net score. Weaknesses of the article were that some other top of the line TTs, such as Technics SP10 MkIII and Denon DP100, were not included, and that the tonearms and cartridges seem to have been different for each TT. For example, the P3 has it's own integrated arm that was certainly not used with any of the other tables. But there is no doubt that the P3 and the later P3a represented Pioneer's all out efforts in TT design and build quality. |
Raul, interesting to note that you even laugh en Espanol. We would be going, "ha, ha, ha!" |
According to what is on the web, P3 had "10 kg.cm" of torque, compared to MkIII at 16 kg.cm. MkII has 6 kg.cm, according to my owner's manual. I wonder whether Downunder bought a P3. |
I wondered why Downunder wanted to use price (i.e., "10K table") as a criterion for expectation of performance. I have lost faith in price as a factor in sound quality of tt's. There are just too many megabuck models with obvious design flaws. Most likely the P3, like the MkIII, will sound great but will not be loved by all devotees of belt- or idler-drive. The limitation of the P3 compared to almost all other top end vintage tt's is that one is pretty much stuck with the stock plinth and tonearm, unless one wants to do a major transplantation of the P3 chassis, which would negate the built-in suspension/isolation. I guess there is a way to add a second tonearm to the existing plinth, but that's about it. |
Thanks, T_bone and Downunder. I have heard good things about the stock tonearm on the Exclusive P3, also (probably from T_bone by private e-mail). Still you must admit that the choice of tonearms is limited and needs to be of similar length to the stock one. Someday I have got to hear a P3 myself in order to make my own judgment. It was significant to me that a P3 owner told me that he favored one of his belt-drive tts (a Micro Seiki, I think) over the P3, altho the P3 was his second favorite of his many turntables. Meantime, I have been happy with my SP10 Mk2A in a slate plinth with RS-A1 tonearm and Ortofon MC7500 cartridge. Downunder, I think there are many $10K tts that are very good and many others that are way over-priced and could not compete with a tweaked Garrard 301/Lenco L75/SP10/etc. But I tend to think the Exclusive P3 (not the Rega P3) is at least competition for ANY $10K tt sold today. If anyone can figure out what I just wrote, let me know. |
Congrats, Downunder. I thought you had settled on, or settled for, a P10. I've now got a Kenwood L07D and an SP10 Mk3, neither of which are yet in service. But can a P3 be far behind? |
Downunder, What you say seems to be true. In ca 1980 the standard for measuring S/N ratio changed, to give everyone bigger numbers to brag on. I think then Exclusive re-defined the P3 to P3a with maybe some minor changes, if any changes at all. No one seems to know for sure just what changes would have been made at that time.
Personally, I wonder whether one CAN have too many great turntables, and I feel that I am testing the hypothesis. |
When the Mk3 is finally ready for audition, I will replace the Mk2 with the Mk3 on the same shelf with the same tonearm/cartridge. Then we will see. Those who have owned both tell me the difference in sound is not "amazing". Over on another thread, Dertonearm tells me that to be in the highest echelon of tt excellence, one must have at least a 30-lb platter, regardless of the drive system. This of course lets any dd table that I know of out of the discussion. (Possibly the megamegabuck Rockport fulfills this criterion.) I am not saying I agree with him or even that I know enough to have an opinion. |
OK you guys. As T_bone knows, I just bought my second L07D yesterday. I know that the P3 was rated better in the famous 1980 "shoot-out", but that was the opinion of two other guys. Plus they did not use an RF/EMI shield between the platter and the LP, whichh is recommended especially for the L07D. Believe me, it makes a difference. You might also want to try it with the P3. I used TI Shield from M Percy. This is a material developed by Texas Instruments that was not even available back then. |
Dear Sonofjim, Becoming a turntable collector is my biggest fear. Actually, you are ahead of me, and Travis puts us both in the shade, I am pleased to be able to say. I "only" have the Mk3 and the two L07Ds among the top rank ones. Of course, I also have the slate/PTP3/Lenco, a DP80, and an SP10 Mk2A, for a total of 6. I swear to myself that two of these, maybe 3 of them, have got to go. Actually, the second L07D was an auction on eBay, and I picked it up yesterday in Long Island, NY. It's quite mint-y. So, not the one from Germany.
I am in the process of constructing a very elaborate partially slate plinth for the Mk3, which is why it is not up and running. If you have not had your L07D tuned up by Howard of "L07D Lovers", you really ought to consider it. Mine is preternaturally silent since he did the work, and throws the widest deepest soundstage I have ever heard from a tt. Get the shield as well. |
Downunder,
The Kenwood is really understated and cool looking, IMO. If you see one in the flesh, you will know what I mean. The plinth is an integral part of the design and beautifully thought out with constrained layer damping, etc. IMO, each of the top line dd tables has a strong point that the others don't have; for the Kenwook, it is the plinth and the integration of the tonearm into the mix. Plus, the motor (coreless and slotless) and motor controller are unique.
Yes, I cut the TI Shield in the shape of an LP, punched a hole in the center and placed it between the platter and the platter "sheet" on the Kenwood, which is essentially a 5-lb platter mat made of stainless steel. On any table you could put it between the platter and whatever mat. I am not at all sure that other DD tables even need it. There was some scuttlebutt that it helps an SP10 MkII. Mk 3 should not need it because the platter is made of brass, essentially, with a high copper content. There is strong support for using a shield with the Kenwood on the L07D website. IME, the effect is at first subtle but then quite convincing in terms of improved clarity, wider soundstage, better inner detail. There is no "noise" per se with the Kenwood, even without the shield. The shield lowers the noise floor from low (no audible noise) to very low (wow factor). |
No apologies necessary. My wife and son merely told me quietly that it was crazy to have 5 turntables (this was before I bought the latest L07D), and they've mercifully let it go at that. My SP10 Mk2A is running right next to my L07D. The Mk2A was given the soup to nuts restoration by Bill Thalmann (the same guy who probably worked on your tables, Sonofjim, via Albert's auspices). The L07D was done by Howard of the L07D Lovers. It's difficult to make a fair comparison of the tables alone, because of the integral plinth and tonearm on the L07D. The Mk2A is in a slate plinth, and I've used various tonearms. Anyway, the L07D has my vote without a doubt. For whatever reason, it's at a higher level.
I am going to mount my Triplanar in the secondary tonearm mount position on the L07D, to get a bead on the L07D tonearm, which some have criticized but which I think must be excellent. If there is anything to criticize with the L07D, I would point to the wiring between the cartridge and the phono stage; too many physical contacts. I plan to address that issue too. We'll see what the more than 2 times more costly MK3 can do next to the L07D. |
No matter how well engineered it was in 1980, caps is caps. After 20 or more years, any electrolytic in any component should be changed out in favor of new. If the thing works without that service, fine, but there is a finite chance that it could work better with new caps. If Pioneer serviced it prior to or after sale, then they likely changed any cap that displayed either leakage of DC voltage or leakage of electrolyte (which comes later after DC leakage has already started to occur and can damage physically nearby elements of the circuit). My SP10 Mk3 is NOS, yet Bill Thalmann tells me there were physically leaky electrolytics here and there, after 27 odd years since manufacture. He opined that it was a good thing I did not try to run the table prior to having him service it. |
