 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.200.116.196
After much reading and advise, I've furthered my thinking
to this extent: accurate speed, tone arm mass, and
cartridge are the most critical factors. The B&O has to
win the tone arm question hands down. I don't believe
the series 20 cartridges will fit the arm on the RX-2. I
don't know why this model is considered a low end machine,
but I'll take your word for it. I don't have a list of B&O
TT in order of ranking, but I'm open. I'll shoot for a
model that will accept the recommended cartridges. From the
prices I've seen, this would seem to be the most economical
solution, and save me the trouble of butchering a ' mod '
I like the Micro concept, but it looks like parts are going
to be a bitch if it breaks down. Past the B&O, it's wide
open: PX-3, PL-71, PS-X7, KP-990, SP-1200MKII, etc., etc.
Thank's guy's; interesting discussion.
Follow Ups:
I have been an owner of B&O turntables for over 30 years. My current B&O is a 4004 model with the top of the line MMC20CL cartridge. I have never seen first hand an RX2 so I can only comment on the general consensus of the B&O community. Most B&O aficionados consider the 8002/8000 the best turntables they made, followed closely by the 4000/4002/4004 series. Others models did not have the material and build quality. The 8000 are risky buys because a speed control part, tachodisc, deteriates with age and there are no replacements. Later production 8000 and the 8002 models changed this part to a more robust material that will last. Cartridges are avaialable but they will run into the $hundreds. If you are one who wants a low cost cartridge, then stay away from the B&O. But good cartridges for other turntables are also into the $hundreds so no difference to me.I agree with your assessment that the tonearm/cartridge combination is critical. Being designed as an integrated system, the B&O are perfectly matched, track extremely well, and are very, very easy on the lps. The MMC20CL cartridge is an excellent cartridge and has been used by many non-B&O audiophiles on their turntables.
I've read extensively the 'golden ear' opinions that do not hold B&O in high regard so I decided to see for myself. I am currently auditioning a Yamaha PF800 TT with a V15 IV and comparing it to my 4004. Results are inconclusive at this time as to sound because I've done so much fiddling with the setup of the Yami that I have not had a chance to really focus on A/B comparisions. After owning the B&O and never having to worry about setup (just play and enjoy), the cartridge setup on the Yami is very consuming. You make an adjustment and then analyze if it is better or worse. When do you get to sit back and enjoy?? One thing I definitely notice is that the isolation on the B&O is way better than the Yami. Turning the volume knob on my preamp will disturb the Yami tracking but not the B&O.
Thank's, 92. How would I know which 8000 or 8002
had the improved parts? Also; what are your thoughts on the SP-12 cartridge? I don't much like the attitude of Sound-Smith;
he won't ' re-build ' a cartridge that has a damaged stylus. Just
what DOES he do during a re-build? And are there alternatives
to his service?Ron
All 8002 models have the good part and are a safe purchase. I don't know how to tell the 8000 models. Perhaps enough research would yield a S/N range and then go for a high S/N.I don't know anything about the SP-12, no opinion.
Sound-Smith, never dealt with him. Only alternative I know of is hawking ebay for rare new ones.
The speed servo on both the 8000 and 8002 fail with age! Furthermore, the 4000 series is better made, far more reliable, and sounds better to boot.If you want a reliable linear-tracker that uses the MMC-X series, then buy the original TX.
Sound-Smith does not retip damaged MMC's because they have to be totally remanufactured to do it. There is no benefit in doing so over buying a new one.
In what way is the TX better than the RX-2? I have no
experience with linear trackers but would suggest that they are more prone to error because of wear, and probably more costly to repair.
However, if everyone is in agreement with Goerge, I'll consider
swapping, but reluctantly because I know what I have as opposed to
hoping for the best on a buy.Ron
The TX-2 is a more than decent table. I have used mine nearly everyday since I first bought it, I guess around 1985. I replaced the belts once (still have a spare set and never needed to use them) and the cartridge once some years back.I currently only use it for recording vinyl to CD but when I play them back on my main rig, the sound is pretty spectacular. Surprisingly so, even to me. The thing is bullet proof and fool proof. I actually bought it so that my now ex-wife could spin records with no hassle. Ditched the wife in 1991. Still have the table. It turned out to be a much better investment in my future...
As far as buying one, now, well I dunno... It's still a 22+ year old table with hard to come by parts. I take really good care of my gear and I'm sure others do to. But, TX-2's are cheap and readily available. 8000's are expensive. I'm willing to bet they don't sound that different, but that would be just a guess on my part.
intersting. I don't know the yamaha table but I always thought to complaint generally with the B&O besides the cartridge issue, was the low mass in general of the arm and the table. I would think a good dual or thorens would win in this dept.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
