Analog Corner

Technics can supply auxiliary armboards for 10 different tonearms, including Ortofon and SME models, but the Technics arm can't be swapped out for a different arm in the main position. The weight of the complete SL-1000R is 88.7 lb. Its dimensions are 20.9" wide by 7.4" high by 15.7" deep. The motor's control unit is 4.3" wide by 3.3" high by 13.8" deep and weighs 4.6lb.

Accessories include the mat, a 45rpm adapter, three auxiliary screw-on counterweights, an overhang gauge, tools, a dustcover, a power cord, and a very well-organized, multi-language manual.

Setup and Use
Technics' US Business Development Manager Bill Voss delivered and set up the SL-1000R. The only tricky part was mounting the platter/motor atop the spindle and aligning the position of the rotor shaft. Technics supplies useful tools for this, and good instructions. Leveling the base was easy. I'll skip the rest of setup because it's basic.

Voss had brought along an Ortofon LH6000 headshell. Technics' overhang jig, which is the same one supplied with the original SL-1200 'tables, is inadequate. It only measures overhang, and even then it is so subjective, depending on your viewing angle, that the results are never better than an approximation. Plus, it sets up a Stephenson-like alignment that produces far higher distortion throughout most of a record side than does Löfgren A, or Baerwald A or B (fig.1). Technics' alignment produces outer and inner null points at, respectively, about 121mm and 60mm from the center of the spindle. Regardless of which alignment you choose, the distortion rises rapidly past that inner null point. The advantage of the Technics/Stephenson alignment is that on newer records, especially 45rpm LPs, the groove modulations will probably have ended by the time the distortion shoots up. The disadvantage is that the distortion is considerably higher over much of the rest of the record.

Whereas mid-record distortion using the Technics/Stevenson alignment rises to almost 0.8%, Löfgren B's maximum distortion at mid-record is 0.4%. The disadvantage of Löfgren B is that its inner null point is 10mm farther toward the record's center, which means that, beyond the null, inner-groove distortion shoots through the roof—less of a problem with new records, but a much bigger one with older LPs, many of which were cut closer to the label. The best alignment, in my opinion, is Löfgren A, which reaches close to 0.6% distortion mid-record, but whose second null point is 5mm past that of Löfgren B. Try 'em all! Maybe you'll even find time to listen to some music.

In any case, I'm not sure I understand Technics' thinking on alignment. If you invest $20,000 in this rig, run, don't walk, away from the supplied overhang jig. It didn't produce terrible results, just suboptimal ones, in my opinion.

Technics doesn't specify the tonearm's effective mass, but since it was probably designed during the high-compliance/low-mass days, be sure to consider that when choosing a cartridge. The Ortofon A95, for example, is of low compliance and is relatively light (6gm)—it needs to have weight added to the headshell to produce a resonant frequency in the 8–12Hz range in this tonearm.

Something else about the SL-1000R that's worth thinking about are the three electrical breaks between the cartridge and RCA jacks—two before the signal gets to the DIN jack, which is the third. This potential shortcoming is shared with many tonearms, from SME, Jelco, and other makers, as is that of the crowded conditions between the cartridge pins and the ones at the back of the headshell—more of a problem with long cartridges. The DIN jack is in a narrow, difficult-to-access crevice at the rear of the base, and accepts only a straight DIN plug.

Two things I learned from listening: Technics was correct to supply a rubber record mat. I tried the various hard mats I had on hand—made of carbon fiber, graphite, etc.—and while I'm a fan of the Funk Firm's Achromat and Stein Music's The Perfect Interface fiber mat, if you want the "blackest" backgrounds the SL-1000R can produce, rubber rules.

The other thing I learned, and quickly: While the SL-1000R's feet let you easily lock out the silicon-rubber insulators, I don't recommend it. I placed the SL-1000R on a decoupled Harmonic Resolution Systems base, and because two different decoupling suspensions used simultaneously can sometimes fight one another, I locked out the turntable's. But that audibly raised the noise floor.

Another experiment involved swapping out the SL-1000R's feet for three more massive, wider-diameter feet ($49.99 each) from MNPCTech, in which a neoprene insert does most of the isolating. I ended up preferring the MNPCTech feet.

I did no double-blind testing, but once you've committed to spending $20,000, why not play with mats, feet, record weights and clamps—definitely a good idea with Technics' ribbed rubber mat—and DIN-to-RCA cables? And headshells? I played with all of those because, in many (but not all) ways, the SL-1000R was sort of a neutral carrier: more than with the many turntables of my experience that have more pronounced sonic signatures, I could somewhat modify the SL-1000R's sound to my taste, especially because of its speed stability and accuracy. Look at the measurements in figs.2 & 3! VPI's far more expensive Classic Direct direct-drive turntable ($30,000, including tonearm) measures about the same. Those numbers are about as good as rotational accuracy gets. You're left with only the wow produced by the warps and pressing eccentricities of the records themselves.

Sound
The old canard about servo-controlled, direct-drive turntables sounding bright because of "jitter" produced as the motor hunts and pecks for the precisely correct speed of rotation did not apply to the SL-1000R. Nor does it apply to the latest generation of SL-1200s—although, having reviewed those, I can tell you that the more costly SL-1000R is in a different, more sophisticated league of sound.

I used a variety of cartridges in the SL-1000R's tonearm: Ortofon's MC Century and A95, Lyra's Atlas SL, and EAT's JO No.5 (remarkable for $1395), OEMed by Ortofon.

The SL-1000R arm's mechanical performance was faultless throughout the time I used it. It tracked every record well, producing no sonic or mechanical glitches even with the most challenging records. Regardless of cartridge, the arm soared through every track on the compilation The Wonderful Sounds of Female Vocals (Analogue Productions APP 122)—Wilbur Ross-like conflict-of-interest note: I came up with this album's track order and wrote the liner notes. The Technics handled all vocal sibilants with ease.

The SL-1000R's accuracy and stability of speed helped produce precise but not overly sharp transients that helped contribute to a complete absence of listening fatigue. The sound, as I noted in my review on Analog Planet (footnote 4), of the pre-production unit was smooth yet precise, and free of grain. The overall sonic picture was anything but analytical, as some think direct-drive turntables must sound. Even a highly resolving cartridge like the Atlas SL delivered sound that was rich and generous in the midrange, yet pleasingly transparent. The SL-1000R reproduced a reissue of Rickie Lee Jones's It's Like This (2 45rpm LPs, Artemis/Analogue Productions APP 51056) with a richer overall balance than I was expecting, even via the Ortofon A95, which I'd never thought of as sounding "rich."

Overall, I found the SL-1000R's sound precise, serenity-inducing (probably a result of the speed stability and accuracy), and refreshingly non-mechanical. However, just because a turntable spins precisely—even more precisely than almost any other 'table out there—doesn't mean it delivers the ultimate sound quality.

The SL-1000R did not produce the "blackest" backgrounds behind the music. The bottom end, while well controlled, was still not completely controlled, and not as explosive, muscular, or grippy as some other more costly turntable-tonearm combos—and compared to the Kuzma 4Point, or either of the latest arms from Swedish Analog Technologies, as used with my Continuum Audio Labs Caliburn turntable, the Technics' overall image focus, solidity, and three-dimensionality were, by comparison, somewhat obscure. Still, the SL-1000R's overall picture was never less than musically extremely pleasing—and consider the huge price gap: the cheaper of the two SAT arms costs some $4000 more than the entire Technics package.

Shortly I'll be listening to the SP-10R supported by an Oswalds Mill Audio slate plinth fitted with an SAT arm. Only then will I find out just how good the SP-10R is. While I can't separately test each of the SL-1000R's components, my suspicion is that the tonearm, well made though it is, is the weakest link in that chain.

That said, the Technics SL-1000R produced a sophisticated musical picture that was seamless and superbly integrated from top to bottom, was never less than completely satisfying, and is fully competitive with anything else I've heard for $20,000—and it's far better built than many.

Swedish Analog Technologies CF1-09 tonearm
I'm going to make it snappy, partly because I realize that few reading this can afford to spend $48,000 or $53,000 on a tonearm, which is what Swedish Analog Technologies charges, respectively, for its newest top models, the 9" CF1-09 and the 12" CF1-12 (footnote 5).

For that matter, few could afford the original SAT arm at ca $30,000 a pop, yet designer-producer Marc Gomez managed to sell some 70 of them. The arm was as startlingly good as I said it was in my review of it in the July 2015 issue. And as I reported in last month's column, Gomez's new LM-09 ($25,400) was a step up in sound quality from his original arm.

My Saab Turbo-X cost $43,000 in 2008, or $51,500 in today's dollars. Why should a tonearm cost as much as a high-performance car? If they were mass-produced in large quantities, perhaps they wouldn't, but SAT is a one-man company—Gomez makes each tonearm by hand, one at a time. It bears repeating: Gomez has multiple degrees in mechanical engineering and materials sciences.

The two new, far more massive CF1 tonearms have parts made of solid stainless steel, and highly refined, tapered, hand-lapped, naked carbon-fiber armtubes. As a result, they're too heavy to be used in spring-suspended turntables. The headshell/armtube interface, unique to the CF1s, is newly developed and structurally far more rigid than in SAT's previous arm. The headshell is also all new. There's a new, far more massive vertical bearing yoke, and new, hardened bearings of far tighter tolerance, as well as other upgrades unique to these models.

I removed from my Continuum Caliburn turntable the LM-09 arm I reviewed last month, lowered into place the CF1-09, installed Ortofon's MC Century cartridge, duplicated all the settings, and began listening.

At first, I was disappointed—the CF1-09 sounded too smooth on top, attenuating cymbal sparkle and shimmer. It sounded as if the leading edges of transients were being blunted. But once my ears had acclimated, I realized what was missing. I'll call it transient "overshoot" distortion—a bright leading edge that's the first thing you realize is missing when you listen to high-quality open-reel tapes: a linear smoothness, stability, and solidity that vinyl, by comparison, lacks. Until this tonearm.

That sounds like hype. So be it. I'm certain that, once they hear the SAT CF1-09, wealthy vinyl lovers will buy one without regret, and offer their old SAT arms on the used market. Everybody wins!

---

Footnote 4: See "Exclusive: One Week With Technics' New SL-1000R Direct Drive Turntable," January 30, 2018.

Footnote 5: Swedish Analog Technologies, Gothenburg, Sweden. Tel: (46) 736-846-452. Web: www.swedishat.com