Your preferred Rega turntable

[linnfomaniac83]

True. I struggled with the looks of RP10, it looks little different from a mid-range Rega. The bolt on plinths I actively dislike aesthetically. The solid wood ones aren't too bad but the sculpted painted ones? They might've looked at home in the seventies.

The metal surround P5 plinths are actually quite smart in the flesh, I have a spare black one, but my cherry one is nicer. Like a say, my only gripe is the neoprene in the corners, not keen on that... but the deck sounds lovely, so meh, sod it. I actually do like the P8/10, I didn’t when I saw the press photos but in the flesh... well I want one. It’s cute, compact and smart, the power supply is a really nice box and standard of finish on the arm is drool worthy, it’s a nice deck.

 

[Craig B]

I've nothing to say about the entry level models. They are the best on the market today as years ago. What I'm not able to justify are the high priced models. I don't understand where is the the value that increases 10 times the price.

Among numerous other differences, consider the following...

...vs. this:

 

[Craig B]

Absolutely NO! I'm proud to keep my PL12s free from the endless row of new bits. I alway think and reason keeping in mind the rule of the diminishing return and this is true for the Rega products as well.

I wasn't aware that Pioneer were still supporting that model, let alone providing endless new upgrades.

 

[Luca]

Just to point out, as far as I'm aware, that's not a P9 Plinth (or at least not the mk2 version that I have with the larger surround). As far as I can tell, my P9 plinth is MDF. Also, the wooden surround on the P9 is actually hollow, with slots routed out to reduce weight.

This leaves me puzzled because the MDF is heavy and has no good acoustic properties.

 

[linnfomaniac83]

Among numerous other differences, consider the following...

...vs. this:

Yeah, that’s a big one. The GT reference sub platter made quite a marked difference to my deck, based on auditory memory, my P5 along with the Neo, outperforms a Planar 6 and it definitely outperforms a stock RP6 because I had one here for comparison. There’s a lot to be said for changing out that plastic sub platter!

 

[Hoopsontoast]

This leaves me puzzled because the MDF is heavy and has no good acoustic properties.

I don't know. If you tap around the plinth, you can hear its been routed out at lots of different points, like the plinth shown above. It might be MDF but I don't think there is much material there at all. The whole plinth with arm weighs significantly less than the ceramic platter on its own.
I guess, as an older design, before the foam core of the later decks, chipboard and MDF were the only real options for the main structure.

At least with the P9, you can see where the money has gone (apart from the R&D) with the massive power supply, bearing, ceramic platter, sub platter etc.
Compared to say a Gyrodec (which I had before) has a lot more machined parts and I'm guessing lower material costs

 

[Luca]

Among numerous other differences, consider the following...

...vs. this:

Tonearm and main bearing are the best rega components in every turntable they made. At least that part justifies a high end price but I'm puzzled for other aspect of the design.

 

[Darren L]

If one takes a closer look at the underside of the original P9 plinth above, one can easily observe the origins of the skeletal plinth of today.

The machined out areas weren't simply randomly selected.

That's what I immediately thought, easy to see the DNA of the new skeletal plinths, I think Rega have definitely mapped out their own path when it comes to TT design and should be applauded for doing so. I don't use a Rega deck, in many ways the TT I use is the opposite, high mass, I still think the Rega record players are a great design.

 

[Hoopsontoast]

Tonearm and main bearing are the best rega components in every turntable they made. At least that part justifies a high end price but I'm puzzled for other aspect of the design.

It seems you are on the wrong thread then. Don't continue to read it and scroll past

 

[gavreid]

Cheap and cheerful is what Rega is about to me, with the best bang for the buck. I had a P25 for a while, thanks to a very kind dealer, but it's not the point really

 

[Mr Pig]

This leaves me puzzled because the MDF is heavy and has no good acoustic properties.

That isn't MDF.

 

[Olsen]

Could someone explain to me why Rega's mats comes in different thickness.?

My P7 mat is very thin
My Planar 2 mat much thicker
I have another lying around, size in between, not sure if its from a P9 ?

Is there some sort of guide?

 

[Craig B]

Just to point out, as far as I'm aware, that's not a P9 Plinth (or at least not the mk2 version that I have with the larger surround). As far as I can tell, my P9 plinth is MDF. Also, the wooden surround on the P9 is actually hollow, with slots routed out to reduce weight.

Just back from a jaunt to 2002 in my time machine...

The plinth is a complex CNC machined skeletal structure encased in highly ridged phenolic resin laminates. The equivalent to the carbon fibre 'monocoque' chassis of the formula one car - an ultra lightweight, ultra rigid foundation for this high performance turntable. The plinth of the new P9 uses a brand new material to hi-fi for the inner skeletal structure. It is an ultra lightweight fibre composite. This results in the plinth being even lighter than the previous Planar 9 and improves the performance.

 

[Craig B]

Could someone explain to me why Rega's mats comes in different thickness.?

My P7 mat is very thin
My Planar 2 mat much thicker
I have another lying around, size in between, not sure if its from a P9 ?

Is there some sort of guide?

The first Rega mat, on 1970s glass platter Planar 2, was the same radially ribbed hard rubber* affair as Linn's, minus the raised Linn branding (within the area of the first ring round the spindle hole, which appears to have been ground flat).

Planar 3 mat, from the 'Rega Sounds Better' flyer of the late 1970s:
"The Planar 3 utilizes a 3 mm thick felt pad which more ideally suits its slightly thicker (12mm, 4.5lb) platter and allows tag cueing. The combination of glass and felt helps stop high frequency vibration feedback to the record and allows for the production of a stable stereo image and clear, unmuddled sound."

Shortly thereafter Planar 2 received a thicker natural wool felt (5mm?). Sometime after the release of the revised Planar 2 plinth with RB250, Rega began supplying the same 3mm felt with Planar 2 as with Planar 3.

* The hard rubber was said to be a 'hybrid' of unspecified materials.

 

[Mr Pig]

Could someone explain to me why Rega's mats comes in different thickness.?

Just fine tuning. The ceramic platters have a thinner mat but these might sound too coloured on a glass platter. A thicker mat on the ceramic platter dulls the dynamics and masks detail.

As with anything, you can experiment if you like.

 

[linnfomaniac83]

The materials that the P9 is made from were trickled down to the P5 and P7 too, with the platter removed, they’re very light, very rigid and very acoustically dead when you tap your knuckles on them. Like I say, they’re great sounding decks and a genuine step up from any P3 variant. The TT-PSU, bearing and platter were the fundamental differences between the P5 and P7... adding the Neo PSU and Groove Tracer sub platter to the P5 makes a very significant difference, turning into genuinely high performance deck... when lockdown is over, if anyone wishes to hear mine, they’re most welcome. It has a great balance between refinement/detail, depth/width and fun, I really like it, and I’m certain others will too.

 

[linnfomaniac83]

Cheap and cheerful is what Rega is about to me, with the best bang for the buck. I had a P25 for a while, thanks to a very kind dealer, but it's not the point really

That is a cool classic!

 

[dave charlton]

What I'm not able to justify are the high priced models. I don't understand where is the the value that increases 10 times the price.

The value is in the satisfaction (or not) perceived by the listener.

 

[Arcadian]

I'm the delighted owner of one of the later RP10's. Clearly this is a "higher priced model" in terms of the Rega suite of TTs but I downgraded (in price terms) from a Michell Gyro plus all the upgrades (excluding Orbe mods) + SME V. I guess at current list price this is £7K plus to replace? The Gyro/SME made a lovely sound, I'd had it since the early 1990's and it owed me nothing. However I wanted something simple that didn't need constant fettling (the endless search, in my case for the famous Gyro Bounce) and matched it in sound terms. I easily achieved that with the RP10. So for me it wasn't a question of "is this £3K deck ten times better than a £300 deck" but whether it met my criteria for sound and convenience and can I afford it. As it turned out I got an excellent SH price for the Gyro SME which left a relatively small gap to the Rega. Perception of value is allways going to have a subjective elemnt to it, as it is driven in part by the criteria we apply.

 

[JemHayward]

The only Rega I ever owned was one of these, and I swiftly moved on to a Linn LP12, as I was young, and had loadsa money at the time. I've only recently moved on from the Linn after over 40yrs.
I've always admired Rega's refusal to follow fashions, copy designs, or make implausible claims. They are really up-front about their expensive decks, and have overly stated on more than one occasion that spending twice as much will only get you something a little bit better. They are examples of pragmatic engineering, and I can't think of an occasion where they have claimed anything that is implausible at an engineering level, which must be pretty unique in the HiFi world.