advertisement


Cart/headshell choices for Technics 1200/1210G

Whaleblue

Whaleblue

Southbound
As hinted at on the Steve Guttenberg thread, one thing I’d like to do with the 1210 is try a couple of different carts/headshells. The standard headshell apparently weighs 7.6g, and I’ve seen a couple of recommendations for Ortofon headshells such as the LH-9000 - but that weighs 16.8g.

From other specs listed the 1200/1210G arm takes various ranges of headshell/cart weight with no/small/large auxiliary weight:
  • Applicable Cartridge Weight Range
    • (Without the auxiliary weight)
      5.6 to 12.0 g
      14.3 to 20.7 g (including the head shell)
      (With small auxiliary weight)
      10.0 to 16.4 g
      18.7 to 25.1 g (including the head shell)
      (With large auxiliary weight)
      14.3 to 19.8 g
      23.0 to 28.5 g (including headshell)
So, the question is what does this all mean for cartridge compliance? Which carts work well on these TTs? If I’m going to try out a cart like the Hana ML I’d assume I’d be better putting it on an Ortofon LH but really not sure!

FWIW I already have available to me:

Ortofon 2M Black
Audio Technica AT33PTG/II
Audio Technica OC9 XML
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Whaleblue said:
Thanks, advice appreciated, but I’m really not looking to complicate the whole experience I’m hoping to get with the Technics, if you see what I mean?!
Click to expand...
Over the years I’ve had lots of carts and headshells, the numbers are a guide, some stuff that shouldn’t work sounds absolutely fine and tracks.
 
Rather confusingly the 2M Black has a different scale for compliance - Compliance, dynamic, lateral - 22 µm/mN

Are MM and MC carts measured differently?
 
Effective mass is arm mass + headshell + any mounting bolts (though these are so tiny you can ignore them in calculations.
A 12g arm with a 7g headshell has a mass of 19G.You dial 19 g into calculator...see Amber's 20 g example above.

Now you need your cartridge weight and it's official compliance figure, calculated at 10Hz, not at 100Hz like some companies do. Make sure to check. If it is at 100 Hz then the accepted conversion is to multiply that compliance figure by 1.75. So 10 becomes 17.

Anyway. Take the hana. It's 9.5g at 10compliance. Back to the chart, and those numbers gross firmly in the green at a resonance of 9Hz, so, perfect.
Just edging into the yellow may sound fine, but keep out of the amber.
 
Whaleblue said:
Rather confusingly the 2M Black has a different scale for compliance - Compliance, dynamic, lateral - 22 µm/mN

Are MM and MC carts measured differently?
Click to expand...
Compliance needs to be converted for some carts, typically Japanese ones to the measurement standard that calculator uses so for your Hana ML it is actually 16 (rule of thumb is multiply by 1.5 to 2.0 usually people use 1.7) see this thread for info
https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/hana-ml-compliance-confusion.266872/#post-4659118
 
One thing to bear in mind with the 1200G is there is surprisingly little downward movement on the VTA adjuster. It was one thing that irritated me in the few days I owned one. With the standard mat, standard headshell and a 2M Black (which is far from the shallowest cart around) it ended up right at the bottom of travel to get the arm level to the playing surface. No way to set it for a little tail-down should you wish. As such when choosing a headshell I’d try and research how high above the SME mount centre the cartridge mounting surface is as they do vary. Obviously you can use headshell spacers, but it seems odd to have to.
 
Tony L said:
One thing to bear in mind with the 1200G is there is surprisingly little downward movement on the VTA adjuster. It was one thing that irritated me in the few days I owned one. With the standard mat, standard headshell and a 2M Black (which is far from the shallowest cart around) it ended up right at the bottom of travel to get the arm level to the playing surface. No way to set it for a little tail-down should you wish. As such when choosing a headshell I’d try and research how high above the SME mount centre the cartridge mounting surface is as they do vary. Obviously you can use headshell spacers, but it seems odd to have to.
Click to expand...
Cart height to VTA number below. The original mat was 5mm, Technics changed it to 3mm a while ago and that’s what ships with all new decks, the old mats and different thickness 3rd party ones abound.

​
 
Rockmeister said:
Effective mass is arm mass + headshell + any mounting bolts (though these are so tiny you can ignore them in calculations.
A 12g arm with a 7g headshell has a mass of 19G.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily so. The Technics arm is 12g effective mass and that is with the weight of the original headshell INCLUDED. But yeah, adding the Ortofon LH-9000 will bring the effective mass from 12g up to 21g (12 minus 8 plus 17).
 
Rockmeister said:
Effective mass is arm mass + headshell + any mounting bolts (though these are so tiny you can ignore them in calculations.
A 12g arm with a 7g headshell has a mass of 19G.You dial 19 g into calculator...see Amber's 20 g example above.

Now you need your cartridge weight and it's official compliance figure, calculated at 10Hz, not at 100Hz like some companies do. Make sure to check. If it is at 100 Hz then the accepted conversion is to multiply that compliance figure by 1.75. So 10 becomes 17.

Anyway. Take the hana. It's 9.5g at 10compliance. Back to the chart, and those numbers gross firmly in the green at a resonance of 9Hz, so, perfect.
Just edging into the yellow may sound fine, but keep out of the amber.
Click to expand...
Correct, the arm mass in this case should be the manufacturers figure. On some arms this is complicated by headshell weights or sliding weights (e.g. Mayware) that allow adjustment.
 
Rockmeister said:
The 2M black is around 7g and 22 compliance. back to the charts shows it will be happier with a lighter arm.
Click to expand...

The 2M Black (and I assume other 2Ms) is really odd as it seems to be designed for a type of arm design that no longer exists! The other thing that is odd is they cranked up the body weight from its (IMHO superior) predecessor the 540/II. The 2M integrated shell thing is just bonkers as it unnecessarily high mass. Really this cart is at its best in a light arm like a 3009 Improved, Mission 774, Hadcock etc IMO, but it does work well in the stock Technics arm too. Being a heavy non-suspended deck the arm/compliance figure only needs to cope with warps, not the subchassis resonance of say a Linn. It tracked anything I threw at it.
 
Rockmeister said:
Odd really. The chart I quote in the thread shows 17, at 10hz, but I suspect that is a conversion based on the idea that Hana measure at 100Hz (being japanese and all) but in fact, Hana's paperwork in the cartridge box states 10 compliance measured at 10 Hz. So it is 10, not 17.
:)
Click to expand...
The Hana pdf specs sheet shows 16 @ 10Hz (line 22) - there appears some confusion as there are different docs out there from Hana.

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...R_ML_SL_EL+Specification_Comparison_Chart.pdf

​
 
Not sure if this correct, but I remember reading somewhere that changing the headshell (from the standard) doesn't change the effective mass of the tonearm by the commensurate amount, more like 2/3. In other words, using a headshell that is 3g heavier than the one included with the tonearm only increases the effective mass by about 2g, and equally, using one 3g lighter only decreases effective mass by roughly 2g.
 
Glad I started this! :D

The Hana ML specs show 16.7 height, but that’s ignoring the tip itself - is the Technics chart taking the additional height of the tip into account? Must be a couple of mil?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top