I've come to the same conclusion. Although, my guess is that a GR with superior aftermarket arm might sound better a G with its stock arm.
It's possible I suppose but more unlikely IMO. Those engineers are pretty smart in the Technics office.
There are more mods I didn’t try, like the external PSU, additional EMI filter and resonance cap at the end of the tonearm. There’s definitely more room for improvement without swapping the tonearm, but the tonearm is probably the biggest upgrade possible, since most of the sonic character of the turntable comes from the tonearm.
Well this is what I was thinking, I was just asking if the arm on the G makes that much of a massive improvment in sound, that it would justify the price in changing it. I paid £1,199 for a brand new 1200 GR , then when I read about upgrades and the difference between the GR and the G, it seemed there's not many differences, other than the tone arm and the brass platter. I wasnt expecting the arm unit on a G to cost more than my entire turntable. I went down a rabbit hole and was wondering how much sound I could squeese out of the GR with a few simple upgrades.
Is the 1000RE -S the one with the 20K price tag? Bit out of my price range . Looks beautiful though. Hopefully the build quality and sound match the price. Maybe if I win the lottery
There is certainly a man who thinks this is the case! I have no connection and will state that I have never heard this arm, but having installed many differing arms over a 15 year period in my retail days, it intrigues me. I asked exactly that question to the designer, his reply is at post #93: SUPATRAC Blackbird tone arm Of course I don't expect anyone interested in other arms to take this as gospel, but of course they could audition and make their own educated decision.....
The G is better than the GR, period. It not only has a better tonearm and platter, but also has a heavier, damped plinth that’s solid aluminum, has a more powerful and sophisticated motor, and better isolating feet. Each step up in the Technics line of turntables is better than the one below it. Technics wouldn’t make so many models if they all sounded the same.
Nice thread! I appreciate your entrepreneurship to launch the new arm! One feature on the Technics I could not give up in this situation is the removable headshell. I swap stereo and mono carts weekly. It's too convenient to live without at this point.
Aah yes, I'm aware of all of these slight differences, but also that the stronger motor was added as a result of putting a brass platter on, not sure if the brass platter was just to make it look good, sound better, or to justify the increase in price. Either way being the cynical bastard that I am, I would imagine the bass platter initially was for asthetic reasons, then somebody pointed out the motor will struggle. Thinking about it, theres probably no real benefit of the motor change between the G and GR, as they're matched for the different platter weights they're driving. I'm guessing the slightly thicker plinth wouldnt affect sound that significantly? So looking at it, the feet and arm can be easily changed and you're more than halfway to upgrading the GR to a G
It may, indeed, and that is the next thing I end up considering. Then I listen to records on the GR and decide it’s pretty good with its own arm, and I save my money for other things.
Sure, but they’re designing things to price points, so the idea that “Technics engineers are pretty smart, therefore there can be nothing better than their products” does not seem logical to me.
Do you really know if they are designing to a price point or are they putting out a design and then pricing it accordingly? These are two different aspects. FYI- I didn't say there's nothing better. However, any tonearm change for me would need to have all the current features available on the current model. If not, then I would just consider a different table altogether.
While I most agree with this, the big question in my mind is: How significant are the sonic improvements in TT drive and plinth unit alone, vs the sonic improvements in the arm alone? My personal suspicion is that there is a lot more room for genuine sonic improvement with the arm than there are with the drive and plinth unit. But this is only a guess based on my belief that the tonearm is probably the weakest link in the 1200 series TT chain. And if the damping the plinth on the G should constitute the plinth's biggest sonic improvement over the GR, that is one feature which could be quite easily added to the underside of the GR's aluminum plinth for under $20 of materials. Hence, I tend to suspect that a modified GR with a superior arm has the potential to sonically outperform a stock G. But not having performed this experiment myself, this is only speculation on my part.
I owned the GR for a year before I bought the G last year. In fact, there is a whole thread on the topic, but you'll have to filter through tens of pages of my struggle getting two defective Gs before finally getting a non-defective one. The G is definitely better sounding the GR, but the difference isn't huge.
The G is indeed better than the GR on a hardware level, definitely more of statement/endgame piece. That being said, these Technics tables are very well engineered direct drives and any level should provide more than satisfactory sound. Check this MK2/G comparison
If they weren’t designing to a price point, the SL-1000R would be the only turntable they make. I’m not sure what you mean by current features and current model here. The GR (well, the GR2) and G are both current models. But the tonearm is technically a separate component from the turntable, so the features or performance of the turntable do not necessarily have any relevance to the features or performance of the tonearm, other than that there is probably a point at which one can limit the experienced benefits of the other. The G and GR both do the job of a turntable very well — turn at the right speed, isolate vibrations. I do not see a reason a tonearm upgrade that is truly an improvement would not be beneficial while still using the turntable of the G or GR to spin the records.
Current features, for example, detachable headshell would be a possible feature to lose with mounting an alternate tone arm. Everything is about tradeoffs. I'm in agreement a tonearm can be upgraded for SQ. However like most have said earlier, just upgrade models instead of trying to build a better mousetrap. Of course that's fun for the hobbiest too. So each to their own in this journey.
For me it's not so much about sound quality it's the que lever that drives me crazy just doesn't match quality of the rest of the deck. But love the fact that I can change the cartridge on the fly. Looked at the sme m2-9r with the ability to change cartridges. Wowser over $3000 way out of my league. Still love my rega planar 6 guess I'm keeping both.
A lot of us have grumbled about the cue lever, but is it really that bad that it has you wanting to swap out the arm entirely? It does the job (albeit less elegantly than others) and doesn't impact sound quality. Personally, I don't really notice it any more. Maybe it got better with time or maybe I'm just used to it.
OK, I see what you mean about features. There are high-end tonearms with removable headshells, though. And, yeah, I even said myself earlier in the thread that I would rather just buy a G than bother upgrading the arm on my GR to the G arm. I could see an even better arm still being an improvement to the GR that may be an overall net improvement over buying a G, maybe, though, which I think is what we were talking about. I’m talking about an arm that possibly costs more than a 1200G costs, though. And, realistically, I’d probably still rather get the G, for its other benefits. Then maybe upgrade the arm on that… At any rate, the GR is pretty good, IMO/IME. I don’t really agree with the premise that the tonearm is a weak spot. Could it be improved? Sure, with enough money. But that doesn’t make the stock arm weak.
