Linn LP-12 still competitive with the very best?

I've heard some Linns and they are a fine turntable. But I just cannot let the statement they they are good value second hand pass. $1,500 for a vintage Linn: are you seriously saying that is better value than a Micro Seiki BL91 for example? They go for about $1,000 and are a great TT.

I'm never going to say Linns aren't very good turntables, but I think they are overpriced, both new and second hand. I just cannot see the value at the prices they go for.

DS

For myself, when I got back into analog, I just felt that I wanted to own a Linn at some point in my audiophile life, just to see what all this talk was about. I thought that there must be something there to have a tt with such loyalty, not to mention the longevity of the product - it's not something you have to replace in 5 years, unless you want to.

I was a bit afraid at first, thinking that they needed constant tweaking if you looked at them the wrong way, but I was mistaken. Once properly set up in your home, as Linn dealers are required to do, they will go for several years without adjustment. Of course, if you're the "nervous type", constantly agonizing over whether your system is in tune, you might be better of with a Rega or something that can't be adjusted.

The last thing is the looks - Personally, I prefer record players that look like record players. That's just my taste. So the Linn fits me well in that regard.

Sonically, I think it's great. There are probably much better and much worse, but now I've owned a Linn as I had planned and I know what it's about. I'm sure there's better and I know there's worse. It's not a religion, it's a record player.

As to it being an old design - well, I don't mean to be crude, but pu**y's an old design too, and that's doing OK as far as I can see.

Chayro,

The fact that the Linn has been a highly regarded standard fore so long is in itself a valuable reason to own one before owning something else, as you point out.

I've never owned an LP12 but the Axis is as easy to set up and requires as little maintenance as any table I've owned. The only difficulty perhaps is that there is not a removable headshell to make mounting cartridges easier, but it is still not a problem. I've run my Linn Axis without issue for over 20 years now, including record cleaning on the table running, and it even still has the original belts and sounds better than ever with my latest associated gear.

NO, I don't think so either. It doesn't mean it can't make music, but then a lot of things can that are less expensive.

The updates.
I am ,qua outlook, on the side of Schipo but fot the
context I must refer to Raul:'If the design is sound
then why so many updates?'
Rauls context was 'tonearms' and I presupose that he
meant Graham (?).
I mentioned my Audiomeca J1 but not the designer.
Pierre Lurne is an physicist and designed first for
Goldmund (TT, linear tonarm F3,etc) and then for hes
own Audiomeca ( J1,J4,Romeo and last Belladonna).
Lurne has 'strong opinions' about the TT,tonearm,etc
design and emphasise that thy are based on physics.
Acc. to Lurne the platter is the most important part of
an TT,with the bearing as 'included' in the design-
'philosophy'. The most 'correct design' is the inverted
bearing with the 'centre of gravity' in the platter.
This 'centre' is only 'nearly accessible '(see Googel:
Pierre Lurne).
The platter of my Audiomeca (8kgr.) was balanced to an
accuracy of less then 0.5 gr.(BTW I have never seen an
update for Lurnes TT).
If this statements are sound (I am not an Physicist)
then,it seems to me, the design of Linn makes also
some sence.I can't recoll that Linn ever 'modified' or
'updated' the platter. So I think that the 'mystery' of
Linn must be the platter. That is of course an conjecture.
I am sure that there are graduate physicist in our forum
and hope thy will expplain the issue more eloquent.
Cheers

but wel