What Turntable to buy under $600 ?

"I've been planning on buying a Dynavector 17D MKII (one of two classic cartridges remaining I want for my collection...)"

Johnnantais, DON'T DO IT. This thing lasted less than an hour on my table - it was truly awful. This is the castrati of cartridges - absolutely and utterly lacking in bass. I have absolutely no idea what reviewers have heard in this cartridge that they liked. You will notice that there are a lot of these that appear for sale with 5 hours or less on them. There is a reason.

Now I feel sory for Dvdgreco, he's been cast into a shark-filled tank, but glad to see you haven't been scared off! There are large differences in sound between these various 'tables (and between your Technics and the heavier ones), but in wanting a reliable, simple turntable that doesn't require finicky set-up you pretty well rule out suspended turntables and a variety of others with outboard motors, and so once again the Rega P3 (simple, elegant, musical and easy to get/hear, though a wall-mount and a heavy slab are a good idea for isolation, as for any light unsuspended design) and Technics SL1200 (tons of upgrade potential as Psychicanimal points out and also easy to use) are your best bets. Then there are the Projects, MMFs, and lower-end VPIs. Most audiophiles consider belt-drives the only game in town, and this does make life simpler and reduces your possibilities. But, life isn't so simple, these belt-drivers are wrong, both idler-wheel drives (off your list due to difficulties) and DDs can sound superb, and both beat belt-drives when it comes to bass quality and detail, and in other areas depending on how far you take them. I think you should try to actually hear some of these if possible, see them in the flesh (we do operate on visuals/impressions to a certain extent), and trust your instincts: when one of them brings you into the music better than the others (bring some LPs), then you've found your 'table (of course, then cartridge, phono stage also influences sound, but you can't control every aspect of these auditions). Good luck.

Pauly, there are very large and fundamental physical differences between the Rega RB300 and the RB250 (now I'll have the Rega Brigade after me), in comparisons I have done, as well as magazines, and contrary to findings posted all over the internet, the Rega RB300 is significantly more refined (the bearings and bearing materials different) than the '250, hearing one does not give you an adequate idea of the other, you are making an error in judgment. The '250 is brash and bright compared to the '300 (the comparison done with the same wiring and same metal end-stub/counterweight), and I suspect that its popularity is partly attributable to its synergy with darker systems, or for ears attuned to bright/thin digital media as opposed to ears attuned strictly to analog like mine (though I have a CD player I use for background music and to tape music for the car). Of course, to realize its potential, the RB300 wiring has got to go, a hidden cost and bother. The Mayware and SME 3009 are two of the vintage tonearms I alluded to which surpass the Rega in certain areas, but neither has the gestalt (music of a piece) balance and control (especially in the high frequencies with difficult MCs) of the RB300 when it comes to MCs, though both beat it for speed and detail (assuming metal knife-edge beartings for the SME). On the other hand, the Rega RB300 (re-wired) is in turn far more musically convincing (lively and dynamic) than the SME IV I auditioned at length in my system and in others of finer pedigree/resolution than mine, which is why I adorer the musical balance of the RB300: it walks the fine line between too much control (big SMEs) and not enough, and maintains a beautiful balance from lows (tremendous when mounted on a big, heavy idler-wheel drive) to highs (control of MCs), balancing musical energy and information perfectly, like a cat walking on a beam. It doesn't have the sparkle of some, but is long-temr satisfying.

Thanks for the warning Newmanoc, but perhaps the 17D requires prolonged burn-in as so many MCs do, or do you know someone who has kept one long-term and come to the same conclusion? I confess I am in love with the engineering of this cartridge, and my big idler-wheel drives do a lot to inject bass where there was none before. I'll try to find one to audition before I make the leap.

"the Creature on Steroids will be at the $5K performance level"?

LOL! Yep, sure it will, and I bet folks will be beating down you door for that no doubt.

Dvdgreco. A $100 could improve your table to a level that may suffice, so you should consider it by all means. As an avid tweaker myself, I know the satisfaction gleaned from improving existing gear. But it would be very naïve to think a $100 can transform your table to sound like a VPI or Sota. That just aint gonna happen.

Well, perhaps I should qualify my invective against the Karat 17D just a little. My system includes JM Labs Electra 926s, and bass is not the strong suit of these otherwise admirable speakers. Also, my Linn equipment is very detailed, but not the most dynamic. So the bass-light, detail heavy 17D probably had no real chance of synergistic success in my system to begin with. But you should also know that several people I have run across have commented on the poor bass in this cartridge. In my system, it sounded worse than poor – it was like my woofers had disappeared. As to burn in, well, I am sure it can make a difference, but I personally don’t know how much. (I didn’t want to listen to it for the requisite hours needed, and also, it was easier to sell with only an hour on it.) If you do buy one of these, I'd advise picking one up used. I have seen them several times with very few hours for considerably less than half of what they cost new.