Linn LP-12 still competitive with the very best?

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

I'd say yes as it relates to quality of sound (and without getting too verbose, an acknowledgment that tables simply produce a different type of sound), but at a price that isn't competitive.

I have currently been considering this very thought. I have an old LP12 c. 1977. Very few upgrades; and of those, small maintenance rather than feature/system upgrades. Was considering a considerable upgrade to the table, purchase of a more recent used LP12 that includes upgrades or switch to another TT. End result was a switch to a new VPI. While liking the Linn sound - and understanding that my vintage had the rather warm mid/low end that could be somewhat 'bloated' or ill-defined as compared to newer versions, I felt that it was time to cast off the periodic fiddling with the TT and the (at times) shocking costs of upgrades. And indeed, with recollections by many on this and other forums, it appears the degree of 'fiddling' over time varies widely within the same model; something of a consideration on it's own. The question then is why bother when there are alternatives. The answer to that is simply personal preferences. And that it that. Those alternatives certainly don't produce a sound of any less quality than a Linn, but rather a different type of sound from each other.

Perhaps the closes I've heard to a Linn sound was a P9. But then I haven't really listened to very many TT's.

Terra3: Because I'm in a virtually identical situation (i.e. an LP12 of very similar vintage to yours) and considering a couple of Stamford UK upgrades (the Hercules board & the carbon fiber sub-frame), how would you compare your satisfaction and sound of your new VPI with your old Linn?