Vintage DD turntables. Are we living dangerously?


I have just acquired a 32 year old JVC/Victor TT-101 DD turntable after having its lesser brother, the TT-81 for the last year.
TT-101
This is one of the great DD designs made at a time when the giant Japanese electronics companies like Technics, Denon, JVC/Victor and Pioneer could pour millions of dollars into 'flagship' models to 'enhance' their lower range models which often sold in the millions.
Because of their complexity however.......if they malfunction.....parts are 'unobtanium'....and they often cannot be repaired.
128x128halcro
Banquo,
Lewm is 100 % correct, also TopClass currently has more then one Victor 101 up for sale along with Pioneer Exclusive including other DDs.

The story at Audiokarma is just that, a story.
I wouldn't "dabble" in vintage dd turntables if I did not sincerely believe based on listening in my own home on my system that they offer superior value for money, based on performance alone. The fact that they will not depreciate if properly maintained is only an added bonus. Of course, some are better than others.

It does seem odd that the owner of a business that thrives on selling used gear would make the statements about dd attributed to him by Henry or Henry's source. Based on the results of my Google search, those Denon chips seem to be available all over Hong Kong, if he would stick his head out of his door. C'est la vie.
I have no doubt that Lewm is right regarding the vintage Technics and Denons. But the Victors may present a different proposition since there weren't as many made and it's unclear, to me at least, that subsequent JVC/Victor tables can be cannibalized for parts in the way that the later Technics can. Either way, buying a DD presents a risk that buying an idler doesn't: the latter's parts can be machined brand new should the need arise. Having said that, Thalmann is THE MAN and I'd have faith that he can fix what ails any DD turntable.

But perhaps we shouldn't let Mr. Cheuk in on it since he'd likely raise his prices on these stellar pieces. :)
Couldn't't sleep last night Hal? :)
Heh heh :^)
Wow, looks like an electronic pizza with the works....:-)
A good description Rockitman!
Thanks for all the responses.
Lew.....does the SP10MkIII look as complex inside as the TT-101?
What occurred to me is that all that electronic complexity is probably a late 70s attempt at a 'computer'?
Today, it all could be accomplished by one tiny chip? That's probably how the new DD NVS turntable does it?
Why wouldn't other manufacturers revert to computer controlled DD I wonder? Kinda like emulating the success of the great Japanese ones of the past?


Hi Halcro. The bottom cover on the JVC is rather flimsy. I owned QL7 and QL-A7 before so I know they are not very rigid. I noticed you placed 3 footers right below that bottom cover. I know you like the nude style and no-plinth approach. Would it be better to have maybe some cylindrical footers, literally almost foot long, that support the chassis where the motor is directly mounted on? This way it can still qualified as "nude" and you eliminate that wobbly sheet metal and adds rigidity. Might be worth a try. I sold all my QL-7s so I can't experiment anymore. But I would like to know what you think.

I am a JVC fan but I came to the conclusion that I only like the ones that use coreless motor and QL-7 and QL-8 use core motor but the 101 is coreless and it's their top of the line and I am salivating here.... I would love to hear it compare to, say, a Kenwood L-07D, another coreless masterpiece.

Have fun!

_____