BeoGram

Re: Beogram 1000

superdario — Sun, 09 May 2010 10:50:19 GMT

Piaf:

I have no doubt that a NOS MMC20CL would add a great deal of brilliance to the 8000’s performance, but I’d miss this particular combination’s sound quality with is subtle, delicate, and smooth sound.

Then there is the Beogram 8002 with is relatively new MMC2 cartridge: brilliant, crisp, and spectacularly unforgiving of any defects in a record.

my experiences between the MMC 2 on my beogram 4500 and the MMC 20 CL, MMC 20 EN or MMC 20S on my beogram 4002 are, that the characteristic of the MMC 2 is more crisp, simular to the cd characteristic, than the MMC 20 CL. maybe the reason is because the MMC 2 is newer than the MMC 20 CL or the construction is different.

generally the MMC 20 series is more relaxed to listen and in my opinion the better choice... the difference between the MMC 20S, EN, or CL is hearable. if you use good quality vinyl, the best choice is definitly the CL. with the MMC 20 CL you've got a nice relaxed soundscape with a lot of details and stereoscopic. but also the MMC 20S is not bad a bit spoongy on details... ;-) if you're vinyl collection have been widely used, that would be the best choice. a good compromise between the CL and the S is definitly the MMC 20 EN.

best regards

Re: Beogram 1000

Peter — Sat, 08 May 2010 01:08:08 GMT

In a word, bass. The two rare 3000s both add controlled low bass to the equation which is lacking in the 4000/8000. B&O decks in my experience have two faults - a slightly veiled top end and a slightly lightweight feel in the bass. The 3000s add the bass - the veiled top end is still there and I think is probably a characteristic of the MMC type cartridge. In my view this makes the cartridges easier to listen to for long periods - the Soundsmith range addresses this though I find this wearing.

I agree that the 4000 decks all sound very similar! My 4000 and 4004 sound just the same to me!

Re: Beogram 1000

Piaf — Fri, 07 May 2010 22:58:32 GMT

Hi Martin and Peter,

The question that begs asking, in my mind is why? Addressed to you both.

At one point I rated my various Beograms in order of performance, but in reality, what I was rating was the relative filth on the individual cartridges.

The vast differences between my three 4000 series turntables evaporated with the thorough cleaning of all the styluses. My flawless, yet much berated 4002 now is very much the equal of the 4004…. and dare I say it? The 4000.

Sure, the 4000 is by far my FAVORITE, but that has so much to do with the incomparable aesthetics of the 4000, well that and the function of the control buttons.

Blindfolded, I have little confidence that I could tell the difference between the 4000 series Beograms with their cartridges cleaned. (All are MMC20CL’s)

The Beogram 8000 with its elder MMC6000 is delightfully mellow, which is NOT to say muted, no, just mellow…. soft if you prefer. I have no doubt that a NOS MMC20CL would add a great deal of brilliance to the 8000’s performance, but I’d miss this particular combination’s sound quality with is subtle, delicate, and smooth sound.

Then there is the Beogram 8002 with is relatively new MMC2 cartridge: brilliant, crisp, and spectacularly unforgiving of any defects in a record. I have come to LOVE this Beogram for violin, guitar, harpsichord, or piano…. but would choose the 4000 (any of the 4000 series really) for vocals. It depends on the recording which Beogram suits it best. Peculiar, huh?

So where does a Beogram 1000 or 3000 fit in to this picture…. and why?

All the best,

Jeff

Re: Beogram 1000

Peter — Fri, 07 May 2010 12:40:36 GMT

I would definitely recommend getting an SP type turntable - but not a 1000. Any of the 3000s are worth a look - the real Beogram one being cheap and a very nice performer when fitted with an SP12. See the other thread!

Re: Beogram 1000

Dillen — Fri, 07 May 2010 10:44:41 GMT

You'll regret not trying one.

Martin

Re: Beogram 1000

Piaf — Fri, 07 May 2010 09:34:58 GMT

Thank you both for your responses.

Martin, two tepid endorsements are enough to convince me that I really don’t need another turntable.

It has taken a lot of work to get my Beograms performing as they do…. so I think I’ll just be satisfied with what I already have.

All the best!

Jeff

Re: Beogram 1000

Dillen — Fri, 07 May 2010 06:02:04 GMT

I agree. The Beogram 1000 is a good deck in it's own right.
It was very popular and will provide good results though it probably
shouldn't be compared to a tangential deck.
Just make sure to get a Beogram with a suitable motor.
The motor is a one-phase AC type so its speed will depend on your mains frequency 50/60Hz.
A 50 Hz motor used on 60Hz will run 20% too fast.

Weak points are the motor- and speed setting mech. lubrication and also the rubber mounts
at the tonearm pivot points.

Martin

Re: Beogram 1000

beaker — Fri, 07 May 2010 05:37:54 GMT

I would say that you should get one. They are not as good a deck as the others you mention but for the price that they cost these days its well worth having one just to complete your collection. They dont cost a lot and the early siver topped versions do look nice.

Beogram 1000

Piaf — Thu, 06 May 2010 23:33:18 GMT

What do you guys think about the Beogram 1000?

I have a fantastic Beogram 4000 which I regard in a class by itself. (Not to denigrate my Beogram 4002 or 4004) The 4000 being my personal favorite.

I also have a remarkable Beogram 8000/MMC6000 which always delights, plus a Beogram 8002 with its MMC2 cartridge which is a stand out, in my opinion. (Possibly better than the iconic Beogram 4000)

Is there any reason to consider acquiring a manual turntable like the 1000 considering my current “collection”? Be honest Peter.

Jeff