Sign in   |  Join   |  Help

B&O MMC1-MMC5

rated by 0 users
Not Answered This post has 0 verified answers | 2 Replies | 0 Followers

Beofile7
Not Ranked
60 Posts
OFFLINE
Bronze Member
Beofile7 posted on Mon, Jul 22 2019 5:04 PM

As a historical owner of B&O turntables I have a question?...

Whilst, in my opinion the more expensive turntables of their time were probably a little better was this just down to the cartridge? MMC 2 with the more expensive tables versus MMC 5 with the less expensive. The mechanics of the turntable appeared to be identical? I am talking 80's 3000-7000 here. I believe the 4000 was maybe????? a little better? If so were B&O charging extra just for a 7000 badge rather than a 3000 badge?

All Replies

Saint Beogrowler
Top 150 Contributor
Saint Paul
735 Posts
OFFLINE
Gold Member
Beofile7:

As a historical owner of B&O turntables I have a question?...

Whilst, in my opinion the more expensive turntables of their time were probably a little better was this just down to the cartridge? MMC 2 with the more expensive tables versus MMC 5 with the less expensive. The mechanics of the turntable appeared to be identical? I am talking 80's 3000-7000 here. I believe the 4000 was maybe????? a little better? If so were B&O charging extra just for a 7000 badge rather than a 3000 badge?

Also paying for the preamp in the BG7000 in the comparison you mentioned, as well as inflation since they were not sold at the same time as each other.

As for the BG4000 being better... not quite an apples to apples comparison when you factor in style, build feel, automation, sonics, cart options, etc.

My daily favorite combo of the aforementioned variables is the BG8002.
Peter
Top 10 Contributor
Earsdon
11,897 Posts
OFFLINE
Founder
Moderator
Peter replied on Mon, Jul 22 2019 8:19 PM

The 8002 probably has the best performance figures - it is let down by the build quality and use of double sided tape.Although not something I would use, it also struggled to use a dust buster extra arm ? lack of torque.  It is also quite difficult to take apart. The later tangentials are quite light weight and the design of the arm mechanism disappointing compared to the earlier decks. The 4000 is beautifully made and clearly designed with very little regard to cost. The later 4002/4004 were not quite as exceptional but had very similar performance. I personally prefer the 4000 for the looks and use a 20CL on it so the sound is excellent. However all these decks suffer from poor record support, sacrificed in the name of style. The 3000 Thorens has a good old fashioned rubber mat!!

Peter

Page 1 of 1 (3 items) | RSS
Beoworld Security Certificate

SSL