+1 on the Nagaoka MP200. Smoooooth.
216 responses Add your response
I'm somewhat satisfied with the Ortofon Blue that came with my table. For a cheap cart it's not bad. Highs are crisp and lows have great balance and punch. It's lacking in the mid range area though. I'm looking at upgrading in the near future and on the short list is the Ortofon Black and the top of the line Audio Technica dual magnet. Don't have part number handy for the AT but it has the same Shibata stylus as the black. |
Totally agree with you about re-tipping @chakster . I am hoping to be set up with a couple of decks so then it is the MM for everyday listening, Denon for dems, the shelter for proper listening and the Transfiguration Temper when I want the best. I am led to believe that a good record cleaning regime will prolong cartridge life. I have the perfect phono stage for the MC2000 - the Vendetta SCP2A. |
Sure, i like some LOMC, currently running Ortofon MC2000 with Gold Note phono stage. Very unusual cartridge, a high compliance MC with extremely low output, low impedance. This cartridge is hard to deal with, very critical about phono stage, wires etc. Sound quality is addictive. I've never tried XSV4000, but XSV3000 is a brother of the Stanton 881s (highly regarded in TAS mag back issue). It's $300-400 cartridge, amazing for the money, but not the best from Stanton/Pickering. My favorite Stanton CS-100 WOS is highly competitive with any LOMC, the sound of CS-100 WOS is seductive. The problem with any MC cartridges is re-tipping (imo). |
@chakster Whilst I very much accept and believe your premise with regards to certain carts like the JVC x1-ii and pickings with stereohydron styli - the problem is that they are just not available - As much as I like my XSV4000 cartridge - very even - great bass - very neutral - it really does lack the magic of my two MC's that to my ears simply sing. I accept that MM's are in fact better trackers, and are actually more accurate (read the Regon audio site by Robert Green which explains this better than I can) - but somehow MC's bring a magic and space that is often hard to define until you hear them. |
@lohanimal The X-1 series of Victor cartridges is great! This is the only NOS Victor X-1 i’ve been able to find. Some of them suffer from poor suspension condition, so you never know if unchecked. Stylus protector may cause resonance issues, it was removed later with X-1II series which i like the most and still have a NOS in the box. I like old Garrott p77, but never tried new. Stanton /Pickering top modeals are amazing. Low impedance and very very low output MM versions of Pickering XLZ-4500s or Stanton 980LZS are very interesting and can be connected to the MC input or Step-up. Totally forgotten Ortofon is M20FL Super (Nude Fine Line Diamond) impressed me a lot a few years ago. I don't have a cartridge, but got one NOS D20FL stylus in the box, hope to find a generator for it. |
Now I have a PICKERING XSV4000 and in fairness it is very good - came with a turntable I bought - I would like an NOS stylus though. I know @chakster mentions the JVC X1 - I want one - partly to go with my QL10, but all I see are used ones - anyone know where to source an NOS one? Of the current carts everyone seems to be going on about the Ortofon, yet nobody mentions either the new Garrott carts nor the Cartridgeman Music Maker. |
Well Raul, to make a long story long, I will tell you a minute part of what I've done to have unaltered music. To begin with, I have custom speakers (don't recommend it, wouldn't do it again) ; they are so neutral that the slightest change in interconnects is easily detectable. First I engaged a "cross over design engineer" to guarantee they would have no sound of their own; then we selected the drivers; they're 3 way. (if the thought ever crosses your mind, the cross over is one part you can't leave to guess work) While I've heard a multitude of other speakers that have personality which I've enjoyed; such as Klipsch, and JBL, I know mine deliver the musicians intentions, and the bottom line for me, is always the music. |
Dear @orpheus10 : """
When a person becomes an audiophile, he no longer wishes to alter the music to suit his taste, but only wants the music from the source to come through unaltered. "" well that's the " perfect " target that all we know can't exist no matters what and that's why we have to take care how to be nearest or less far away of that " perfect " target. There are simple/sutil " things " that could helps us additional of everything we already know or that as me are just learnit to, examples of what I'm talking about: - seat position, that means not only the distance from the speakers but the build material and shape of that " seat. As simple the better but normally we look for a very confortable one it does not matters if that does not helps for a better listen quality. - kind of fabrics of our clothes when listening the audio system. Syntehic fabric goes against quality. - cleanse the ears at least twice a year with an specialist. - try not listen over 87db at seat position SPL for hours. - temperature issue is important too not only because cartridge suspention but because our ears and body. - we have to remember that we hear through all our body so as less clothe we wear as better enjoyment on MUSIC. -attend at least twice a month to listen live MUSIC. - think and take action/changes/modifications " out of the box ". - always make to our self these questions: " what if am I wrong and why could be? what to do? - try to listen as many different home audio systems as we can. To many issues to name it. R. |
Raul, I agree with your take on "I like it". That's why my speakers are as neutral as possible; I only want what the musicians who made the record intended for me to have; I'm a music lover, not an equipment lover. When a person becomes an audiophile, he no longer wishes to alter the music to suit his taste, but only wants the music from the source to come through unaltered. "I like it" can be used to justify anything; it can go far beyond differential preferences. |
Dear @orpheus10 : That " MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS " goes way beyond SS vs Tubes technology limitations. As @johnss posted in the other thread both analog/digital signal pick up by the recording microphones is way manipulated that degrades it and we can't do nothing about because the damges already comes in the LP grooves. What can dowe to try to listen the LP's in the best way?. IMHO, try to listen it putting at minimum every single noise, distortions, anomalies, etc, etc developed during the overall play proccess. Than means that we need to know or learn how THD sounds along/added to MUSIC, same for IMD, noise levels, frequency response bandwindth. room/system relationship. Unfortunatelly in the overall room/system chain each link is a focus od developments of different kind of noises, distortions, anomalies that degrades the already heavy degraded recorded signal that comes in the LP grooves. I posted several times that my main room/system target is to stay truer to the recording and this means to put my room/systems developed noises, distortions, anomalies and the like at minimum. To do those we have to be self trained to be aware how detect all those developed " enemies " and how to put at minimum. Only to know how detect it how it sounds each of them is a true challenge for any one of us and we need a hard sel training, patience and a lot of time. When any one of us can be near of that target digital or analog always will performs with very high quality and you will listen those MUSIC nuances you are talking about with SS electronics. We have to learn if that high frequency " transparency " is just MUSIC or is added distortion what we are in true listen it, not an easy task but worth the rewards to enjoy rally enjoy MUSIC and not only that: " I like it ", that at the end means almost nothing because each one " I like it " is really different. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Are you a music lover, or an "equipment specification" lover? If you are a music lover, you will listen to what I have to say; if you are a spec and equipment lover you will dote on every word Raul has to say. Make no mistake about this post, in no way am I challenging Raul's knowledge of cartridges, but I am challenging his method of classification in regard to good and bad. Raul quite often ends his posts with this; "Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS" There is a subliminal SS message hidden in that statement; that's because SS is more likely to have 0 noise and distortion than tube, but are you hearing what the musicians intended for you to hear or a good reproduction? I'll give you an extreme example of music versus equipment; after my SS pre bit the dust, I asked for a CJ loaner. A "golden eared" audiophile was visiting at the time; although the CJ was apparently noisy, the music sounded better. While I was thinking this, he blurted it out. His hearing was so acute, and his listening ability so intense, that I would invite him over for a session, and ask what I had changed without telling him. (I miss that guy) He would demand complete silence, and after listening for awhile, he would say "You got new interconnects", and whatever his answer, it would be the correct one; that's what I had changed. Everyone knows about ARC; I got an ARC SS pre loaner, and we listened to it for 5 minutes before returning thumbs down, and going back to tubes. No noise, and 0 distortion can be seductive, but I want to hear every nuance the musicians are laying down, even if that includes both noise and distortion; a tube phono is a perfect match for a MM cartridge. |
Dear @halcro : In audio all is dependent on at least to critical subjects: r00m/system quality level and resolution and each one of us MUSIC/Sound priotities. I forgot a third one: how accurated is your proccess evaluation to always know the very tiny differences/nuances in between the different items: are you sure to be aware of those differences other than the obvious ones? With out that all preferences/opinuions belongs to the common: " I like it more ". R. |
He rates the AT150ANV as incrementally better It actually was the winner as voted (blind listening) by his readers. And I think it won IIRC against his Ortofon Anna in his Cobra arm on his Caliburn turntable..... I have the AT150ANV and this is an excellent example of what Chakster and I are saying about 'modern' MM cartridges...... Whilst in a blind listening test the AT150ANV beat the Ortofon Anna......it cannot compete against the GOOD vintage MM of the 70s and 80s 😝 And when compared to the GREAT vintage MMs that Chakster and I mention......it is really 'chalk and cheese' 😴 |
Audio Technica AT150ANV, $1549. In Mike Fremer’s evaluation of nine cartridges, #2 was the 2M Black and #1 was the AT150ANV. He rates the AT150ANV as incrementally better, conveying wider dynamic swings, but the 2M Black is overall rated more organic and natural sounding, which would probably carry the day for me. One thing that puzzles me is why, in Stereophile’s Recommended Components issue, the 2M Black has been dropped to Class C, the same as the 2M Blue. Pretty much every other review I’ve read of the 2M Black placed it at or near the top of every MM cart available. |
@frogman 1959 - First MC phono cartridge (Grado) This not the first MC phono cartridge, but first STEREO MC phono cartridge, an MC cartridge (MONO) invented by Ortofon in 1948. Anyway all those cartridges are garbage. You can also remember Gramophones and 78 rmp records, but it will be hard to argue that the best MM cartridges are all made in the 70s/80s and some of them are better than modern LOMC even if the price difference is x10 and not in favor of the LOMC. Grado holds patent for stereo MC, but all their cartridges are MI |
Dear @halcro : Not only through different tonearms including that vintage today ( fashion ) 312 ( because is only a fashion and nothing else. ). In other thread I posted the very low knowledge MUSIC/Audio level of that gentleman against its very high whealty condition. Money per se means almost nothing like in that kind of systems/videos. Yes, an Astatic MF-200 could make that kind of job with very high quality levels. R. |
Ergo: from my explanation how universal and numerical quantifier work one can deduce that statement like ''Peter is the tallest guy in the class but Lew is even taller'' are not allowed. But it may be the case that Mexican grammar allows such statements. I remmember many ''best cartridges'' according to Raul but am really surprised with the newest kind regarding one of the oldest carts: ADC 26. If we were informed about this curiosity by the start of the MM thread we may have saved ''mucho dollares''. On the other side chakster is legitimated to make categorical statements about his 10 (?) cartridges such that AT 180 is the best among his M'M''s and FR-7fz among his MC's. Because our Lew has problems with ''categorical statements'' probably because he is not an Kantian or hate Germans we can't know which of his 7(?) carts is the best. But what we do know is that he likes his Ruby Grace, his Uruchi, his MC 2000 , etc., equal. |
@orpheus10 Chakster, the cartridges on jukeboxes were quite visible, and that brush on the end of the Pickering cartridge was unforgettable. You are talking about $50 Stanton AL-500 and $50 Pickering XV-15. These cartridges are the lowest quality mass market Stanton/Pickering product. Actually those cartridges are so called "professional series". Durability is the key, not the sound quality. The fact that you have recognized Stanton/Pickering brush does not make them better. These carts works with high tracking force, the diamonds are not natural. This is very cheap basic product. The jukeboxes I'm talking about were in sophisticated lounges that also featured live entertainment. The same professionals that installed sound systems in high end salons, also installed them in these lounges. Evidently you have no idea how important the sound system and music was to a lounge. Jukebox era is definitely not the 80s, but 50s. I don't know what are you trying to say, but Stanton high-end cartridges starts from 881 series and up to 891 series, they are not from the jukebox era, they are invented in the mid 70s - early 80s. Look at this Stanton catalog to see them all. Unlike the cheapest Stanton Al-500 (which is awful cartridge) the 981 series cost up to $800 today and considering the best Stanton ever made. This is high-end cartridge today and you can easily compare 981 series to the $3000 MC cartridges from whatever manufacturer today. If High-End system is an old Jukebox for you then our vision is completely different with all my respect to the 50s aesthetic. |
I am sorry if I look pedantic but I want to clear some confusion. The confusion between quantifiers like ''all'' and ''some'' which we use to express generality and numerical quantifiers like, say, there are exactly 30 carts in my collection. My experience is that the most easy way to explain (universal) quantifiers is: ''someone has stollen my car''. One can also say that the difference is as between variables and names. If one ''sees'' variables as places were a name should be put in order to complete a sentence and get an idea about the reference . So individual statement about ''the best carts'' even by Raul whom we assume to own the ''biggest collection of carts'' can only apply to certain ''numerical quantifier''. Say 120. I assume that he can count so he can ''discover'' how many carts he owns. We will than know about how many carts he pretend to judge ''which is the best'' among them. |
Among those of us on this thread, only a few who have taken the mega-expensive leap are qualified to dispute the proposition. You actually don't need to own these 'uber-cartridges' to 'hear' them Lew..... Fremer has been uploading high-res digital rips of various cartridge tests on his Analogue Planet Website for a while now, and not one of them has ever had the expensive LOMC (like the Anna and Atlas SL) as the winner (voted by the readers) against cheap current MM cartridges.... Why does this fact not resonate with wealthy audiophiles....? See Raul's answer 🤥 Here is a Link to WTBF where you can actually hear YouTube uploads of uber-priced cartridges like VdH Colibri Master Signature ($12,000), Air Tight Opus 1 ($15,000), Clearaudio Goldfinger Statement ($16,000), Lyra Atlas SL ($13,000). https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/hear-it-yourself.26355/ Be aware that these cartridges are playing on a new $200,000 turntable through $300,000 horn speakers. The music is unfortunately undemanding.....but listen carefully and tell me that you haven't heard equivalent sound from cheaper cartridges in your systems.....?! |
Chakster, the cartridges on jukeboxes were quite visible, and that brush on the end of the Pickering cartridge was unforgettable. The jukeboxes I'm talking about were in sophisticated lounges that also featured live entertainment. The same professionals that installed sound systems in high end salons, also installed them in these lounges. Evidently you have no idea how important the sound system and music was to a lounge. These were among the cartridges they used; https://www.google.com/search?q=pickering+xv-15+625e&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=6...: |
Ckakster, jukeboxes in the city were the only high end; maybe you're thinking of jukeboxes in "podunk". Gangsters fought wars over whose jukebox would be where. I would not have fed those jukeboxes with quarters for jive time music; they were composed of state of the art parts, like custom tube amps, beside the best cartridges and 45 turntable. Jukeboxes were the only high end in the 60's for the ordinary person. |
@orpheus10 The Pickering and Stanton cartridges I saw on the jukeboxes were Mono, just like the music on those 45's. Some people claim it's better than stereo. As i said earlier in this post High-End cartridges does not comes with a Jukebox, but it would be nice to have analog jukebox for free. Also Jukeboxes does not comes with High-End cartridges from Stanton/Pickering. In my opinion stereo is better than mono, 99% of my vintage 45s are stereo. I like stereo better than mono. Sorry i've never tried a Koetsu, but if you will check the link below you will find comparison between Fidelity-Research FR-7 series versus Koetsu Coralstone. The price for FR-7f and even for FR-7fz (the best one) is still much cheaper than Koetsu. Old thread: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/mc-cartridge-mini-shootout-spu-koetsu-fr-ikeda And updates: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/fidelity-research-cartridges?highlight=fidelity-research%2Bcartridges |
Dear @lewm : The real subject down there is MARKETING where the very high price of items as in this case cartridges makes that the hiogher the price more desirable for gentlemans/audiophiles that in reality has ( not all of them. ) poor knowledge level in MUSIC/Audio and even don't know what are looking for paying those high prices other than show it to their friends that are with poor knowledge levels but always impressed by the high price of his friend cartridge. What could happens if that Coral stone or the Blue Lace or the Goldfinger goes for 5K: something easy no one of those gentlemans buy it because are not so expensive. We have here in Agon and other internet forums really whealthy gentlemans as could be downunder,syntax and several others and they prefers and sometimes even laughs about cartridges at 1K-2K dollars. Dop you think that any of these gentlemans can buy from me the ADC 26/27 cartridge of the 60's that outperforms the EPC100CMK4 and even any today top LOMC cartridge?, no way. That kind of ADC cartridge is not to humble for them but not something they can be proud to show to their audio friends. The relation-ship between price and quality level ratio really disappeared many years ago and disappeared mainly by our each one ignorance and that's why manufacturers takes advantage of each one of us and this trend will follows and seems to me that's nothing that could styop it. In other thread some one ask if the high price of tonearms is a rip-off and some one posted that maybe it's and told the OP that in cartridges is even worst. Am I saying that cartridges must stay in a 1K-2K price range?, no not really could go a little higher but not to that 15K-28K that is totally unjustified no matter what. The other issue is that the gentlemans that bougth those cartridges at those very high prices are really satisfied with even proudly of it and the question to all of them could be: why are you satisfied with, compared against what? R. |
In this hobby, I try to avoid the categorical statement (like "all MC cartridges are superior to all MM cartridges", or vice-versa), and I am suspicious of categorical statements put forth by anyone else. Therefore I would say that a $15K cartridge might be absolutely superb. But so too might a much, much less expensive cartridge. I have to accept this proposition, because I don't want to be buying $15K cartridges just to prove that it is right or wrong thinking. (The most I have ever paid is around $2K.) Among those of us on this thread, only a few who have taken the mega-expensive leap are qualified to dispute the proposition. And it seems that neither Halcro nor Raul are prepared to take the contrary position that $15K (or let's say more than $10K) buys Nirvana. |
Possibly, a 15K cartridge does everything perfectly, but not a 1K cartridge .. Well I have had a $12K MC cartridge (Atlas) and still have a $10K MC cartridge (Palladian) and Chakster is right.... There is NO relationship.....absolutely NONE..... between the cost and the performances of cartridges. The wealthy audiophiles who are "hypnotized by reviewers or manufacturers"....compare uber-expensive MC cartridges with their even MORE uber-expensive (but newly released) competitors and comment on their differences..... But they are the SAME differences that the impoverished audiophiles can hear between ALL the cost-effective vintage MM cartridges 🤪🤗 |
Chakster, I was thinking about this cartridge, but it's not MM; https://www.needledoctor.com/Koetsu-Coralstone-Platinum-Phono-Cartridge To be honest, I'm quite satisfied with the Grado; it reproduces nuances quite well. People who didn't choose Grado said they were musical, and that's my major requirement. No, I'm not trying to sell Grado, my main point has been about the effort it takes to find one's own cartridge, the one that reproduces his musical requirements; this hasn't been easy, it's taken years. The Pickering and Stanton cartridges I saw on the jukeboxes were Mono, just like the music on those 45's. Some people claim it's better than stereo. |
@orpheus10
Are you hypnotized by reviewers or manufacturers ? Prices means nothing in the modern world of High-End, if you don’t have a reference among classic High-End cartridges you have no idea where do you going even with 15k budget, don’t let them fool you, there is NOTHING is the cartridge that cost $15k! The logic behind $15k pricing is not about fidelity at all and they are not better than many $1k cartridges. Also this thread is about MM cartridges, they are always cheaper than MC. The stylus is the most expensive part of MM cartidge. Some of the very best styli with exotic cantilevers cost under $1k max. |
Dear @orpheus10 : That recording can works for some kind of evaluation but nuances is not per se what defines the overall differences. In that recording those nuances could be way obvious and what I do through my proccess is more " tigth " " less tolerant " and way lower nuances. As I said the first part of my test/evaluation proccess is with very special " isolated " music information. Inside my proccess I have parts of LP tracks for those tiny nuances but additional to nuances due that the item under evaluation gives you more information/pick-up a little more information for better tracking abilities. The true is that an overall proccess as the one I devloped over the years is really complex but gives you many things if you are well self trained on it and the high advantage is thta trhough it I or you know exactly and in specific what to look for. It’s more than all a true whole proccess to evaluate quality performance level not what I or you like it but if performs as should be. I use between other recordings Disco music from the 60’s-70’s where was really strident in almost any system well any not well roo/system set up. In the same way I use, classical, jazz, blues, pop, female, orchestras, solo intruments as piano or trumpet, etc, etc, "" Possibly, a 15K cartridge does everything perfectly, but not a 1K cartridge ..""" Through my process sometimes is the other way around like with my ADC 26/27 cartridge review. R. |
Raul, the question I asked was a very difficult one to answer; it involved different characteristics of the same high quality cartridges. For example: let's compare cartridges rated "B" by "Stereophile"; we already know they're good cartridges, we're simply concerned with the differences in these cartridges. The question I asked pertained to the subtle nuances in that particular tune; how those nuances are delivered make a lot of difference; all of the difference to me. I'll post the tune again and point them out to you. While the entire tune is a composite of nuances, they are most critical beginning with the bass at 5:55 and then the guitar at 6:52 all the way to the end. This was a 45 RPM mono; only the best rigs can capture all the nuances; maybe only the best ears can hear them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHold6ylvEM Possibly, a 15K cartridge does everything perfectly, but not a 1K cartridge; that's why it's necessary for me to isolate what's most important to my musical enjoyment and go with that. |
Dear @orpheus10 : I really like R.Charles and Milt. The Bag's Groove by MJ is a great composition. I listen him with Dizzy, C.Bassie, Coltrane and obviously with the M. Jazz Quartet. I can't remember that recording, maybe I own who knows because with over 7K LP's is not easy to remember all. Anyway, my evaluation whole proccess is not exactly to listen to all one side LP or even one complete LP track. Over several years I choosed some LP tracks of every kind of MUSIC that over the time I up-dated if I found out something especiall to evaluate with. What I do is to listen small parts of a LP tracks with very special instrument sounds, distortions, special noices and even clicks/pops that even thiese clicks are performed by diferent cartridges with diferent tones. I'm looking not only for very special kind of every kind sound but very dificult to listen it in precise and clear/transparent way. Example: a tinny really tinned triangle sound in a " tutti " high SPL of an orchestra. I have tracks for every kind of " audiophile " quality sound: brigthness, agrseviness, mistraking, detail, power, dynamics, rythm, bass foundation , high frequency definition, bass overhang, tigthness, tracking abilities, saturation, etc, etc, etc. After all those very precise and individual characteristics then I follow with complete tracks/side lp as a overall evaluation where I'm looking for the sound of a live event. My evaluation always is at near field seat position and some times when I have doubts I try headphones. Normally I try to even SPL in between the items under evaluation and I listen at: 75db, 84dbs, 90dbs and 95dbs continuous SPL with peaks at 6db-7db SPL over the continuous SPL listening. Under that evaluation I use too some CDs to confirm mainly in the bass range . My proccess is very personal simple for me but could be complex for other gentlemans and always use the same tracks and same LPs. TYhrough my evaluation proccess I can evaluate in no more than an hour any single home audio system with almost no mistakes in the conclutions, the proccess is almost bullet proof not because I say so but some audiophiles in the USA that I was at their places can confirm about and of course my audio friends here in México. The foundations of my whole proccess was and is developed to know how away/near I'm of my main home room/system main target: truer to the recording. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dear Chakster, I was reading a very interesting white paper on static electricity and vinyl reproduction, published by Shure in 1978, when I came across this very interesting comment on the use of exotic metals in cantilever construction. Of course, Shure is here defending their own choice of using a "special" alloy of aluminum in what was then their latest flagship cartridge, the V15 Type IV. I think you can consult the referenced article at the bottom, if you want to see some data in support of what they wrote here: "What material is used to make the shank? Why? Why not use Beryllium or Boron, etc.? Answer: Normally it is not our policy to divulge the material and proprietary processes that are used to fabricate our products. In this case, however, a departure from that policy is warranted, because of the great deal of confusion that seems to exist in the marketplace as to the pros and cons of certain exotic materials, such as Beryllium, Boron, Titanium, etc. It seems that by the sheer sound of these exotic and strange names, tremendous performance advantages are implied. Since these materials were developed for space age applications, it is easy to understand that there is a connotation of super strength and other advantages. Shure has made use of and studied a variety of these materials for quite a while. In the early days, Beryllium Copper was used, then Magnesium, Aluminum, and special Aluminum alloys. Aluminum and Beryllium combinations were used for example, in the V15 Type II stylus as early as 1967. A special heat treated Aluminum alloy is used in the V15 Type IV telescopic stylus assembly. This coupled with its shape and structure determines the performance criteria." The method of analysis is outlined in L. Happ’s paper, "Design Considerations of the V15 Type IV Phonograph Stylus." |
@orpheus10 this stuff was a lot cheaper in 1960, and it was what the average person played music on; that's why jukeboxes pulled in so many quarters. I like music recorded and pressed in the 60s and 70s, some of those original records cost more than high-end euipment today. I have some very rare 45s, not all of them recorded quite good, some musicians recorded and released only 1 x 45 sigle and nothing else, not even LP, nothing. Some private press 45s only reached 300 copies. You can imagine how rare some of them today. But i don't play them on 60s equipment, i think from mid 70s to mid 80s some of the best cartridges were born and they are still unbeatable by most of th modern carts. |
Raul, I've got a question for you; it's not that I doubt the validity of your evaluation of cartridges, but I wonder what music you use to evaluate. For example; what differences would you find when evaluating this music with different cartridges; in the same price range of course, let's try over 1K but less than 2K. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHold6ylvEM |
Let us put things in their proper perspective; this stuff was a lot cheaper in 1960, and it was what the average person played music on; that's why jukeboxes pulled in so many quarters. https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=40994 https://www.turntableneedles.com/Record_Player_Phono_Cartridges-Ceramic This was the high end in 1960, and few people owned Fisher; my rig was Emerson. http://www.fisherconsoles.com/brochures,%20catalogs/1960%20Fisher%20Catalog.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_Electronics This was a lot of money at that time, and you got a lot of audio for your money. http://www.fisherconsoles.com/president%20IV.html I read some comments on "consoles" and most of them had no idea what they were talking about; Magnavox was good while Fisher and Grundig were very good. Some "brandless" consoles were just beautiful furniture. https://www.google.com/search?q=magnavox+console+1960&oq=magnavox+console+1960&aqs=chrome..6... Grundig Majestic from Germany was tops; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grundig https://www.google.com/search?q=Grundig+majestic+console&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&f...: These consoles produced some of the most beautiful music; it soothed me to sleep and I had sweet dreams. I believe the cabinet and the wood played a big part in the sound. While all that equipment sounded good at the time, the only thing that comes remotely close to my moderate "high end rig" is the jukebox, and we are talking strictly "mono" "So much for the good old days" |
Jukeboxes in the late 50's and early 60's was the "high end" of that time. The reason they had the best cartridges, and 45 RPM turntables was quite simple; they pulled quarters out of patrons pockets in bars. No one I knew, nor did I have anything to compare to those jukeboxes. Gangsters fought wars over whose jukebox was going to be where. The jukebox made more money than the lounge. This was because of the quality of the sound they delivered; they were made of the finest tube electronics, and the very top cartridges of that time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jukebox This is the best I could find, and it doesn't even give a hint as to the quality of jukeboxes in the city; the nuances, and the subtlety of those nuances that made this tune what it was, are nearly impossible to duplicate. Maybe I'm there, maybe not; I don't have a late 50's jukebox to compare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHold6ylvEM Personnel Ray Charles – piano, electric piano, alto saxophone ("Soul Brothers') Milt Jackson – vibraphone, piano ("Soul Brothers," "How Long, How Long Blues," guitar ("Bag's Guitar Blues") Billy Mitchell – tenor saxophone Connie Kay – drums Oscar Pettiford – bass Skeeter Best – guitar Kenny Burrell – guitar Each one of those artists was a star in his own right; what we are talking about is the comparison with this music from the jukebox, with listening to those artists live. That was Skeeter Best on guitar. Let me repeat; it's the nuances, and the subtlety of the nuances that are so difficult to reproduce; everything in the record chain has to be perfect. |
@vortrex Why do some of the eBay Victor X-1ii say titanium cantilever instead of beryllium? X-1II and X-1IIE are two different models, two completely different cantilevers and also completely different diamonds. X-1II is Beryllium/Shibata (clear plastic) X-1IIe is Titanium/Elliptical (orange plastic) This is Beryllium cantilever with Nude Shibata stylus tip for X-1II This is Titanium cantilever with Nude Elliptical tip. This link must be used for correct info about japanese cartridges (not a vinylengine where normally i can see a lot of missinformation). X-1IIe has a titanium tapered pipe cantilever. I’ve been able to find some NOS styli for Victor "X" series of cartridges, but they are very rare @dhcod |
dEAR @orpheus10 : 1k FOR THAT nos VINTAGE 981 is not very high comparing with the today really high prices as the one example in the Grado Epoch that could or not be in true justified by its quality level performance. Btw, if I remember Stanton/Pickering had its own vintage Epoch models. Of course only the name. I own 2-3 vintage Grado cartridges and all sounds good and I have no doubt that the Epoch/Aeon are really good but for 12K I will love to put one of my ADC 26/27 samples " face to face ". At the end the cartridge main motor foundation as a transducer just did not changed at all, still are the same as 50 years ago. We discuss reciently about with other gentlemans in the thread: Diamond is a man's friend? ( or something like this. ). R. |
To make a long story long, I am an Electronics Technician, with a first class license; that's how I earned a living for my entire working life. It was my philosophy that it was all in the specifications. Then one day my prized SS preamp bit the dust. I was curious as to why people would pay so much for tube preamps, that were not half as good as mine according to the specifications. I got a loaner CJ PV 10, that had audible distortion, but the music sounded better than my highly rated SS amp with the very best specifications; that's when I decided to listen to those people who call themselves "Audiophiles", who don't even know ohm's law. Now I listen carefully to what they have to say, because the bottom line is; "What does the music sound like when played through a piece of equipment"? The quality of that sound is a combination of things, and one of them is high price parts. That means that high quality sound ain't gonna be cheap. When somebody tells me a $200. cartridge is going to sound better than a 1K cartridge, I'm skeptical. This is in reference to the best Stanton and Pickering cartridges. Those cartridges were in reference to "Mono"; yes, I believe they could compare with today's best, if were talking about "Mono", but I'm not talking about, Mono, I'm talking about a holographic 3D sound stage. Raul stated that 1K was not much money; if that's all you can afford, it's a lot of money; that's what I meant by, "It's all relative". While there are as many different colors of sound as there are colors of the rainbow, each one of these colors has to be compared within it's price range; "There ain't no free lunch", and if there is, I want to be the first to get it. If I was in the market for a very expensive cartridge, this is the one I would buy; https://www.ttvjaudio.com/Grado_Epoch_Phono_Cartridge_p/gra0000075.htm That's because each time I have gone up the Grado price line, I have been well satisfied; their color of the rainbow is my color. Since I was a born music lover, I have been in this game all of my life; however, I've only been in the "high end" since 1990. |
Dear @vortrex : Maybe by ignorance: https://www.vinylengine.com/library/jvc/x1.shtml R. @dhcod : original JVC or ADC and other vintage ones are almost no wAY TO FIND OUT REPLACEMENT STYLUS. |
