There is no more boron pipe for cantilevers. Useless to continue with you.
R.
R.
'Diamond' cantilevers: a man's best friend?
An increasing number of cartridge manufacturers is offering models with 'diamond' cantilevers at the top of their range, generally priced at the wrong side of $10k. The price hike compared to - otherwise identical - models with boron (or other) cantilevers runs in the multiple thousands.
Can anyone explain why? Is this just an artificial price point to emphasize exclusivity or does it have to do with material or manufacturing cost, even if there's not much material to begin with? And speaking of artificial, are these cantilevers made from 'real' diamond, or some industrial type? Are all diamond cantilevers created equal or do we see a variety of diamond-like materials sold as 'real' diamond? And what about the rare 'one piece' diamond stylus/cantilevers used in a few vintage cartridges (Sony XL-88D, Dynavector, Kiseki Lapis Lazuli); are these new top dollar diamond cantilever cartridges (like some Koetsu's, Ortofon MC Century, Transfiguration Orpheus Diamond, etc.) of the 'one piece' type? And if not, what is the presumed advantage compared to ruby, sapphire, boron or any other cantilever materials? In short: does anyone know what the 'diamond' cantilever landscape really looks like?
And finally the really important question: do 'diamond' cantilevers - all else being equal - offer superior performance that would begin to justify the price difference? Has anyone done the required comparative listening?
PS: a have a nice collection of MC's with a variety of cantilever materials: sapphire, ruby, boron, aluminium, beryllium, or some combination of materials. But not 'diamond' (real or otherwise), so I'm curious to find out if I'm missing out on something.
Can anyone explain why? Is this just an artificial price point to emphasize exclusivity or does it have to do with material or manufacturing cost, even if there's not much material to begin with? And speaking of artificial, are these cantilevers made from 'real' diamond, or some industrial type? Are all diamond cantilevers created equal or do we see a variety of diamond-like materials sold as 'real' diamond? And what about the rare 'one piece' diamond stylus/cantilevers used in a few vintage cartridges (Sony XL-88D, Dynavector, Kiseki Lapis Lazuli); are these new top dollar diamond cantilever cartridges (like some Koetsu's, Ortofon MC Century, Transfiguration Orpheus Diamond, etc.) of the 'one piece' type? And if not, what is the presumed advantage compared to ruby, sapphire, boron or any other cantilever materials? In short: does anyone know what the 'diamond' cantilever landscape really looks like?
And finally the really important question: do 'diamond' cantilevers - all else being equal - offer superior performance that would begin to justify the price difference? Has anyone done the required comparative listening?
PS: a have a nice collection of MC's with a variety of cantilever materials: sapphire, ruby, boron, aluminium, beryllium, or some combination of materials. But not 'diamond' (real or otherwise), so I'm curious to find out if I'm missing out on something.
Showing 3 responses by rauliruegas
Dear @invictus005: No are not: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/young-modulus-d_417.html https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/young-modulus-d_773.html in this page you brose at the end and make click in tensile/strength..... http://biotsavart.tripod.com/bmt.htm Pipes always are more resonant. R. |
Dear @edgewear: "
have reinforced my opinion that not much real 'progress' has been made in the sonic capabilities of MC cartridges,..." Well, till today the transducer/cartridge foundations are still the same and nothing can change about due to the rudimentary analog medium. The transducer is a mechanical/electrical rudimentary/arcaic device. I think that we can't say exactly that " no progress " with because exist some kind of progress that made it some kind of improvements in the quality level performance of this kind of rudimentary trasducer, over the years we have some changes ( not on its foundation. ): improved the material wire in the cartridge coils as its wiring coils shapes, improved the stylus tip shapes, improved the stylus tip polish pproccess and in top cartridges that treatment make it twice time, improved cartridge material body and shapes, improved the cantilever materials and building shapes, cartridge " motors " improved too like the Lyra line from the Kleos to the Atlas that is way different for the better than the Titan i or the Dynavector XV-is against the 17D3 or the old Koetsu that really were " terrible " against today ones, improved the magnets in the cartridges from samarium cobalt to neodynium- allnic-platinum, etc etc. So, several kind of progress but the essential in a cartridge is exactly the same, can't change because that rudimentary analog medium that we all are enjoying. Yes, DIAMOND is a man's best friend but not at the ridiculous prices that manufacturers puts on in their top line model. They take advantage of the diamond word that when any human beed read it or heard it all we know that is the higher touted jewell: " if it's diamond it will be the best ". This is the kind of expressions about. The industrial diamond used in cartridges with out doubt is the best material for cantilevers where we need that the cantilever pass all the stylus tip movements picked up ridding the LP grooves with out adding any single /tiny vibration/resonance developed by the cantilever it self. So we need the best material in the Young's Modulus scale where nothing used in cartridge cantilevers come close: 1,200 Gpa. Against that the worst material is aluminum with 69, titanium only 110, beryllium 287 and Boron with 400 Gpa. Btw, the Boron yuield strength is a very high value over 3,100 by comparison the aluminum is under 200. Now, diamond per se makes that the cartridge be " the best "?, certainly not if it's true that the cantilever build material is important the main subject is that are the sum of the parts in the cartridge design and the qulity level execution of that design what it matters and what makes the differences for the better or not. Those cartridges as the 88D or the Audio Technica MC-1000 ( I owned both. ) where the cantilever and stylus comes in a single piece are not better performers than today top LOMC models. The today top cartridge manufacturers makes its election and voted for Boron for very good reasons ( diamond on top models is to market top models at non justified prices and that's all. ). Btw, solid Boron ( rod ) is way less resonant than hollow/pipe boron type. Name of the game: the sum of the parts and the very old ( 60's . ) ADC 26/27 non-MC cartridge confirm that statement because I tested with everything the same against the Etna SL, Goldfinger, XV-1s, top My Sonic Lab/Air Tigth and Colibri and no one of them outperformed overall and the 26/27 came with aluminum cantilever and a humble elliptical stylus in a plastic body: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/adc-26-best-pritchard-cartridge-ever-or-best-cartridge-ever Regards and enjoyb the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |