and I have to add: an apology to everyone that like you are up set about, that's was not my intention.
Regards adn enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul,you don't owe an apology to anyone,IMO!
You simply stated an observation,from what you heard.My only question(slight doubt) was I did not get the impression the particular set-up was "very" familiar to you.At least I don't think you mentioned the specific set-up....No problem though!!
Based on your many varied MM comments,as well as the PC-1 observation,I come away thinking that if I were going to spend alot "more" money on a cartridge(I did last September,with the Orpheus,but heard it in my friend's set-up first, and liked it)I'd definitely think twice!!
Keep the posts coming,and tell it how you hear it!!!
Best |
Dear Raul, don't be sorry, Jan Allaerts has the exact same opinion and believe me he has no commercial interest to say that , he is over one year backordered!
He is admirative of EMT and Koetsu design. Personal info.
Best regards. |
Sirspeedy, Your comments are right on. If I'd heard what you did in Dallas, I'd not buy it or recommend it either, but "still" you may have been subject to one particular parameter negatively affecting the outcome, you heard! That is exactly the situation and Raul was told. Obviously it was my and Louis system being discussed "in Dallas" and the session at my home was done with my BRAND new crossover, a few days old. This new one utilizes 16 mil spec Teflon caps in the signal path and Raul heard it with about 100 hours on it. The designer of the caps said forget about a decision on sound until 1000 hours or more and that has proven to be true. To make matters worse, I was under the assumption we were going to listen to Raul's new preamp FIRST and mine second. So, the system was off (for nearly a week) and cold when we began. As for the second system, so far Louis has been unable to pick a winner between his Garrard/Triplanar/Dynavector XV-1s combo and his Technics/SME 312S/ Air Tight combo. I've heard these two turntables played side by side every week for the last few months, and they are both superb. I still prefer the Air Tight but deeply respect the Dynavector too. Louis also has the same Aesthetix Io and Callisto but Kharma Exquisite 1De speakers powered with CAT mono blocks. We listen at his home once a week and my home once a week, I love his system and he loves mine and both of us are huge fans of Air Tight. I'm such a fan of Air Tight I ordered and just received the new Air Tight Supreme. Out of the batch from Japan that mine came from, one was pre sold (not loaned or a review sample) to a reviewer at Absolute Sound. Another one from the batch was just put on hold by me as I'm acquiring it for the world wide director of advertising for one of the finest speakers made. Not everyone hears the same as Raul and some of those people have a lot of experience in the business. |
The PC-1 is everything than a great cartridge for me. It is one of the most boring cartridges I ever had the chance to listen to. Dead, thin, no PRAT, no Body (HP describes it as "Gestalt") even worse than digital.
One of my friends had it, we did a comparison with XV-1s, Kondo IO, Zyx UNIverse and Zyx Atmos with various Phono Stages, The PC-1 didn't survive it, it found a new owner in the next days. |
Raul, Sirspeedy,
Forgive me for getting involved. But as a former owner of the PC-1,XV-1s, and having owned the My Sonic Labs Eminent (PC-1 equivalent almost) Raul is correct in his description of the sound. I think his description is a bit "strong" but he is spot on. The PC-1 is a bit hot in the treble. Having owned one, and most of the cartridges discussed hear, I feel confident in that statement. It also does have a bit of a bloat in the midbass area. I have tried the PC-1 in quite a few arms, w. quite a few phono stages. It faired best w. a solid state phono stage and can help in a lean system. In some systems it should balance in very well. It should be described as such.
Albert,
I wonder about the PC-1 Supreme. Time will answer. I know I told you I was very HOT about the PC-1 initially. Especially since I also owned a Jade (I honestly miss it but not for the price). In contrast to the Jade, the PC-1 is more dyanamic and has a little better bass. It doesn't have the same magic as the Jade, but it has its own magic. But to be honest, if you really want magic The Urushi was the best for that (and lacking highs & bass but yes it did have magic)
After living with both the PC-1 and Titan I I can now state that the Titan I for me is one of the most balanced cartridges I have heard to date. The Dynavector might be a touch more natural in sound but a little restricted in dynamics or bass in comparison. The PC-1 is a very good cartridge. When I heard it I wanted it. It has something that entices you on first listen. But after extended listening the PC-1 was found to be not the best match in my system which currently is voiced very close to neutral with all my equipment being very neutral as well. To let you know, I currently have 4 different phono stages in house. Solid State/battery, 2 w. SUTs, and tube w. out SUT. Nothing like hearing the difference between cartridges when you bypass a SUT phono stage and use either a SS or pure tube.
Thomasheisig,
I don't want to disagree with you but the description you give is the opposite of what I heard. Also the opposite of Rauls. I think maybe something wrong w. the PC-1 you had. HP's description is correct only he makes it sound like a good thing, when in fact it is a good thing only for some music. Many reviewers use words in a way to make things sound good, when in fact if you read carefully, they are colorations.
PC-1 was loved for some Jazz, Male Vocal and some music requiring more body. But this ended up being 10% of my collection. The Titan I was so close in sound w. more natural highs, and better bass that the PC-1 was not needed. Mind you, I had the Titan I in the Phantom (Tara Zero phono cables) and the PC-1 in my Schroder. The Titan I now is in the Schroder and it has reached an elevated performance level compared to the Phantom (music is played w. a certain freedom from the speaker that just floats in space and beyond the equipment). So the Titan I is a cut above the PC-1 in more respects now.
My listening tests by the way, are usually done w. some friends who are not audiophiles. BUt they are musicians. We all felt the same way in comparing the PC-1 to the Titan I. (mind you the ZYX Universe was in there as well, but that is a separate post). |
Well,I must admit these October 4th posts are really interesting!!
Albert....this is "really" funny,because I had the sneaky suspicion it "was" your set-up Raul spoke of.No apparent reason,other than the geography.
Thomas....I'm kina liking your new-found hard edge honesty,even in such a controversial(harmless,in reality)subject.
Dgad...."that" was a great post(from my own perspective).It was thorough and personally I'm in no position to question anyone!
All in all,what "is" consistent and "logical" is each individual hobbyist attempt to listen on their own,and take reviews with a grain of salt....STILL,I have a sneaky suspicion the PC-1 has "much more legs" than some think,and I admit to not being familiar with it.
Albert(just in jest)...I have heard some "word on the street" opinions of your own system voicing.Heh,heh,heh -:)
I'll keep it under my hat,just to be intriguing!!
Seems,one thing is "consistently" clear...The Dynavector XV-1s must be an amazing design,and holds up to time(it's now been around awhile,and holds off competition like Roger Federer did,at the U.S. Open).I heard it,and it was A/B'd to the also fine Myabi.My taste slightly preferred what the Dyna brought to the table.
The Titan i(like the Dyna)has been around for awhile too.This cartridge I've heard about a zillion times,at a dear friend's home.He is an obsessed LP collector(the collection could pay for a small Island Nation,if he sold it,I have NO doubts)with a superb system.
The Titan i,to me,is about as perfect a sounding design(on the Lp's we play)as I'd want.It seems to do about everything incredibly well!...Not "just" well,but "over the top superb"(I don't own it,btw).....Some cartridges seem to be blessed with a higher "Fabulosity Quotient" than others,over a wider range of music "and" system configurations.Regardless of how those set-ups are voiced!!...."That" point alone could support another thread!
I own a Transfiguration Orpheus(just in case anyone is interested).I've owned three previous Trannies,and before that, four different Koetsu "stone body" types(loved them).
My Tranny Temper-V was absolutely "smoked" by the Orpheus.I have set up the Orpheus in a friend's set-up,who has almost identical equip as me.I have a load of listening experience there,too.My own set up is "hopefully" going to be up and running soon(I pray,because I've been down for almost a year,due to really crappy support...ugh).
I only have 12 hours on my Orpheus,but still know it(on a Phantom/Cosmos series IV)like the back of my hand."It" is a great cartridge,but I have to admit to being surprised there is not as much "talk" about it as some others.
Oh well,need to choose which wine to be had with dinner,so I have to retreat to my "ping-pong table" wine rack(hey it works).
Best to all,and I am totally envious of those who are atending RMAF!! |
Dear Albert: You already know exactly what I think on what you posted on your system ( I don't want to start anything on it here ) even trying to help I already give my suggestions on the overall subject.
+++++ " Not everyone hears the same as Raul ... " +++++
fortunately don't because it is on the " differences " where we can/could learn.
Albert, I stop to buy new today MC cartridges because I understand/find that there is nothing really " new " that really helps to improve the quality sound reproduction performance in our audio systems, there are some new cartridges that are not better but only different and the PC-1 is a clear example of that fact and I'm sure that the new PC-1 low output will be a little different but not a better one: why? because it is a similar design.
Something that could confirm that the PC-1 is not what the " reviewers " rave is that you can see many people that put on sale the PC-1.
I already posted in other thread that over the years there are almost nothing better on real cartridge grow up quality performance, there are some exceptions and I can name some of them: Titan i, XV-1, Colibri, Allaerts MC2/Formula 1, Transi V, Ruby 2, REX 9, Ortofon 7500, Insider.
We can ( like the audio industry and reviewers want ) to close the eyes to that fact about " nothing really better " on cartridges and we can take for example all those Agon rave posts on the " almost " arcaic " ( I say with respect about ) 103 and 103R cartridges and not only that but some builders are taking the 103 " motor " to build new cartridge designs: ZU and Magic Diamond are only two examples on that.
There are many cartridge options out there and some builders only care about " business " making on the same model other ones differing only in its output level but not a new real design.
I'm waiting and " hungry " to start again buying new MC cartridges I hope that sooner or latter I can/could do it, in the mid time I'm learning and enjoying not only the wonderful MM cartridge designs but MC ones too ( mostly great " old " ones. ) with top quality sound reproduction performance.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
it has to : IMHO we can't.
Raul. |
Dear friends: Talking here about MM/MC cartridges ( new and old designs ) it is interesting to " touch " the name TECHNICS and in some ways give this manufacturer a special recognition due to its great cartridges/TT/tonearms " old " designs.
Several of their analog products, IMHO, are unbeatable till today, for example:
the MM cartridges: EPC-205C MK4 ( that I report on it in other thread ) and the memorable EPC-100C MK4.
MC cartridge: EPC-305 MK2 ( that I'm enjoying right now thanks to its great quality performance that compete against any today MC design. )
tonearms: EPA-100 and EPA-100 MK2 and the EPA-500.
turntables: SP-10 MK2 and MK-3.
it is curious that all those " old " TECHNICS products were designed around 1981 and 1983 ( more than 25 years ago ) that seems the " Era Gold " of Technics analog production.
Some of those products have " unique " " thinking and material design.
I'm very proud to own some of them and more of that to enjoy it with my today audio system, in some ways : something and a must to hear!
My hat off to all those TECHNICS people that were committed to quality perfection designs and made possible to achieve that so high quality sound reproduction performance audio analog products in favor of the Music enjoyment!!!
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Albert: You already know exactly what I think on what you posted on your system ( I don't want to start anything on it here ) even trying to help I already give my suggestions on the overall subject. What you think was based on a brand new component. Any suggestions at that point were as useless as judgement on a room at CES the first day. |
Dear Albert: You are wrong for say the least, I posted:
+++++ " ( I don't want to start anything on it here ) " +++++ so my advise is that stop to post on your system subject with reference to me, I can't see any benefit for you or for any one else but if you insist then I will answer you in a wide and specific way according what happen there, so is your call.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
+++++ " ( I don't want to start anything on it here ) " +++++ so my advise is that stop to post on your system subject with reference to me, I can't see any benefit for you or for any one else but if you insist then I will answer you in a wide and specific way according what happen there, so is your call. That sounds very much like a threat. My question is, are you sure you want me to talk about things from my perspective as well? |
Gentlemen,
Let's stick to the facts.
The object of this discussion is that the PC-1 did not live up to everybody's expectations. Well i disagree, however, if you think about it, nothing ever lives up to the hype!
Why else would we be changing so often or even having this discussion.
Nothing is perfect.
In the case of the PC1, in the correct arm and in the right system, it
can solve a lot of problems and add serious value. It's bass response can augment systems that are lacking in this area and it's speed brings otherwise lackluster of lifeless systems alive. Let's be honest, this is what it is all about matching the right components to minimize system weakness and achieve the correct balance.
In my system with the Technics Sp 10 MkIII/Sme312s, i watched this cartridge improve weekly. When first installed, I compared it to my reference, the Garrard 301/Triplanar/Xv1s, and felt the PC-1 system was lacking in refinement, transparency and naturalness. Now after putting hours on this combination, I can see it breaking in and doing things the other system doesn't.
On large orchestral works, in my system in a very large room, I appreciate the added body and weight of the PC-1. On Blue Note jazz works, I appreciate the speed and dynamics over the XV1s setup.
Whereas, the XV1S syetem, excells on chamber music, solo voice and smaller works like solo piano that benefit from its refinement and naturalness, I can see where the PC-1 has it's strength and place.
IMO it boils down to system requirements, music preferences and room accoustics plus time to properly run in. This last comment is often overlooked by all of us causing us to jump to invalid conclusions. |
Dear Raul, I read with interest and some surprise your comments above regarding the fact that you were disappointed in the PC-1 because of the price/performance ratio. You stated that at half its retail price (i.e., ~$3,000) you would rate the PC-1 as "good". In view of this statement, how are we (or how am I) supposed to take your comments on the many MM cartridges that you've been very enthusiastic about? None of them cost more than a few hundred dollars, at most. Am I to assume that you would not review those cartridges nearly as favorably if they were priced up there with the latest MC types? Prior to this, I was of the opinion that your critiques were formulated without regard to cost. If we're talking about price vs performance, then a typical out of production MM cartridge would be competitive, even if it's absolute performance level were very mediocre in relation to the latest and most expensive models. Please clarify. |
Raul,
Taking shots at Albert, based on one nights listening, is pointless. That you still harbor ill-will after taking offense at someone's honest opinion, does you a disservice. You've turned this into a pointless argument that Albert tried to avoid. However, you keep bringing it up.
Albert correctly points out that the crossover had only a few hours on it, that the signal caps are teflon, and teflon caps take hundreds, if not several thousand hours to completely break in. It's my understanding that Dan at RTI has empirical evidence that caps break in. He can watch a cap break in over hours with an oscilloscope. The 'scope doesn't lie. Further, Dan states that teflon caps take much longer to break in than polypropylene caps. There are physical and chemical changes that occur in ALL capacitors.
The root of the problem here is that you swoop in with a transistor preamp, try to warm it up in a couple hours (after it's been in a jet, cold, moved around, etc..), insert it into a completely foreign system, and expect it to perform to its potential. A better approach is forwarding the preamp some days/weeks earlier, allowing the unit to be run continuously for enough time that the unit settles in/warms up, and giving the host enough time to make system tweaks that will maximize the combination. As an aside, I've never had ANY solid state piece that didn't sound slightly hard/aggressive/sterile for the first several hours (usually four hours, with more gradual improvement the following day). I would imagine, based on my experience, that your preamp is no different. Also, moving around interconnects seems to somehow disturb them. I know that will sound like audiophile nonsense to some, but I've heard it. The act of plugging in your preamp disturbs the cable geometry/crystal structure, etc.. of the cables.
Nobody there disrespected you, jumped up and down screaming that the Aesthetix was better or even offered an opinion. Let's face facts here: Albert's entire system is based around the Aesthetix. Everything from tube choices in the power amps, to speaker positioning, to turntable tuning, to isolation, to tweaks, to cable choices were based on the Aesthetix being in the system. Even without the preamp switch, the system was not its usual self. The aforementioned new crossover was already causing problems in the system, not to mention that Albert was using 12sn7 instead of the 12sx7 which is what he usually uses (he was using the 12sn7 as a break-in tube to save the hard to find 12sx7). Now, I'm not saying the system sounded bad, but that it now sounds a good bit better after the crossover had a chance to break in.
It is my understanding that your preamp was rather new, with only a couple hundred hours. I've always heard major improvements with transistor equipment after many hundreds of hours--from cheap CD players to extremely expensive transistor pieces.
Those of us who were there didn't like the changes after swapping in your preamp. Why does that disturb you? It was a preamp with a few hundred hours on it, that had been on a freakin' jet earlier in the day, put into a system optimized around a totally different sounding preamp, with a brand new crossover with teflon caps, and all of it done with no chance to allow any tweaking/adjustments. It's no wonder that it didn't sound as good to us. It had no real chance, and that is your problem. It's possible that the thing was damaged because it wasn't working when it showed up at Louis' house, or at least that's my understanding of the night's events. When you asked Albert's honest opinion, and the opinion's of those others of us who were gathered there that night, the opinions were given without malice, disrespect or ill-will. YOU never gave YOUR PREAMP a fighting chance under the conditions.
Another thing I find improbable is your assertion that you know how a system sounds after just a few hours. It took 3 or 4 listening sessions at Albert's house to appreciate what is special about his system. Even though the system didn't sound as good as it usually did that night, it still beats the hell out of my system and 99.5 percent of the other systems I've heard. You're making a snap judgment based on 3-4 hours of listening. I don't know of ANY reviewer or audiophile who claims that he knows what a system or component sounds like after such a short period. You usually need to go through dozens of recordings to hear everything a system can and can't do. Albert's system is better than mine. Listening to it has made me a better reviewer/listener, and allowed me to better hear changes in my system. I've only heard three other systems that are as good as, or maybe better, than Albert's current system. Two had huge full range 'stats and the other had huge full range ribbons.
Raul, none of us have said that your preamp sucked. We just didn't like it as much as the Aesthetix, a design that's been perfected over several years, and happens to cost even more than your preamp. Your preamp did beat a more expensive tube design that was briefly in that system some time back, so this has nothing to do with tubes versus transistors.
I wish you peace. Please let the episode drop and learn from it. Criticism, when honest, is the only way to objectively improve the performance of a design. The designer/builder/owner is usually too involved to see possible flaws that would be apparent to a non-involved party.
By the way, hearing the AirTight and the Koetsu in the same system on the same night was eye opening. The PC1 is the absolute cleanest cartridge I've heard. It makes most records sound more like tape than a piece of plastic with a groove in it. The frequency response is super extended and very flat. Dynamics are superb. On the other hand, it is VERY demanding of the matching tonearm (the 312S is maybe even more spectacular, in an unspectacular way, than the PC1). Further, the high output with low impedance is a challenge to properly load. Some phono stages won't have the necessary flexibility to take advantage of the PC1.
With deepest respect,
Phillip Holmes
www.dagogo.com |
Dear Albert and friends: Please don't panic!.
As Logenn very clear and precise states: the main subject is the PC-1 not Albert's system ( he knows very clear my overall opinion and I know his opinion too ) or any one else system.
As Logenn point out and I always said nothing is perfect and is system/room/time dependent and according the choose on each person trade-offs.
The fact that you and your friends agree on the PC-1 is ok with me that does not change what were my experiences on the PC-1 in five different system ( including mine/yours ).
Normally in a group like the one you belong that things happen: there are a general agreegment on some subjects many times under friendly " presure ".
In the other side you have the Thomasheisig group that think the PC-1 is not so good like you think.
Mobilholmes: I respect your opinion but you don't have not only the whole facts but even the right facts on everything you posted. Example : day before that night you speak I was hearing for many hours the Albert's system even we made some changes in the set up inlcuding load impedance in the Aesthetix.
In everything that I speak with Albert at his place and on email I never " touch/compare " the Essential 3160 for the good or bad, the Essential never been a subject for my opinion.
The ones that " touch " my preamp were both of you when told me that its sounds is better than the Messenger one and even the AR: these were your words.
There are many other things that are unknow to you so your opinion is a lightly one.
Anyway like I posted: in the differences are the answers and the way to learn.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Yes, on the MM subject ( and some MC " old " ones ): +++++ " critiques were formulated without regard to cost.... " ++++++
In the PC-1 I take it in that way because that's are the very high prices on the today MC cartridge market but if I put against MM top performers IMHO maybe it could be two " roads ": one bring the PC-1 to the MM price or to carry the MM to the MC price level.
In the second case and speaking of quality performance/price ratio some MM could be easy on price level similar to top MC ones.
IMHO I think that several of those " old " and some today MM cartridges are really a bargain and the best time to buy it because maybe in the future you can't find them at those very low prices and that " price growing evolution " fact we can see it with some MM today cartridges like the Grado and Cartridge Man Music Maker, so it already starting about.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Logenn: +++++ " On large orchestral works, in my system in a very large room, I appreciate the added body and weight of the PC-1. On Blue Note jazz works, I appreciate the speed and dynamics over the XV1s setup. " +++++
IMHO one of the strong point on the XV-1s has to do with dynamics and your statement makes me think more a tonearm/cartridge subject ( of course that could be many other things. ) that a stand alone cartridge one.
Do you already try the XV-1 with the SME and the PC-1 with the Triplanar?, it could be ineresting how makes/change/performs on that one.
Could you do it an share your findings here?
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul,I love ya,but you're starting to lose me(a little) here!! -:) |
Logenn,
About the XV1s, if you can get hold of an Audiocraft AC3300 tonearm with the s-shaped armtube, please give it a go. In my experience, it also benefits from the use of a magnesium universal headshell. In this set up, I think that the dynamics and overall performance of the XV1s will more than surprise you. It is simply a phenomenal cartridge and I believe you have a hidden treasure just waiting to be unearthed.
Good luck and happy listening |
Raul,
To date, I have not switched the arm cartridge relationship, as I was
listening to the recommendations from others at audiogon who have had success with these set ups.
I will need a little time, but this could prove to be interesting to contrast
the performance differences.
I will report back in a few weeks.
thanks. Louis |
Dgob,
This is a shift into a completely different direction.
Essentially, you are suggesting that a uni-pivot arm as having better dynamics than a fixed on the XV1S. This is contrary to what I would have thought. From my earlier experience with a Naim Aero and a Graham 2,2, they both were lively and airy but lacked the foundation and bass of a fixed pivot arm.
Why the s tube vs the straight one? Is the s shaped tube designed for low or medium compliance cartridges?
regards. Louis |
Dear Louis: Great and I agree with you: that will be interesting.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Phillip and/or Albert,
I particularly picked up on the glowing 312s comments!
Especially with regards to how it impacts the PC-1,"and" I'm hearing Albert no longer prefers the Walker!
So being the busy-body I am(and while I am still "reeling")I doubt I'll get a good night's sleep until I have answers -:)
Don't force me to go to the water board!!
Very interesting!From my own personal interest point of view,could you elaborate?
This is just enthusiastic curiosity on my part.Nothing more.
Best |
Dear Logenn: +++++ " Why the s tube vs the straight one? " +++++
the S tube is a removable headshell design and this permit/help to choose different headshells ( weight/build material, shape, etc, etc ) to test trying to match a cartridge to the tonearm to achieve a top quality cartridge performance.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul,
That makes perfect sense.
thanks. Louis |
Logenn,
Excuse the delay but I've been away and only just seen the response. Anyway, Raul's point is correct but apart from the fact that you can experiment with the set up the AC3300 is a double points oil damped tonearm and just about brings the XV1s to a new and exciting place.
I've tried my XV1s with a Lustre GST-801, a silver wired Ikeda IT-407, a Morch DP-6 ((red point) and the Audiocraft AC3300. I used the shorter s-shaped armwand and a Nagaoka magnesium headshell on the AC3300 and it simply rocks. If opportunity allows, I would strongly recommend this combination - although Raul got excellent results from this set up only using a Denon headshell. My XV1s is down and awaiting repair at the moment but I've now obtained a Denon headshell and hope to try this combination when I get the opportunity.
Good luck and happy listening |
Deare Dgob: Despite the AC-3300 dual points it is a unipivot tonearm and like every unipivot tonearm it is a oil damped one.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Dear Raul,
Thanks although my description did not intend to question either fact! My statement was meant to be read as: "yes it is a unipivot (given in the arms formal definition) and it does perform well on the XV1s". That was my point and the reason why the suceeding paragraph went on to support the only contention of my response: i.e., the AC3300 works well with the XV1s.
I always confess to limited technical interest and/or knowledge but not quite to that length! Thanks for your ongoing help though!8>) |
Dear friends: This is a very interesting information about the effect loading impedance on MM cartridges, this link comes to me from Maxson that's a fellow Agoner:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/load_the_magnets_e.html
and in this example we can learn that 47K could be not the best one but 75K or over this value along a low capacitance value too.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul,
What is your favorite arm for your Colibiri? Also, what version do you have? Am I remebering right? Got a Breuer which I currently love. Works wonderful w. the Titan I. More dynamic then the Schroder but missing a tiny bit of the magic. In the end they are equal but in terms of ease of use the Breuer is fabulous. |
Dear Dgad: It is a very low weight: 2.5gr. and low output: 0.22mv. Sumiko MDC 800 ( a Breuer's copy ) and in the AC 3300 from Audiocraft too.
The Colibri is a lovely performer.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Mine is too wide for the Breuer unless I change the pivot to stylus distance. I will tri it soon. I had it in the Phantom. Great bass & dynamics but no magic. Now finally well set in the SQ. Highs are magnificent. Mids too. Bass is a bit less dynamic then with Phantom. I still think Titan I is in same class. Is the AC3300 similar to Phantom?
|
Dear Dgad: Yes in some build design both tonearms are similar.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Hello from germany, i use two Supex SD 901 SuperE, one in
a wood body. Which cartridge will be increase the sound
quality in case off more resolution? I use Tonearms as:
STAX UA9N, Sony PUA 286, Fidelity Research FR 24 MK II,
SAEC W 308N and HELIUS Aureum II.
The last two Tonearms i will let go.
I'm looking for Supex SDX 2002 Ruby, SUPEX SDX 1100B or FR 1 mk3f( silver)or FR-7, maybe Technics MM? I have a Technics SP-10 Projekt with 2 diff. Tonearmbord locations
on the plinth, for each location 5 boards. I use PARAGON 12 Preamp. and SCOTT LK 150 Tube Poweramp. with self designed and built TRANSMISSIONLINES.
Best Regards, Wolfgang
|
