Fidelity Research cartridges

Hi Charlie, Welcome by the FR-7 club. For all second hand FR

components check: www.hifishark.com 

Hi Charlie, I would like to extend my ''welcome'' to Ikeda 9,

the cantileverless kind. My first impression is that this cart is

at least as good as FR-7fz which I consider as the best from

the 7 series. To me this means ''the best ever''. The proviso is

of course the ''subjective impression''. But I am very much surprised

by the fact that there is hardly any info about this cart. Considering

the ''fuss'' about  Decca even more strange. Assuming the right

phono-pre and tonearm (aka FR-64/66) one can end his search

for ''the best''  and spend his time listening to the music with those

two carts. Anyway this is my (subjective) opinion. I am of course

curious if there are others with Ikeda 9 experience?

Addition. Sorry ddriveman I forget your ''short shoot-out...''

I hope you deed find the right headshell-wire for your Ikeda 9?

My question is if your Coralstone is still your favourite?

Chakster, That is how ''general opinion'' works. One does not

believe his own eye in order to follow the so called ''custom''.

I looked many times to my sample and assumed that a former

owner retipped the original ''conical'' with ''line contact'' stylus.

However in contradistinction to you I was more intriqued with

the question why Mitch Cotter has chosen FR-7f for his celebrated

TT and even made his own SUT for the precious? But my wondering

was based on two assumptions which may be not true. The first

was the conical stylus and the second that FR-7fz sounds much

better. Besides the ''fz''' has more ''modern'' stylus and has more

admirer than the ''f''. I  obviously followed the convention  by

which ''more admirers'' means that they are right in the sense of

majority rule (grin). I consider my FR-7fz as one of my best carts,

second to none, and still wonder how this can be possible with

a cart from the 80is? BTW Dertonarm advised me 10 years ago

to try one of those FR-7 kinds but I was very reluctant to  do so

because I thought that I would need separte SUT for each of

my MC carts (+40). When I got my Denon AU-S1 which covers

 2-40 Ohms I bought more Ikeda's carts instead of  SUT's.

r,

Hi Chakster, Yes Axel retired and sold his ''shop'' to his assistent.

He got some curious illness (not a stroke) and lost command of

his left hand. But he was already around 70 so deserved retirement.

I moved to Expert Stylus in UK while British GBP lost value in

relation to euro like dollar deed (grin). Those who predicted the

end of euro are very silent now.

Dear chakster, I am not the right person to give you advice about

phono-pres but I own two highly regarded samples: Basis Exclusive

(gold) with battery power supplay and Klyne 7 PX 3.5 which is

praised even by Raul . That is to say one of the few next to his own

(grin). Considering your extended interest and not so extended

means I would recommend Klyne which can be obtained with

modest means. Typical pre for your experimetal nature because

the pre has 4 amplification stages (from 40 till 68 dB) as well

''high frequency contour'' by which each MC cart can be corrected

in its resonance region . Besides there are loading recommendatios

by which 47 K plays important role.

For this pre you should check regular the German HIFI market

(aka ''audio-markt.de'').  

The ''paradox'', the more one read the more one forget. The less

one read the less one forget... I have read this thread at least

5 time but discovered many valuable contribution by my present

reading. I obviously forget what Dertonarm, Carr and other has

to say. I hope that chakster will be as impressed with his FR-7f

as I was with my first FR-7.

Dear chakster, There is a thread or post written by ddriveman

by the title ''mimi shout out....'' in which he describes comparison

between 5(?) MC carts done with 3 friends. In short (grin)

you will be pleased with the outcome of ''your contender'' :

ex aequo Koetsu Coral stone and FR-7fz.

Dear edgewear, My question was why the most Japanese tonearms

producer followed Stevenson geometry. As you probably know

according to Japanese culture it is ''not done'' to deviate from , say,

national customs. Then there is this curious FR-702 with assumption

that this ''model'' is made for European market. But this cart has

shorter cantilever than other from the FR-7 series. I even assume

that experiments with shorter cantilever was a kind of evolution

to the cantileverless kinds. It may be also the case that Ikeda

deed not consider tonearm geometry as very important issue.

Nobody has to my knowledge claimed to hear something special

by whatever ''0'' points by those tractors. BTW I own about 3000

classical records but only few of them have the ''inner groove''

near the spindle. This may be the reason for the ''bad reputation''

of Stevenson (?). 

Ikeda's tonearm geometry versus FR-7 series cartridges.

Nobody ever explained why the most Japanese tonearms

followed  Stivenson geometry. As is well known(?) the FR

64/66 as well the new  Ikeda 's can be adjusted to Bearwald

by changing the spindle- pivot distance to 231,5 mm with

246 mm effective length. But then the integrated headshell

by FR-7 kinds does not provide for ''effective length'' change.

Some Japanese MM carts with integrated headshells do have

such provision. As my comrade Don informed me about his

Supremo cantileverless kind also has such provision by

its integrated headshell. At ''the end'' of the headshell there

are two small screws by which one can move the stylus forward

and back for the needed distance.

My FR-7 fz sample was modify by Van den Hul to Bearwald

geometry in addition to boron cantilever and Van den Hul

(aka ''Geiger'') stylus.

@edgewear, You changed my ''point'' about ''0'' points on the

record radius. I stated that nobody has claimed to have heard

something special by those ''0'' points: ''so it seems that some

people do hear something special when the ''0'' points are set

to Bearwald''. This however is different statement. Bearwald

geometry means that other radius on the record is optimal

then Stevenson. Stevenson nearer to the spindle , Bearwald

across the radius. Your statement is about relation between

the (two) points which determine the geometry my about individual

points regardless of  the geometry.