Dear endgewear, Ikeda produced at least 4 different tonearms.
To know if he was consistent one should know geometry of
each of them. I do remember ( vague) that some Russian cart
producer uses ivory for his cart bodies . The ''theory'' seems
to be based on acoustic properties of, say, ''bones'' . I think that
I have some ''hammer'' mede from bone in my ear. But this is
my limited medical knowledge. Besides I have seen so many
different materials for the bodies , even naked (aka without body)
kinds that I have no idea what or whom to believe(grin). Alas I
sold all other FR-7 kinds except FR-7 fz. So no chance to check. Besides I moved on to those cantileverless kinds with 9 REX as my latest purchase.
|
Dear Nandric,
Agnostic? Yes. Dogmatic? Hell no! But I do own 4 different FR-7 types, including the MC-702 which I regards as FR-7. I suppose this borders on ’religious’ or at least on being a strong believer. So I’m ’allowed’, thank goodness. 😋
On visual inspection the cantilever of the MC-702 doesn’t appear to be any shorter. This can be deceptive, but it is confirmed by the fact that it exactly hits the three ’o’ points of the Stevenson alignment on the Feickert protractor, just like the other three. I’m not at all suggesting Ikeda was ’dogmatic’, but he definitely was consistent.
As for that elusive Miyabi Ivory, I’ve actually seen it for sale twice this past years. Once on eBay by a Russian seller and once here on Audiogon by grgaudio, as part of a Miyabi ’wholesale’ with all the incarnations except the MoFi Carbon. I was outbid on eBay and the asking price of grgaudio was too steep for me at that time, but the Ivory is still on my radar......
|
I don't believe Ikeda himself was as dogmatic as our friends
chakster and edgewear. I am not sure about other FR- 7kinds
but I owned this ''rare'' FR-702. According to Syntax this one
is made for European market. I am also not sure about that but
well that this one has shorter cantilever than the rest. In one
of my contribution I even guessed that this was his ''evolution''
to cantileverless series 9 C. The number 702 is mysterious but
not its looks. This cart looks exactly the same as other FR-7
kinds.
|
So I can't wait till I find whatever about this ''mysterious'' Takeda '' Ivory'' cart. Next to your impressive cart collection you also have many carts pictures so I hope also Ivory?
@nandric this is the only Miyabi Ivory picture i can find. Art Dudley has mentioned this model in his review from the late 90’s. BTW The Miyabi MCA looks completely different. @edgewear I did try the Baerwald geometry with other (adjustable) cartridges, but I don’t hear the sonic benefits compared to Stevenson, so I decided to stick with Ikeda’s original specifications in all cases. right, me too |
edgewear, Being dogmatic is only ''allowed'' if you are strong
believer in whatever religion . There are not many carts with
fast headshells. The most can be adjusted in their headshell
to whatever geometry ( aka eff. length). Even Dertonarm used
his FR-7fz with Bearwald geometry. But I am not sure about
Syntax about whom I don't dear to guess.
|
Dear chakster, I am not as patient as you are . So I can't wait till I
find whatever about this ''mysterious'' Takeda '' Ivory'' cart. Next
to your impressive cart collection you also have many carts pictures
so I hope also Ivory?
|
Yes, it’s unforgivable to divert attention away from the FR-7, isn’t it? 😉
Getting back on the right - uh - track, changing the P2S distance of the FR-64S (or FX for that matter) when using the FR-7 is not a very good idea.
With P2S distance at 230mm you get perfect Stevenson alignment (the stylus ’hits’ all three ’o’ points on the Feickert protractor). This is clearly what Ikeda had intended. Changing to 231.5mm changes the geometry of the tonearm to Baerwald, but it will not be possible to align the FR-7 to this geometry. At least not according to the Feickert protractor. With the fixed headshell arrangement of the FR-7 there’s no way to adjust this.
I did try the Baerwald geometry with other (adjustable) cartridges, but I don’t hear the sonic benefits compared to Stevenson, so I decided to stick with Ikeda’s original specifications in all cases. |
I knew you will say it, haha
sorry |
And here was me being complained at for comparing a Benz lps to and fr7-f to purchase 😉 |
Thanks for sharing your observations! I assumed these were all technically identical to the Miyabi Standard. But I did notice that Krell had two different model numbers, which suggests there might have been some slight sonic differences. I also noticed that the shape of the body of the various Levinson brands is slightly different than the body of the Krell models and the Miyabi Standard. But I guess these were all just variations on the same theme. And what a theme......
As for other versions, I remember there was also one with a carbon fiber body made for Mobile Fidelity. I'd be curious to hear the influence of the different body material. One reviewer also mentions Klipsch as one of the incarnations, but this is incorrect.
I've seen pictures of the 47Labs model, but that's a rather ugly plastic job compared to the others. The rare Ivory on the other hand looks gorgeous. Apparently this was the first Miyabi model.
Probably the closest one can get to the sound of the Miyabi Standard from a new cartridge is the Fuuga, a concious attempt to resurrect Takeda's creation.
|
@edgwear I’d be interested to know if the cartridges Takeda built for other brands like Mark Levinson, Cello, Red Rose an Krell are identical to either of these three he produced under his own Miyabi banner.
I own the Mark Levinson MLC-1, which as far as I know was the first cartridge he made (at least of the ones mentioned here). It is a magnificent performer and certainly one of the most musical cartridges I’ve ever had the pleasure to hear. But I can’t help wondering if any of the later models are even better. Did anyone here ever compare them? Red Rose, Krell, Cello, Mark Levinson = Miyabi Standard. It is basically the same cartridge. There was one more incarnation of this model, i forgot the name. Miyabi MCA is different model from the same era, it is a vintage Miyabi handmade by Takeda San in Japan. This is obscure model ! Later he made Miyabi 47 exclussively for 47 Labs aka Sakura Systems, this model is different from earlier Miyabi MCA. I have only Miyabi Standard and Miyabi MCA in my collection. |
|
parrotbee, I am not pedantic but one need to discriminate between
FR-64 and FR-64 S.''S'' standing for ''steel''. FR-64 , to be recognised
by round lateral balans, has aluminum ( arm) wands. The 231.5 pivot to spindle distance change original Stivenson geometry to Bearwald. The eff. length then become 246 mm. I ordered Mint
tractor for my FR-64 S despite the fact that I can adjust eff. length
with an (plastic!) caliper.
|
edgewear, Levinson actually discovered Takeda and ordered all
''his'' models by Takeda which he sold under his own name. Krell
deed the same so, obviously, Levinson deed not own ''exclusive
rights''. All those carts were Miyaby Standard. Thanks to Levinson
Takeda become ,uh, known ''san''. He then started his own production with the name Miyaby. I am not familiar with chakster
MCA nor the ''third kind'' which he produced later.
|
I'm going to make a couple of armboards for my FR64. Can I just ask. is the 231.5 pivot to spindle length for all cartridges - or for the FR7? or do I need a hole mounted at 230mm? I'm curious because the FR64 instructions have the length at 230mm.
On the issue of alignment - I currently have a clearaudio gauge which I understand is actually a different alignment to Bearwald, Lofgren et al. So what protractor would I get? mint? Wally? anything else?
|
Would those three be the Ivory, MCA and Standard?
I'd be interested to know if the cartridges Takeda built for other brands like Mark Levinson, Cello, Red Rose an Krell are identical to either of these three he produced under his own Miyabi banner.
I own the Mark Levinson MLC-1, which as far as I know was the first cartridge he made (at least of the ones mentioned here). It is a magnificent performer and certainly one of the most musical cartridges I've ever had the pleasure to hear. But I can't help wondering if any of the later models are even better. Did anyone here ever compare them?
|
Dear chakster, Are you some kind of masochist? How can you
resist to try out your Miyabi standard AND Ikeda 9. III?
|
If I am well informed Takeda-san made 3 carts the
best among them is called ''Miyabi Standard''.
I have it too, but did not tried yet as my Miyabi MCA is a stunning performer. |
Dear chakster (only teasing) By FR-64 S there is an extra weight but
lighter than standard; 170 g versus 250 g. I see that by FR-fx the
case is the other way round. Probably to compensate for aluminum
construction(grin). If I am well informed Takeda-san made 3 carts the
best among them is called ''Miyabi Standard''.
|
Anything between 8 - 15 Hz is ok, it is not necessary to have 8Hz resonance freq, more like 10-12Hz in theory.
The FR-64s and 64FX are two flagship models designed by Ikeda-San, both are perfect match for his flagship cartridges such as FR-7f and FR-7fz. The only difference is the optional W-250 counterweight for 64fx arm which is a must have for use with FR-7 series of cartridges.
There are long versions of both arms made.
I am using FR-7fz on my 64fx with W-250 counterweight and N-60 nut.
and i have not mounted yet my FR-64s with B-60 base and with IKEDA 9 III cartridge.
However, my current favorite is Miyabi cartridge by Takeda-San on Lustre GST-801 tonearm. |
S4 headshell with which FR 4S was sold weights 14,5 g (or it was supplied with 19 g headshell???)
So
if
roughly to evaluate FR-64S + 7f :
35-14,5+30=50,5 eff mass, g
So if to go further and to compute desired resfreq [Hz] 9 - we are getting if to use 11 cu --> 28,4 g tonearm (Total)Effective Mass needed[gr] ; or roughly 35 grams tonearm eff mass needed in case of 8
desired resfreq [Hz]
It seems that there are owners here in Audiogon of 64S + 7f or 7fz --> have you tested with test record lateral resonance frequency in your system? Could you please post here results?
|
Confusion about effective mass by FR-64 s is caused by
assumption of ''given eff. mass''. But eff. mass depends from
the used headshell as well the used counterweight. Not
to mention carts weight.
|
ohh, i see
not sure why we discuss benz in Fidelity Research thread ?
Completely different cartridge!
Yes i do believe in the compliance figure given @100Hz
It will be about 11 cu @ 10Hz which is pretty low compliance
|
Question was about Benz and FR.
7f and 7fz looks the same from compliance point of view.
Although do you believe in these compliance figures?
If to multiply compliance of given for 7f roughly by 2 in order to get 10 hz data we are getting 14 cu.
|
@bukanona if tonearm is FR64 S version FR-7f will be better match.
in case of FR 64 fx both are good match. What do you mean? Could you explain in details why do you think one FR tonearm is better for certain FR-7 series cartridge than another ? For FR-7f or 7fz we must have optional W-250 counterweight for 64fx toneam for optimal performance in terms of tonearm effective mass. As you can see in this catalog the compliance of both FR-7f and FR-7fz is the same, tracking force is the same too. The 64s has a higher effective mass and made of steel while the 64fx has lighter effective mass and with default (smaller) counterweight was designed for cartridges like PMC-3 for use on conventional headshell, or any other cartridges with higher compliance and lighter weight. |
Yes it is a lottery.
Although 35 grams of effective mass is a lot for majority of modern cartridges.
I don't own FR-F7f but my Ikeda 9 CV is low compliance. So low that I think it's close to Ortofon SPU and compliance figures are quite equal of of 6 CV and F7f at least on paper.
|
It is fr64s
my only fear is buying such an old cartridge...
i normally buy new carts ever since I got an OC7 with a wonky cantilever 16 years agos |
if tonearm is FR64 S version FR-7f will be better match.
in case of FR 64 fx both are good match.
|
I think that many prefer FR-7 fz above FR-7f. However FR-7f
is more easy to find. Considering its ''modest price'' you are very
lucky to get ''brand new LP-mr'' for similar price. Lucky b...
|
Yeah - the brand new LP-S
I can get them at a very 'reasonable price' which is comparable to an FR-7f - plus it will be new
Unlike the likes of many on Audiogon - I have to make choices between components.
I have heard a lot - particularly on this thread that the Fr-7f is a uniquely brilliant cartridge. Likewise I am told that the LPS is superb - truly self-effecting and neutral.
TBH - I'd ultimately like to have tried all the 'great' carts - one never gets to audition them. |
parrotbee, If you mean with ''brand new Benz LP-S the latest
version with micro ridge stylus and bronze insert (16,5 g) then
LP-S.
|
I am immune and ahhing between a brand new Benz LP-S and an fr7-f what say you - it’s to go with an fr64 on jvc ql10 |
was it pre-amp and step up? if so which pre-amp? It’s an interesting question, probably the SUT was connected to those big oldschool receivers (MM input), there are many of them. I’m not expert in vintage phono stages, but something like Pioneer Exclussive system was very expensive in the 80’s, looks cute and still popular. The headamp for MC in "Z system" looks like this. Preamp with MM input is C-Z1. And the power amps (monoblocks) from this series is here. Kind of a cute little system for a very high price @parrotbee I think in the USA at that time all those SUTs were connected to big and expensive Levinson and Krell preamps. If you will look at the FR catalof from the 80's you will see only this stuff. |
This is somewhat speculative, but my guess is that most of these 1980’s cartridges were designed and ’voiced’ with the use of step up transformers, being more common than MC phono stages (called ’head amps’ in those days). And in Japan they were always more popular than active devices , even to this day.
Most of these vintage MC cartridges will sound great using a modern high quality phono stage, provided you have some flexibility for setting impedance load and gain. But in my experience the low output low impedance types - like most of the FR models - give their best using a dedicated SUT.
|
While we are the topic of an old/vintage carts - what did they use as phono stages when the carts came out? was it pre-amp and step up? if so which pre-amp? |
There seems to be an interesting MC between his work for FR and starting Shelter. Apparently he released some cartridges under his own name somewhere in the 80's. I own the Ozawa OS-70L, which was part of a three model series with different cantilevers (aluminum, boron and ruby). This is one of those Japanese mystery MC's of which there's hardly any info. From what I've gathered these were built by Supex to Ozawa's specification. Fact or speculation I'm not sure, but it's a really nice sounding cartridge with more than a little resemblance to the Shelter 701, the first Shelter model. Coincidence?
|
Just curious what Ikeda fans thinking about those last FR cartridges designed by Ozwa Yasuo (founder of Shelter) in the 80's ? "Born in Tokyo. He was fascinated from boyhood by the timbre of music instruments and started self-designing audio products to realize high fidelity sound reproduction. He designed many tube amplifiers when he was in junior high school age, and majored in electrical engineering at the university with aiming an amplifier designer, but he found the charm of analog pickup which can practice the whole design of sound reproduction that he imagines. In 1982 he joined Fidelity Research (FR) and started its career as a phono cartridge designer. He participated to design MC phono cartridges of MCX-3, MCX-5 and other products during his work at FR. He then became independent in 1986 to establish Shelter, thereafter he has been designing and developing the MC phono cartridge throughout his life." |
Congratulations on two great decks and wonderful arm. The FR-7fz is far rarer than the FR-7f and consequently more expensive. If the stylus needs replacing on the FR-7f.....have it re-tipped with a nude Line Contact diamond pressure-fitted into the original aluminium cantilever if possible. I had my FR-7f done that way. My FR-7fz is NOS original. I find the extra cost for the 7fz hardly warranted but decide for yourself.... FR-7fFR-7fFR-7fzFR-7fzFR-7f vs FR-7fzGood luck 😉 |
I have an fr64 and either a jvc tt101 or Sony tts8000 for it. My question is are there any reputable people who have an fr7 and if so which one to get? If new stylus what type? I use expert stylus for re-tipping in the uk |
So guys I have my fr64 good to mount on either my TTS 8000 or jvc ql10/101. I am thinking about an fr7f - I take it that’s the one to buy - there are a few sellers out there - any recommendations?
|
Thank you Chakster! Invaluable contribution.
I have a few NOS FR MCs, but only two models. Alas, neither is included in the listings (FR1 Mk3F and MC201).
But that doesn't diminish the value of such a thorough listing, with hard-to-find reliable specs.
I'd also like to note that the suspensions on all my FR cartridges seem just fine. Unlike some (notably AKG) FR chose a durable material that doesn't significantly change with time. |
Recently discovered this vintage Fidelity-Research catalog from the 80’s. This is the best illustration of LOMC cartridges designed by Isamu Ikeda for Fidelity-Research. page with tonearms: FR-64fx, FR-64s, FR-66fx page with SUTs, headshells like RS-141, N-60 nut, W-250 counterweight and accessories ... page with Cartridges: FR-7fz, FR-7f, FR-7, PMC-3, FR-2, FR-1 mk3, FR-1 mk2, PMC-1 page with top of the line cartridges in order from the best models to lower models: FR-7fz, FR-7f, FR-7, PMC-3, FR-2, FR-1 mk3, FR-1 mk2, PMC-1 .... including MM models too. Looking at the specs for each cartridge in the catalog you see that PMC-3 is the closest to FR-7 series. But the PMC-3 has higher impedance, lower tracking force, lighter mass, higher compliance. There is a tiny difference in frequency response only at high register, but i can assure you that the bass is tight and the highs are crystal clear. Fidelity-Research PMC-3 has one serious advantage compared to the FR-7 series: the PMC-3 can be mounted on modern mid mass tonearms (on conventionel headshell). Fidelity-Research PMC-3 has its unique Air-Core Coil and Refined "Vital" Contact Line stylus. So the PMC-3 is more user friendly on wider range of tonearms than FR-7 series. |
Okay, sorry for my misunderstanding: "o" point taken!
|
@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.
|
@chakster I agree that the choices made by the tonearm/cartridge designer are the most important and should not be disregarded. The FR-7 have the Stevenson alignment as part of their design criteria and the sonic results speak for themselves.
@nandric I doubt if this choice has anything to do with Japanese culture. Various tonearm manufacturers chose their own alignment, using neither Baerwald nor Stevenson. Not just Sony, I know from experience that Pioneer and Audiocraft used their own alignments as well. So I'm not sure what national custom you're referring to. Innovation is impossible without deviation from the norm and I think we all agree that Ikeda was some innovator.
I've seen some heated debates on this forum about Stevenson versus Baerwald. The 'experts' all claim that Baerwald is way superior. So it seems that some people do hear something special when the 'o' points are set to Baerwald. I just don't.
|
This month i have PMC-3 mounted on Lustre GST-801 tonearm on FR RS-141 headshell with FR leadwires (Baerwald geometry) ... and Ortofon MC-2000 on its dedicated headshell with silver lead wires on Sony PUA-7 tonearm. Both on the same Luxman PD-444 turntable, both arms connected to Gold Note PH-10 phono stage with Signal Cable Silver Resolution phono cables (Xhadow RCA). It’s so cool that PH-10 inputs can be adjusted for two MC cartridges (like no other phono stage) !
Sony tonearm geometry is not Stevenson or Baerwald, it’s something Sony prodived with its own protractor that comes with the arm.
I use Baerwald for Lustre GST-801 with FR PMC-3 cartridge.
Two different cartridges, two different sound signature. Ortofon MC-2000 still have some sort of background noise which sounds like tape hiss when the music is off (+6db on Gold Note), but when the music is on this cartridge is very special.
Fidelity-Research PMC-3 on Lustre GST-801 is dead quiet with Gold Note PH-10 + PSU-10. On this particular tonearm and with FR-141 headshell this cartridge is much better than on Sony PUA-7. Very interesting. This cartridge is not so expensive as the ortofon MC-2000 and less problematic with gain. But i really like the sound signature of its Air-Core.
P.S. I must say i’ve never had a problem with Stevenson geometry and my FR-7fz sound is amazing on FR-64fx tonearm. I have no idea why FR-7 owners should worry about Stevenson geometry on FR tonearms. Ikeda designed them to be used with Stevenson. Cartridge/tonearm designer’s opinion is much more important for me. First thing to do is to follow the original instructions like it supposed to be.
|
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 (?).
|
The Stevenson alignment is generally regarded - on this forum and almost anywhere else - as inferior to Baerwald. Measurements seem to bear this out.
So why did one of the most revered cartridge builders stick to this inferior alignment? We would have to assume that Ikeda tried out all options before making his choice. Or was compatibility with SPU types perhaps one of his design objectives (SPU’s exactly fit the Stevenson alignment with FR-64 tonearms)?
My guess is that Ikeda was not of the ’compromising kind’ and must have had ’sound’ reasons for choosing this alignment. Obviously it’s impossible to make a comparison of both alignments with the FR-7, but I did try it with other cartridges without fixed headshell (using the FR-64 with either 230 mm or 231,5 mm spindle-to-pivot distance).
This remark will probably disqualify me as a serious listener, but I don’t find the Baerward to be sonically superior to Stevenson. If anything, the Stevenson has an edge in dealing with inner groove distortion. This is particularly helpful with classical music, as these composer guys usually liked to ’go out with a bang’.
So this question remains: was Ikeda a Wagnerite?
|
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. |
This is great to see all this information here from experienced users.
I just got a FR64s and FR 7f that I hope to assemble this week and try. I also have the Koetsu RSP that I will attempt to put on the arm with a Jelco headshell for now. I do have the lighter counterweight to use as an option as well.
|
