Dear Vetterone, The intention of my question was to get
advice reg. the purchase of the MFG 61. From your answer
I can conclude that you prefer to keep your knowledge for
yourself. I know that you are a kind of inventor but the
so called 'know how' in the context of the intellectual property
apply for your turntables and not carts. Or so I thought.
Regards, |
In an ordinal system like Glanz ranking order the numbers
on the carts express their place in this ranking. Consequently
the top of the Glanz carts is numbered as: 31, 51, 61 and 71.
As far as I know I am the only one who owns the 71. Sorry fellows. |
Dear Dgob, refering to 'hearing' will not do. We all hear
(normal hearing presupposed) in the same way. But in the
interpretation of what 'we hear' the whole brain (seems) to be involved.
My basic assumption is the difference between 'knowledge' and 'art'. Knowledge is about 'the truht' ( or 'the false'). The art is not easy to simplify. But we associate this with'feelings': the beauty, the taste, the culture,the aducation,etc.,etc. But it is not about 'the truht'.
I have some friends who are professional musician (Concert
Gebouw) and I never got an clue of what they are 'hearing'.
To my mind they should be able to 'hear' the difference between my gear from 20 years ago ($5000) and at present
($60.000). But non of them were interested in my gear. They
were interested in the 'interpretation' of some artist of some composition. I put some LP with Svjatoslav Richter on my TT and realized that this LP was the worst (in technical sence)of my collection. Their comment was :'Onbelievable ,never heard Beetohoven in such an way.'
Raul made some remarks about the 'sommelier' with 'delicate
taste' trying to explain what he means by 'the best'. To my mind he was refering to some kind of art that one can only obtain by experience,learnig,etc. For him of course the 'knowledge' and the 'technique' are a means to an end: 'the music'. But if you are an musician and he is not you will never speak the 'same lanquaqe'.Ie if our 'whole brain' is involved in listen to music there is no way we can reach much consensus.
Ragards,
Very |
Dear Dgob, that "the issue of 'art','knowledge' and 'truth'
are equally complex and aporetic" does not mean that we should confuse them. To me those aredifferent 'categories'.
But I am an 'Fregean guy' and you are, I assume, an Kantian kind of person. So I must underline that 'the art'
is not about the 'truth' in contradistiction to science.
Regards, |
Hi Dgob, You actually own your own thread. Are the answers
from Dgob to Dgob satisfactory? |
Dear Dgob, You should know that thinking (Urteilskraft by your beloved Kant) is mostly our wrestling with pro and contra arguments about some premise(s). This however may be called an 'invardly discussion'. It is not, uh, usual , to do such thinking in public. Ie stating questions in public and answering the same questions by yourself. The usual 'procedure' (proscripted or prescripted) is to put forward the result of the 'wrestling' or the conclusion(s) and then see what the OTHER have to say about that. I don't think that Raul was wrong with his interpretation of what I intended to say in the mentioned post.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, Like Lew I have never seen the G5 or G7 on any ebay (4)which I visit regular. Except the 51 MF and some other with the 'wrong nr.' which look to me similar to the Astatic MF versions ( 100,200 and 300). Is there any connection between the two producers that you know of? Can you recommend some other (obtainable) models ?
Regards,
|
Addendum, My assumption about possible connection between
the Astatic and the Glanz is even more strenghtened by
the folowing consideratios. I compared (visualy) my own
Astatic MF 200 with the pictures of the Glanz 51.They look to me like a twin. Besides both have the marking 'MF' on the corpus. Then 'Glanz' (shine) is an German word so probable the Japanese producer made this 'brand' for some German importer. I am not sure if 'Astatic' is a similar American 'brand' but on my cart there is this inscription: Conneaut, Ohio. Made in Japan for Astatic.
Well Raul is very 'astatic' about his Astatic MF 100 and (even more so?)about his MF 200. He also mentioned to me to have posted his MF 300 to Axel with some 'exotic' intentions. Ie : beryllium cantilever with the Gyger II stylus.
My own Astatic MF 200 has an Shibata stylus while the 300
has, according to the seller, an elliptical stylus. I have no idea what kind of cantilever/stylus combo the MF 100 has.
My wild quess is that Glanz 7 is the same cart as the Astatic MF 100 while Glanz 5 should be the same as Glanz 5.
If this is actually the case than it logicaly follows that Raul and Dgob have, uh, the same 'teste'. The 'mystery' solved by Nandric?
Regards, |
Addendum 2, Well according to the logic of identity 'everything is identical with it self'. According to some logician :' Glanz 5 = Glanz 5' is true because of the meaning. Aka 'analytic truth'. However I made an error. My intention was to state that Glanz 5 is the same as the Astatic FM 200.
Regards,
|
Dear Lew, Thanks to the fact that something was rotten in
Denmark we got a great literary work. However you should know that many carts in the same series share the same corpus (aka 'generator'). The Glanz 51 has the sufix 'E'
(aka 'elliptical) and should be 'the same', according to
Nandric, with MF 300 and not, as you wrongly assume,the MF 200. The MF 200 is a proud owner of an Shibata stylus. A big 'status' difference I should think. I also noticed that the 'model difference' is marked on the stylus and not on the corpus. The corpus of all of them (Glanz and Astatic) is marked with 'MF'.
My quess is that 'MF' should give the indication for the producer. Besides a Balkanes and certainly 'some' Serbian will never admit to be wrong in anything. The animosity
between Raul and Dgob should of course not count as proof of the contrary. I am a kind of proud with my discovery so it is really unsporty from my comembers to (be)grudge me
my success.
Regards,
|
Dear Lew, No need to apologize because the identity relation is inscrutable. Even Wittgenstein made a strong point by stating: 'for two things to say that they are identical make no sense and to say that everything is identical with it selfs says nothing'. Well we can do with 'equal' in the sense that you own the Triplanar and I also or that you own a poodle an I own the same dog. This of course does no mean that we are coowners of the same dog but rather that we own the same kind of a dog. In this sense the Glanz 51 'E' looks to me the same as my MF 200.
'The same' qua corpus because there is no way to see on whatever picture what kind of stylus is involved. Then,speaking about the styli. No one of us knows for sure
which kind of shape is 'the best'. What is 'best' for our records does no imply our 'ears'. However even Raul is obviously willing to make Axel rich with his 'mega order'
in terms of money for the exotic cantilevers and styli.
One can hardly qualify such kinds of decisions as 'rational' but well of course as wishful thinking.
I can also hardly believe that Dgob owns Raul's amplifier.
This must be something from the past in which we all liked
each other...I am very glad with the fact that no (identical) lady is involved in the dispute. Otherwise we would have one member less.
Regards, |
Well this thread become 'something totaly different':
it is now about who knows better. Nobody invited Vetterone
to demonstrate his knowledge so he obviuously invited him self. To surpass him I decided to check the German forums but to my big suprise as well as disappointment the Germans know even less than we do. Glanz was established in the 80is and despite some 'pushing' by two German HI-FI Magazines never get off the ground.Besides the German snobs (all of them) preferred Shure. More in particular the Shure
V15V. What some of them could remember was that Mitachy in
Japan produced the carts (with the known nomenclature labyrinth) while only 51 and 30 models are mentioned. So 'Glanz' (shine) 'shined' for about 1 year only. I am interested in the 'twin' brother or sister of the MF 200 of whatever 'brand' and would love to inform Raul with something like this: ''I got my MF 200 for 30 Euro, how much deed you pay for Axel's upgrade of your MF300?''
Regards, |
Dear Raul, There are also 'stand alone' Glanz carts so you
should not give up. But if both , the G5 and G 7 are 'integrated' I need to concentrate only on the 31 E or L?
BTW Vetterone asked Dgob about the styli as well about the
kind (mms or mf's) of his G5 /G 7 which imply that he is not familiar with those.Besides to be able to 'integrate' whatever cart in whatever headshell both are (pre)assumed to be 'stand alone' before the (re)union. Ie. it may be the case that the carts 'in' G5/G7 exsist as separate or 'stand alone' entity.
Dear Dgob, I hope you can answer all those questions. Considering the time that you spend on the 'subject' I am very optimistic. It is , I would think, much easier 'stuff' than Kant's Critic of the pure reason.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob,I borrowed the expression (and now) 'something
totally different' from some (hilarious) English comedians
while the part about Vetterone was inspired by my native
Balkan humor. You however changed the issue from 'who
knows better' in 'which cart is better'. But your own answer is, I should think, very predictable: there is no better one then G7. In contradistincition to Nandric
you borrowed the way to express yourself from Kant. Long,
complex sentences, but without a clear outcome. Ie I still have no idea if the 'stand alone' carts which are integrated in their respective headshells are to get as stand alone carts? You see those of us who don't own tonearms with removable headshell have no use for G7/G5 despite the fact that both may be the 'best there is'.To buy a separate tonearm for the purpose while the prospect to get any of both is so slim looks not very attractive to me. This argument of course does not apply for Raul but my suggestion to you is to tell Raul that the internal wire (aka 'tags') in those headshells are made from 100%
pure silver with gold coating. For the sake of argument as the phylosopher are used to say. I am sure Raul will then invent some other contra-arguments. Say the impossiblity to change the headshells which any true connoisseur can't
do without. Not even those from Australia (Henry is all well?).
Regards, |
Dear Henry, My arguments are 'in general', not reduced to
my subjective feelings and interest. Add to that the Balkan inclination to try to be funny at whatever cost. Btw I used the phylosophical way of speaking to explain my intentions: 'for the sake of argument'. You don't actually mean to refer to me in this context but to somebody else. Some Mexican perhaps? Ie I never stated anything against the 'integrated carts' but only considered possible problems by those who don't own tonearm(s) with
removable headshell ( I am a lawyer you know). I even provided Dgob with this strong argument for the 'integrated case '( 100% pure silver wire + gold coating). However you should also know that you can't use your beloved + upgraded FR 7 in some other, possible better headshell. I assume, but I may be wrong, that you deed not buy those 33 separate headshells for the esthetical reasons only? Not to mention rubber or metal rings for all the headshells which seem to add some extra 'finnesse' to the 'extracted'sound.
Glad to see your post of course but do we need to force you to contribute?
Regards,
|
Dear Dgob, Anyway no reason anymore to feel lonely. You
even got support from Australia. I was puzzled with the fact that the Glanz carts are so rare on the German ebay. My 'primary source'. Even thought that Glanz is not an German brand at all. But the fact that Glanz was established in the 80is may explain why. By lack of the more precise info I intend to look for the 71 L. Assuming
at least the 'similarity' with the Astatic MF 200. I agree with Raul that this one is relly, say, 'special'. As you can see I am not (anymore)so sure about the identity issue.
Regards,
. |
Dear Raul, I agree that stand alone carts are more convenient or practical but , first, the FR-7 have had such a huge magnets (Alnico?) which were impossible to fit in a stand alone model. But then we still have Ortofon SPU and EMT integrated. The last mentioned sells more integrated carts then stand alone models (JDS 5 and 6).
There is obviously still demand for such carts and there is
no way to argue against the demand. From the producer stand point of course.
Dear Henry, your contributions are always welcomme while
such a forum as our assumes ignorance. Even the science
assumes 'ignorance' as the start point for the knowledge.
Besides you can write for our regular MM thread. Ie no
excuses. There are no privileges for the Aussies.
Regards, |
Dear Raul, What I assumed reg. the FR-7 is that I quoted
J. Carr correctly . He called the FR-7 'big,heavy monster'
(FR 7 thread; 05-26-09).It is also a fact that FR-7 was never produced as stand alone cart. Why not? With your own 'foundations' you should be able to answer the question. You also dismissed Ortofon SPU and EMT with a very strange 'foundation' : for some silly Japanese? Both carts are still produced so obviously there is demand for them. I don't believe that those who buy them care very much for your arguments. BTW from the same FR-7 thread I 'deduced' that you are pretty fond of this integrated cart? My own objection is that they are impractical . That is to say impractical for me. Everyone else is free to think what he likes.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, Because your thread , as I already mentioned,
become 'who knows better' our beloved Henry decided to
move your thread to the right place: the MM thread.
I love the guy and will follow. As you know my beloved Frege was obsessiv about 'foundations' so I, as a good student, will try to question some of Rauls 'foundations'. He, it seems, is also very fond of 'foundations' but thinks that his are the only 'right one'. This of course is a very strong indication that he 'knows better' and that is and was my point. No more 'shine' alas for your Glanz as separate thread.
Regards, |
Dear Raul, this thread is moved to our regular MM thread.
I have no idea why you count me as 'proponent' of the integrated carts? I owned just one, the FR-7, but never used the thing. I am on your side in this dispute but my
reason is not connected with the performance but with the lack of practicality in my case.
Regards, |
Does anyone knows anything about the Glanz MFG 61?
This one I can buy from some Italian seller.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, The only possibility to get this remarcable G7 is to rob someone who owns this treasure and the only such a person I know is...
Till then, |
Dear Vetterone, I hope you will like this one:
Lawyer 1: 'colleaque your case is hopeless'.
Lawyer 2: 'dear colleaque a case is only hopeless if the
client is not able to pay'.
Thanks for your 'second opinion' . BTW I nearly wrote to Vidmantas to complain about you.
Regards, |
Dear Lew, There are at least two interpretations possible.
But you can be assured that your Slavic brother is not involved in the worst case scenario. He was never attorney.
I realy hope that this is of any help. The problem is that
this Vetterone provoke me which btw is very easy to do with
any Balkanese. I even considered to complain about him by
Vidmantas assuming that Vidmantas is also his friend. But
considering his kind of humor I doubt if he has any friend at all.
Besides who wants a TT addict as friend? BTW how many TT's
do you own?
Regards, |
Dear Isochronism, Your verbal construction is wishful thinking. You should construct something more convincing.
Say: if we were brave enough to commit our revenge by ourself we will not need attorneys.
Regards, |
'Tho'? There are foreinger in our forum you know.Besides why do you think that innocence needs defence? What kind of defence do you have in mind: religious or criminal? |
Dear Dgob, I was suprised with Vetterone advice because
I thought that the higher numbers imply higher ranking.
Even more suprising is the price for the MG 70: 1495 GBP.
To be honest I have difficulty to believe this.However in
the nomenclature I have the Glanz series consist of MFG
31/51/61 and 71. So it may be the case that MG 70 is a
'different animal'. I expect to get today from Italy:
Krell mc 100 (aka Takeda's Miyabi Standard) and Sony XL
88. The same Italian seller promissed to post some pictures
of his MFG 61 but, alas, he lives in Nord Italy where two
earthquakes happened. He is well but needs to help his
friends who where less lucky ( homes damaged).
So my quess is that I will get this cart within 10 days or
so.
Regards,
m |
Dear Dgob, Not sure if Vetterone will react on your invitation. This will depend on his sense for humor. That is to say if he likes the Balkan kind. I now understand why you are so desperate to convince all of us about the superiority of your G7. For such kind of money some are willing to kill. Meanwhile I received the Italian packet.
The Krell MC 100 looks fantastic and as a twin brother or suster of the Miyabi Standard. Takeda also produced the same cart for Levinson (MLC10) and Cello. My advice: look for those. The Sony XL 88 looks poor in comparison but this regards
only the looks. Thuchan however is very fond of this cart and ensured me big suprise. I wrote to the Italian seller that I received his carts and now hope that he will also say something about the MFG 61.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob&Vetterone (?), There is a problem with 'my'
Glanz. The box is from the MFG 61 but inside the box
there is a 'new animal': Glanz 1 G -55 a. I always hope to see in
whatever box something better than the markings suggest
but this time I have no idea what to think.
Can you help? |
Dear Dgob, Thanks for your worry but I wrote 'my Glanz' with quatation marks. I was in what lawyer call 'pre contractual' or 'negotiation' state of affair. It took me
some time but I learned from the Dutch how to negotiate.
Ie if a Dutchman agrees with your price direct than your negotiation capabilities are (very)questionable.
So again thanks for your worry as well as for the warning.
Regards, |
Dear Vetterone, I am really sorry to have caused such a
dramatic impact. I am sure that your dog will love you provided you feed him well. The problem is, if it is a problem, that the Balkanes like to tease each other.This
is our way to show whom we like. Strange perhaps but true.
BTW I would never risk a possible complain by Vidmantas.
Kind regards, |
Dear Dgob, I got a warning from you reg. the Glanz 55a.
My to you is entailed in the following. I exchanged some
books with an acquaintance and lost my wife as well as
some books.
Regards, |
Dear Vetterone, If you mean some 'curious' sense for humor
I agree. But I still try to learn English so, alas, some of
the American proverbs or the way of speaking are not clear to me. But Lew is always willing to help in this regard. I even think that he likes me. Slavic bonds I assume.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, Sorry for your 'argument' but 'aestethic in its
wider...sense' make no sense. Raul is very clear in his
statement reg. function versus aestethics. I myself am very
impressed with the 'aestethics' of the FR-64s. But I
would never state that FR-64s is functionaly very good tonearm
because of its aesthetics. Those are different criterions.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, What a pity that you bolted even your windows
because my intention was to bring my Zeta, Lustre 801 and
Sumiko 800 for you to try. My FR-64S (+ B-60) is ,alas
for you, meant for my heir (the legal one).
I am reluctant to admit that I never succided to reach any
Japanese ebay site. Not even such a big company like Ogura
for those microridge styli for Alex. I wrote 5 emails to
all of Ogura divisions but they are probable not able to
understand my English? The 'Topclass' however I have seen
twice and, considering their prices, I have no intention whatever
to visit their site for the third time. Will you be so kind
to teach me how to reach the Japanese ? Should
I try Russian, Serbo-Croation, German or Dutch?
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, I got my first Glanz. The MFG 31 L. But what is
more the user manual is included. According which the series consist of 5
carts each of them with either line contact or elliptical
stylus: 71 L/E, 51L/E, 31 L/E, 11 T/11R. As you can see
there is no 61 with whatever stylus. I know that Vetterone
is an inventor so, probable, he invented the 61?
The specs reg. inductance is the same for all ,impedance is the same by 71 and 51 while the output is also the same for all. Ergo the difference must be the cantilever. I own
the Astatic MF 200 which looks as a twin brother or sister
of the Glanz but the stylus of the MF 200 is Shibata.
The Japanese have obviously their own logic. There is no
mention of cantilever material except by 31E and 11 T
with a kind of a cryptic description: 'Titanium bonded line
contact and/or titanium bonded elliptical'. Probable because of the mentioned logic there is no such description by (my) 31 L by which, I would hope, the line contact stylus suggested by the letter 'L' is somehow fitted to the cantilever. Why they 'bonded line contact stylus in the elliptical 31 E ' is an enigma to me. I also got the 'punishment' for my carts greedyness because I accumulated 6 different carts in one
month time and have no idea with which to start. Anyway the 31 L is the cheapest of them all so , I hope,this one will get his turn somewhere in June or July next year.
Regards, |
Hi Dgob, I compared Raul's 'darling' Astatic MF 200 with
the Glanz MFG 31 L and was not able to hear any difference.
I even switched the styli with the same result. Both are
excelent carts. I am still searching for the 51, 71 and this mysterious 61.
Regards, |
Dear Raul, I am sorry but I don't understand what you mean
with 'not only that but even you can't make a precise/accurate cantilever alignment!!!'. I have no idea to what 'not only that' refer nor what you mean by 'precise/accurate cnatilever alighment'.
Regards, |
Dear Vetterone, By my MFG 31l the user manual is included
with the nomenclature of the whole series. There are 51 and 71
(L and E) above the 31 but 61 is not mentioned. That
is why I called this one 'mysterious'. I also own the 31 E
but am , like you with the 51 E , not very impressed. BTW
deed you try the stylus from the 31 L in the 51 cart?
The strange thing is that I have never seen any Glanz on the German ebay.
I got my specimens from the UK.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, This to me is like dating Michelle Pfeifer or
Nocole Kidman and suggesting to us to try the same. Now those 'girls' at least exist and are in theoretical or imaginary sense attainable. But I have never seen the Glanz 7 or 5 nor the Technics 100 mk IV anywhere. Vetterone already made my life misarable with this 'misterious' Glanz 61 for which I search all ebay sites that I can read and even those that I can't read while I am supposed to spend as much time as possible to listen to my records. BTW the tonearms are not a problem in my case; I own 8 of those. If you can provide the source for any of those carts I can ask Van den Hul for assistence for their adjustment in one of those arms.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, thanks for your good intentions but I don't
believe that you have as much of spare time as I have to
search. I am a retired civil servant with good pension...
Dear Vetterone, I think that my Astatic MF 200 sounds better
with the stylus from the Glanz 31 L ( line contact)
while my Glanz 31 E sounds better with the stylus from the
Astatic 300. You should try exchanging those styli instead
of buying inferior Glanz versions. It is ,alas, not the case that
all Glanz carts are exceptional.
Regards to both, |
Dear Dgob, Wishful thinking is a strong psychological part
of our hobby. But I added logic to it as follow: all the
top line Astatic and Glanz carts have the same body (aka
'generator') and the only difference are the styli.
According to this logic the G 7, 5 and 3 should have the
same 'generator' but different styli. So, if you will
be so kind to give me the address for this G3 I would
be very grateful (nikola et andric.com). My search on
the net was without result. BTW I inspected the styli of
'all' Astatics- (2x) and Glanz carts (2x) that I own
with my (50x) hand microscope and discovered that the Glanz
styli are of better quality than Astatic. Should I tell this to Raul?
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, You obviously overlooked my connection between
wishful thinking and logic. From only two carts of both
kinds (Astatic and Glanz) I constructed the 'all quantor'
by help of which the universal statements are made. Now
by Astatic versions MF- 100, 200 and 300 only the styli
differ. I own the 200 and 300. From 'all possible' Glanz
carts I own the 31L (line contact) and 31 E ( elliptical?).
Those Glanz look exactly the same as the Astatic's
qua body and even (packing) boxes. All of them
have the marking 'MF' on the styli with respective numbers.
Ie without the stylus one can not determine which
one one has at hand. There is not much to compare visualy.
But if one compare the prices there are huge differences.
I got my Glanz 31l and 31 E for about 30 Euro each. As
Vetterone also concluded there is no difference qua sound
between Glanz 31l and Astatic MF 200.
Regards, |
Dear Dgob, We both try to inform other members about the Glanz and Astatic carts. While both kinds are not easily available one may have luck and if one find ,say, Glanz
31 l or E even more luck because of the price difference with the Astatic MF 200.
Thanks to your info I was able to at least see the G3 which should be similar to your G5 and G7. I do believe that those are exceptional carts but I also noticed that
they have no azimuth and eff. lenght adjustment provision.
By the integrated headshell/cart combo's such a provision is necessary for the correct geometry adjustment. One can see by Technics 205 mk 3 ,for example, how those provisions look like. BTW there is no standard or 'norm' for the 'right stylus place' in a cart. That is why the most headshells have this adjustment provision.
Regards, |
Dear Banquo, '+/- 3mm'? I ever made a joke pretending not to be able to see whatever fraction of just 1 mm. Then I got reprimand from Dertonarm and Raul togehter. As you probable know they often disagree but not in this case. Since then I never make jokes about any dimension. BTW those Sony integrated are ugly as well as clumsy while one
can get all of those integarted models also 'solo', without the headshell. I own the XL 88 and hope to get the XL 55 very soon. Raul already mentioned XL 44 as a very good cart.
Regards, |
Banquo, It seems to be obvious that Sony made those integrated cart/headshells for their own turntables/arm combo's. As deed Ikeda for his own tonearms. But the difference is this. According to J. Carr the magnets by FR-7 series are so big that no other solution was possible. This however is not the case by Sony. The Pro.55 for example contains the regular XL 55. I would not mess myself with the cart but you can post this cart to Axel and ask him to do this job for you. The added benefit is his check of the suspension and stylus. As Raul stated and I can confirm this XL series is exceptional.
Dear Dgob, I am not 100% sure if the SME sliding base can provide optimal geometry for whatever cart but should be obvious solution for the Glanz G series.
Regards, |
Dear Banguo, My gosh! There is no conspiracy on either side
so you are consequently not in 'the middle of something'.
We all try to provide info to our best knowledge but what
you intend to do with this information is your own choice and/or decision.
All my headshells have 'splits' and azymuth provision for obvious reasons
but if I get the chance to obtain the Glanz 5 or 7 for a good price I would
certanly buy any of those. This is how I interpret Dgob's
recommendation. That is btw how I bought the most of my carts: by others recommendation. More in particular by Raul's recommendation.
Regards, |
Dear Raul, I assume that you made a typo by 'promoting'
Banquo's XL 33 to XL 55 'status'. My own interest is involved
because I hope to obtain the XL 55. If your XL 44
is somehow 'better' than the XL 55 you are using 'top line'
argument in some other sense than you are used to do . Say, those Signets and the arguments against Halcro and Professor who prefer lower kind ( 3-7) above the above
ranked kinds. Halcro btw even refused to cosider my kind offer
of my beatuful Signet 9 CL (NOS!). I, on the other side, bought
the Signet 7 E as a proof of my own open mind (grin).
Regards, |
Dear Professor, Thanks for your advice but my experience is
the other way round. For the low complience carts I use my
Reed 2A, 12'' and 27g. eff. mass. For such carts there
is no other option. But ,as Halcro, for all my MM carts I use
the FR-64S with excellent results. This arm is considered
as a 'havy gun' but the eff. mass depends from the used
headshell (+cart weight) as well from the 'place' of the
counterweight relative to the pivot. Now all or at least
the most MM carts are about 6-7 gr. so the counterweight
nearly touches the pivot. For some MM carts
one need to use heavier headshells to compensate. I also use
the Lustre 801 which is much less(?) heavy but the FR-64 is
much better 'tracker'. My quess is that the bearings by
FR-64 are exceptional. However I also own the Sumiko 800
(aka 'Breuer') and can provide the 'optimal conditions'
according to your opinion for both Signet's.
Regards, |
Dear Henry, As Raul stated I assume that we all want to learn. The first review about the FR-64s that I have read was the German Magazine 'Das Ohr' (the ear) from 1984. Our
member Dertonarm was then a reviewer by this Magazine. Regarding the tonearm geometry already than both reviewers made the remark that the geometry in the user manual was not optimal. They recommended the spindle -pivot distance of 231,5 mm instead of 230 mm in the manual. With 'optimal' geometry they meant the Bearwald. Well I recently ordered by Yip his Mint protractor for my FR-64- SP 10 combo. Yip wrote to me that the geometry in the user manual is Stevenson : 230/ 244,9 ( spindle -pivot/ eff. lenght).
For my combo I wanted Bearwald which according to Yip imply :231,5/ 248,2 mm respectively. I am not sure if you referred to your FR -66 or 64 with your statement that the geometry of your FR tonearm and FR-7 cart is 'perfect' Bearwald but if you referred to your FR-64 this can't be true. I never owned the FR-66 so I have no idea which geometry is assumed in the user manual for this tonearm. But I am familiar with the FR-64 from 1983 till now.
I agree with Raul reg. the integrated headshell/carts combos's but my reasons are more pragmatic than theoretical.
Regards, |
