As I said: I'm done on this subject. Nothing to add.
R. |
Hi Vetterone,
I would just like to say a huge thanks for bringing additional knowledge to bear on this thread. It is a little late here now but I will attempt to respond properly when I log back on in the morning.
Kind regards
As always... |
Hi Raul,
If you want to look at the available Glanz literature (some of which you have cited), you will see that there is direct performance differences and that (according to the company's literature and the available performance data) the G7 is superior to their non-integrated MF-line: including the MF-71L or E. However, as you found, the latter are far more easy to obtain. Incidentally, this is the first time to my knowledge that you have shared the information that you have ever heard [let alone owned and then sold on to a member of your own family] any Glanz.
Despite what might appear otherwise, I do respect your opinion on many matters. However, ignorance cannot be a ground to accept your views here. It seems that personal experience cannot overcome your prejudices and that is your right.
Nevertheless, I cannot fathom why you would wish to go against just about every positive and educational comment you have ever made about learning and being open to actual experience when determining cartridges!? Indeed, the MM/MI thread is littered with your references to that effect and presents itself as an attempt to do precisely that with a form of cartridge that had suffered unjust 'prejudice' [here meaning, 'judgements made before or without adequate information/experience']. Maybe the difference here is that you tend to stand as arbiter of those favoured cartridges!? Other than that I could only fathom your response as being directed at me rather than the cartridges.
I hope that is not the case as it would be a pity to let anything so churlish get in the way of good musical experiences.
As always... |
Dgob, are your G5 & G7 MMs? What cantilevers does each use? Do the bodies look like the Astatic MF series? Have you tried interchanging styli?
The Astatic 100/200/300 as well as the Glanz MFG series are all Moving Flux. Hence the MF model designation.
Allow me share a few things I do know about these carts. All of the MF series from both Astatic and Glanz were made in Japan by the Mitachi Corporation. I can also say for sure that the Astatic/Glanz MF generators are not all the same. Well on the outside they are but the MF200/300 put out 4.2mv. The MF100 and all of the MFG Glanz 31/51/61/71, series put out 3.5mv. Interestingly, the G7 is rated at 4.2mv on the Vinylengine database. I wonder if that is true?
The MFG51E Glanz is not a MF200 or even a MF300. The sound is quite different on each. They should because they have different output and have different styli. The cantilever on the MFG51E I have also has a much different aluminum cantilever than any other MF units. It uses a very large taper. Looks heavy to me. My MFG51E is on the bottom of the totem pole sonically of all the MF/MI carts I have heard. The MFG31E/L is much closer to the MF200. It uses the same color stylus holder as well as the same cantilever. All three have different styli. MF200 is a nude Shibata. The MFG31E has a nude elliptical and the MFG31L has a nude line contact. The MFG31E/L both sound close to the MF200. The MF300 is good but I would use it for target practice after hearing the MF200 or MFG31E/L. |
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, |
Dear Nicola, I assumed nothing except that I thought it was you who recognized a similarity between Glanz MF51 and Astatic MF200. I have never even seen any Glanz or Astatic cartridge in the flesh. Apparently I was wrong about your opinion. Sorry.
Dgob is a loyal user of Raul's preamplifier. I should think that would trump any disagreement over one particular cartridge's performance level. Thus I do not perceive any animosity on either side, just a difference of opinion. |
Dear Dgob: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&56&4#56
I bought on Argentina and now the cartridge is with my brother. Was the MF-71L ( non-integrated headshell but stand alone model. I don't know but maybe what you like are the additional integrated headshell design distortions, I never heard that integrated design and certainly I don't care about integrated headshell designs: I don't like it for very good reasons that already discussed in this and other threads. ) and was identical to the MF-100 ( tha's why I remember was the 71L. ) that performs similar but a little better than the Glanz sample ( my MF-100 was a NOS and not second hand as the Glanz. ).
Anyway, the MF-200 IMHO outperforms both Astatic/Glanz. I think you need to hear the MF-200 and I'm sure that's as other MF-200 you will be surprised.
My MF-300 is on the road to Axel for an up date and to find out the Astatic up quality performance limits, the MF-200 on stock fashion is great one.
Btw, no I'm not ignorant on the Glanz.I think for my part is all said it about, I'm done on this Glanz subject.
Please go ahead and as till today you can follow sharing your experiences. As Lewm could be that other people want to follow with your thread/interest about.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
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,
|
Hi Lewm,
I can partially appreciate the tendency for others to assume relationships without recognising differences. It is a method by which one can order and make sense of the world. Unfortunately, that sort of approach leads to its own problems and I am certain that Nandric is too intelligent to allow it to entomb his experiences in perpetuity.
As always... |
Hi Nadric,
Apolgies, I meant to say that there is a G3 cartridge available at the noted source - unfortunately, he might not be an economically attractive option though! If you already have the Astatic 300 and do nevertheless get this, you could do your own comparison and let us know your experience regarded the strangely repeated claims concerning the Astatic/Glanz. I sold my MF100 in preferring the G5 'and' G7. Others might disagree but it would be interesting to hear an informed opinion here.
As always... |
Hi Nadric,
About other models, I have a limited knowledge and the continuation of this thread is largely based on my desire to learn more - an ambition that I still hope more enthusiasts would display. However, the G5 and G7 might be linked up in line with the Astatic 100 and 200. Yet the comparison does not hold up on close physical or sonic examination.
I do know that there is a G5 cartridge going in Hong Kong (Tommy Cheung) at present and that might be more similar to the noted Astatics than are the better in the "G" series. I would therefore start with the G3 and see if you can find the other two - moist likely on the Asian market and or through Rinkya.
The performance characteristics are notable and stepped with top end frequency abilities (fopr example) being above 30k, 40k and 50k for the G3, G5 and G7 respectively. I am still bogged down in life and rarely in testing the G7 and I will report when I have any certainties to share.
As always... |
Hi Nandric,
I think we can appreciate your confusion in two statements:
1. "Raul and Dgob have, uh, the same 'teste'. The 'mystery' solved by Nandric?" and
2. "My intention was to state that Glanz 5 is the same as the Astatic FM 200"
Whatever the validity of the former view, I hope the above response to Raul answers your latter.
As always... |
Raul,
I have documented comment from yourself that you have NEVER heard a Glanz, but that you decided not to listen to any of their "G" range because of some prejudice you have about integrated cartridges. Has this position changed recently? If it has I would love to know the persons from whom you bought and to whom you sold it/them - as well as the experience you had and with which Glanz!
The links you reposted are clearly answered and developed on within the course of this thread but that might demand a closer reading. For example, I thought you were aware that I have fully assessed the Astatic/Glanz relationship and can confirm that the performance differences are as marked as the noted construction similarities. All of this is set out in this thread.
Of course, if prejudice is allowed to govern your experience, you can reject anything you like. I would like to think that you would not spread such blind prejudice and ignorance but we are obviously very different people.
As always... |
Wait, Nicola, didn't you start out by saying that the Glanz MF51 appeared identical to the MF (FM?) 200?
If so, then Glanz MF51 = Astatic MF200 = Glanz 5. Clearly, something is rotten in Denmark. |
Dear nandric: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&2&4#2
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/glanz/cartridge-data.shtml
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1252605722&openflup&12&4#12
Nothing to comment on Glanz/Astatic other that the MF-200 is an stellar performer. On the MM/MI thread are my experiences with Glanz, nothing that the MF-200 can't do it, even I don't have any more the Glanz.
I know that for Dgob Glanz is his star but not for me, period.
regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
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,
|
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, |
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,
|
Hi Lewm,
And thanks for your sensible post. I have sold most of my MC's in recent years. The most memorable of these was the Allaerts MC2 Gold, Dynavector XV1s and the Lyra Parnassus. I also enjoy the Denon 103D on its traditional Grace 660p tonearm. That combination was apparently the original one that found fame while being used by the Japanese broadcasting corporation and is great fun.
I wholly agree with you about a possible reason for the apparent lack of online responses. However, I have been discussing and advising on the Glanz for some time now and the figures for those still interested continues to rise to around 13,000 viewers of this thread. I was being ironic about the loneliness issue but do nevertheless understand the apparent concern of Nandric who is obviously communicating from a position of ignorance here.
I do think they are great cartridges but continue to assess their qualities in light of my ongoing exposure to other cartridges and, of course, trusted opinions. I have continued to search for opinions and experience but I suspect that this is frustrated by the fact that the Japanese only seem to have sold their Glanz's to Europe and Asia (as far as I can find out), with the G3 and G5 models seeming to have only been sold in Japan. It took me a very long time to find my G7 and if I come across another or a G5 I will definitely let you know. |
Dear Dgob, I just visited your system site. I see that your "other" cartridges are also MM or MI types, albeit some of the very best ones. I wonder what has been your experience with LOMC types, especially given that you own a very fine MC phono stage, inside the 3160.
I think one reason you are so lonely here is the virtual absence of any Glanz cartridges from the marketplace. If I could find one, I would be interested to try it. |
Hi Nandric,
And thanks for your company in my loneliness.
As always... |
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, |
Hi All,
I have been discussing all things hifi with an Asian friend who knows more about the Audiocraft line than any else that I know. This led to a major finding of some significance.
Some will recall that I had a rather heated response to the suggestion that I was enjoying distortions on my Glanz (incidentally, I wonder if the mechanical properties and task that they are asked to do does not mean that 'all' cartridges show some distortion). This was because I do play Cello and often use my own play to test aspects of my analogue.
Anyway, the long and short of the matter is that I have recently found that the overhang for the AC3300 tonearm that I use is 13mm. I had concerns because it did not match the standardised 15mm overhang used in my Fiekert professional protractor. On using Audiocrafts own template (slightly more tricky to set up), I found that the overhang of my favoured medium mass wand was exact.
This explains why I have constantly found near perfection in listening to the G5 and G7 cartridges on that arm. I am currently listening to the G7 as my favoured cartridge and will report more after I have assessed and confirmed every aspect.
If any one else manages to get hold of a G series Glanz, I hope you use their provided template in the first place and find the pleasure that I seek to spread through this thread and my complete admiration.
As alway... |
Hi All,
You might recall my noting that: "I have 'now' discovered that the G7 line contact stylus adds something to the G5 cartridge..."
This was because I was not satisfied with the performance of my G7 - having given it around 20 hours of testing. Hence, its M-7 stylus has been playing on my G5 for the past few months. It must have passed the 100 hours mark by now.
Well, I decided to try the G7 with its now run-in M-7 stylus reinstored on Sunday. WOW: there seems to be real grounds for a major reassessment!! However, what is apparent after only a few hours of playing this is that the G7 is an immense beast with dynamic, tonal and detail retrieval abilities that can both surprise and delight.
My task is now to assess it in light of the performance of my Technics 100 Mk4 and Glanz G5. I will feedback once any certainties are secured. This could form a review of the top of the range Glanz.
Obviously, my apologies to any reader who might take offence from what I share here.
As always... |
Sorry Raul,
Forgot to mention that I genuinely did not see anything wrong with Nandric's inquiry. He was obviously interested enough to both read and comment on my reflections and so (happy as I am with your support) I don't think there is really any problem here. And as you say, we are all of course free to share our experiences and/or to choose to ignore those of others.
As always... |
Hi Raul,
I'm impressed by your close reading and support for sharing evolving impressions among the interested. I know you also share my experience of changing perspective with the ongoing exploration of other cartridges and bits of hifi. I think this is part of what is reflected within this thread and hope (should there be another long break between my posts) that this will not prove a problem for other interested readers.
I'll definitely contact you off site in spring/summer regarding our recent Essential discussions.
All the best in the meantime |
Dear Dgob: I take your point and I understand the Nandric one too.
Maybe you could understand better the Nandric post with this example on the thread ( second page. ):
you posted on: 09-07-10 and from here there was no single other post for more than a year till you posted again in: 10-08-11 and only to " reaffirm " ( that's what I read in this post. ) something that you posted before.
Makes sense this scenario to you?, I respect what you think and obviously you are free to make anything you want in any thread. I'm not questioning either if there are persons interested on the subject.
Anyway, go on: this is your privilege and not Nandric one or mine.
Regards and enjoy the music,
R. |
Hi All,
Thanks to a recent contribution, I thought it timely to reiterate a founding aim of this thread/diary.
To wit, I still hope other Glanz owners (most specifically those owning or having owned the G5, G7 or MFG71E/L) will chip in with contributions. I know that we are apparently very few (or possibly only one) among the Audiogon readership but perspectives or information that add to the related knowledge here would still be warmly welcomed.
Until such time, I hope my meanderings and reflections will not prove too painful for those who remain or become interested.
As always... |
In my 02-18-12 posting, it should of course have read:
"I have 'now' discovered that the G7 line contact stylus adds something to the G5 cartridge..."
Apologies |
Nandric,
I would just note that there are over 11,000 others following this thread - some of whom I discuss matters with off site. You could think of it as my sharing experiences around a cartridge that (although possibly a better performer than anything you have heard)
few if any of you have yet experienced.
Your puzzling interest here does of course make you 11,001. Although I cannot pretend to fathom any further interest on your behalf, I am glad that you had the time and energy to make your interesting contribution.
As always... |
Hi Dgob, You actually own your own thread. Are the answers
from Dgob to Dgob satisfactory? |
Hi All,
I simply cannot optimize my G7 with my selection of tonearms. This is not to say that it cannot be optimized in other settings and I will wait until I do find just such a setting.
On the plus side of my latest meander, I have not discovered that the G7 line contact stylus adds something to the G5 cartridge (the stylus in the range are interchangeable). I have now settled for the G5 with G7 stylus as my ultimate Glanz.
Happy hunting to those who try.
As always... |
In light of the above,
I intend to turn my attention to my Glanz G7 to see where fine tuning and perseverance can take me with this proclaimed 'top of the line' Glanz.
My auditions of it so far have not been as focused as those of the G5 and I have always simply exchanged cartridges in the same set up. Not ideal and to be addressed!
I will comment on my findings around the G7 when (and 'if') I am certain and have something useful to say.
As always |
Hi All,
They say the lucky man often benefits where the clever man can't. In this light, I must confess to a certain ignorance being shored up by complete luck.
Those who follow (and there appears to be many of you) this thread will know that I was amazed at the performance of the Glanz G5 in my Audio Craft AC-3300 LB tonearm. I noted that just setting its VTA and VTF seemed sufficient without concerns about overhang and effective length. Many will note the dispute that this suggestion created! Nevertheless, my own slightly refined hearing and that of a former friend (whose hearing was unsurpassed to my knowledge) kept telling me that I was approaching perfection with the performance of this intergrated moving magnet. I had even recently told others that the ideal position would place the tip of the stylus 50mm from the tonearm collar and suggested they experiment and seek such a tonearm. This is where my ignorance and luck come in!
On finally digging out the Users Manual for the AC-3300 last night, I was amazed to read that it has reference to the integrated Ortofon SPU cartridge and even suggests its ideal damping for such a cartridge. Then I noticed that the ideal position for stylus to tonearm edge for my Audio Craft was given as "50-51mm". This is exactly the position achieved by the Glanz and seems to support my suggestion that protractors and the like should not be your only means of assessing ideal set up of a cartridge: your own ears and experience being more important than generalised calculus.
This means that my faith (albeit challenged and uncertain at times) in what I am hearing with the Glanz G5 now makes complete sense. It also means that I can extend my recommendation with a little more surety.
The Glanz G5 cartridge in a tonearm such as the Audio Craft AC-3300 LB is simply stunning. It can keep company with the Technics EPC 100Mk4 and that says more than I can.
Very highly recommended |
"Its undoubted potential" alludes to the fact that the Glanz might indeed outperform the Technics if the (still sought) ideal set up is achieved.
Any medium mass arm that places the stylus tip precisely 50mm from the collar of the arm wand where the cartridge meets arm will provide that potential! |
Apologies,
However, following off-line correspondence, I hasten to clarify that the Glanz is NOT of the quality of my Technics EPC 100Mk4. There again, nothing I have heard is.
What it is is a better performer than most well respected cartridges 'and' a (in my case) still unresolved challenge for perfect set up.
These points hopefully now clarified: I highly recommend it and its undoubted potential. |
Hi All,
Just spent an enforced length of time re-aquainting myself with my Glanz's. I can only reaffirm my claim that the G5 is a very superior cartridge and I would desperately urge anyone who has the opportunity to grab it. I am aware that they rarely appear but I truly believe they are worth any efforts to get hold of.
I write this partially stunned by the music presently playing in the background.
As always... |
Hi All,
Those looking to optimise their vinyl replay can currently get hold of an Audio Technica AT666 EX pneumatic stabilizer. There's one currently going on eBay:http://cgi.ebay.com/Audio-Technica-AT666-EX-disc-stabilizer-pump-etc-/200516997374?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories&hash=item2eafbe90fe.
|
Thanks for that.
Regards
Steve |
Steve,
Excellent news.
On the Glanz, I would recommend the G5 integrated as the best I've heard and the G7 and/or MFG 71L or E as the alternative options. You can see the bulk of comments and issues regarding these in the above posts of this thread.
Not withstanding clear set up challenges for the former two integrated cartridges, REALLY, REALLY GREAT cartridges - particulary the former.
Happy listening and hunting |
Thanks Dgob - yes you are absolutely right on both counts. I initially setup the VTA/SRA with tonearm parallel to record and was pleased - then read that shibata stylus likes a high VTA to work best - I have a pete riggle VTAF on my arm so increasing VTA was easy - hit the sweet spot with just over 1/4 inch arm raise - wow! Also seemed to "cure" the previous tendency for the cartridge to bottom out on a warp.
Which Glanz would you suggest I look out for?
Regards
Steve |
Steve,
Congratulations and happy to have been of help. Be mindful of compliance on the Astatic and positive VTA and it should reward behond your expectations.
Do keep an eye out for a Glanz. Owners rarely sell these but if you're patiant and can find one, these will open your eyes to new musical vistas - at least they have done so with mine.
Happy listening |
OK so the Astatic MF-100 is now installed in my OL Silver II tonearm having flown across the pond and displaced my AT 150MLX. Import duty/Customs charges were a bit steep! Setup and installation was straight forward although the stylus tip is difficult to visualise on the alignment gauge. Tracking force is hyper-critical I think with this unit. 1.3g seems the best compromise and at this it tracks 3 out of 4 of the Hi-Fi news bias test tracks 100% with zero bias applied - test track 4 is a bit of a torture but this is still better than the AT 150 MLX which was pretty good and seems as good as the MusicMaker III. First impressions are very favourable. Presentation is very different to the AT 150MLX. Very neutral but still dynamic with great timing and poise. Bass is deep and tuneful, highs very detailed without being harsh and the midrange is sublime. More revealing than the AT 150MLX, more layers and fine "background" detail is audible. Perhaps biggest improvement is in the expression of voices - far more nuance and emotion than I have heard before. Before listening I was a bit worried it might sound a bit flat - previously I had an Ortofon Rohman bought unheard but on recommendation and I hated it - dull as dishwater but the MF-100 just seems to do everything right although very early days. My only "criticism/concern" is that it sits very low on the record and the slightest warp knocks on the base of the unit - at tracking weight of 1.5g (max) this was not uncommon - much less at 1.3g but still occurs. Not tried at 1.0g (min) as tracking fell off.
Anyway, a very pleasing first impression and I am sure it will get better the longer I listen. Thanks to Raul for his recommendation as otherwise I doubt I would have taken the plunge.
Steve |
Thanks Dgob - just putting my system details together - will upload piccies later. Have 2 systems the OL/Croft/Cyrus/Epos and a Quad 67 CD - Quad 33/FM3/303/ heavily breathed on by Net-Audio (http://www.net-audio.co.uk/) - Quad 21L's - very nice.
Steve |
One of my earliest systems had a croft preamp-phonostage with a Leak ST60 amp. I still have fond memories.
Welcome aboard |
Thanks for that - am a newbie to Audiogon forum so will need to research as to how I post my system details but will do - am a total Croft valve amp fan :-)
Regards
Steve |
Hi Steve,
Great to hear that more great equipment will be making its way to these shores. I'm sure you'll enjoy the Astatic and you can find a lot of detail about set up and various experiences of it on the 'who needs a moving magnet' thread started by Raul Ireugas here on Audiogon.
Do let me know how it turns out and good luck
PS. Have you thought of posting your system on this site? |
Hello,
Just bought the Astatic MF-100! On it's way to the UK as we speak. It was browsing this AudioG thread that made me take the punt having never heard one before. Currently have Origin Live Aurora 2/Origin Live Silver 2./ AT 150MLX into Croft 25R/Croft Series 4S - with Epos M22i and Townshend supertweeters. Also have Cyrus CD XT se/PSxR with Benchmark DAC1
Looking forward to trying out theAstatic in the OL setup.
Steve |
Hi All,
Just to alert you all that there is an Astatic MF100 cartridge currently for sale here on Audiogon. The seller says he also has spares.
It's close to the Glanz G5 and some might actually prefer it. Worth looking into! |
Hi All,
My MM/MI cartridge shortlist is now in its final penultimateness (?). I'm down to my Glanz G5, Glanz G7, Technics EPC-P100c Mk4 and Audio Technica ATML-170 OCC.
How good are these? Well, I have sold or am in the process of selling on eBay my B&O MMC2, Audio Technica AT20 SLa, Empire EDR9, Empire 1080 LT, Nagaoka MP50 (with 2 unused and original NOS spare styli), Lyra Parnassus Dct moving coil, Sumiko Andante P76, Audio Technica ATML-160 OCC, Denon DL103d moving coil, Empire Ltd 750, Astatic MF100, Empire 900 GT (with 2 unused, original NOS spare styli), Ortofon M20FL, Spectral Moving Coil Reference, ADC XLM-1 integra, Music Maker 3, Audio Technica ATF5 moving coil.
My Azden YM-P50VL and YM-P50E have not really had the time to be judged and so could still make the list. Although this is obviously a reflection of my own taste, it says something about the quality of the four remaining contenders. More soon, or as soon as I can give all of them a fair run for my money.
Bliss |
