Thanks Harold.....
The cantilever looks like beryllium to me.....
But it might be titanium or even aluminium although someone claims it is boron......
There was no box or literature that came with it and the specs page I've seem only lists the stylus as 'line contact' but no mention of the cantilever.
Being familiar with all the beryllium cantilevered styli in my collection....my money is on that 🤗
And as Chakster has repeatedly stated.....the performance of the 610LX is NOTHING like the other Glanz 31L, 51L, and 71L cartridges which are rather dull and mediocre IMO.
|
Yes Frogman,
Rita Coolidge's 'Good Old Days' on A&M is one of the most naturally recorded, all analogue albums I've heard.
No theatrics or 'look-at-me' processing in the recording and mastering stages....this has been my 'go-to' album for 40 years having been played over 1000 times (hence the missing cover).
The whole album will tell me almost everything I need to know about a system or a cartridge or a tonearm or an amplifier or speakers.....
An excellent appraisal (as always) Frogman and it seems that you and Noromance are in agreement on these two 👍
I'm really glad that the Palladian remains the 'benchmark' as I would feel rather silly having forked out the price of admission needlessly....🤔
My aim is really to expose the SLIGHT differences produced by the uber-priced LOMC cartridges over fairly cheap vintage MM ones.
The Glanz 610LX in NOS condition cost me $450......
If some audiophiles can justify those differences to be worth $9,000-$15,000.....who am I to argue?
I'm grateful for your contributions Frogman and am pleased it is "fun" for you because it surely also is for me....😎
Regards
|
|
Noromance is becoming more confident in his analyses and I think he's spot-on....
Frogman and "the very cute pooch" (Princi-a male Principessa) are also correct as usual...at least in Frogman's case....Princi is generally a sideline critic 🤣....
I agree with Frogman that the Glanz gives the Palladian more of a contest....
Whether that changes as the Grace 'runs-in'....I'll let you know 🤗
|
|
I want to thank you again Frogman for that detailed, informative analysis. I can’t admit to being able to hear exactly what you describe between MMs and MCs.....but your examples in these ’shoot-outs’ enable me to perhaps ’train’ myself to listen more intently....? You read my mind......🤯 Knowing of your predilection for the wonderful London Decca Reference....I was going to conduct exactly the ’shoot-out’ you wish for, between it and the Palladian...👍 And if it’s confession time........ One of the first MM cartridges I bought (after my flirtation with LOMCs) was in fact the AZDEN YM P50VL and I’m embarrassed to admit that at the time.....it just didn’t make the CUT. It’s been sitting in a drawer collecting DUST for 10 years...😱 Lucky I didn’t sell it....🥳 It will now receive the royal treatment and will be appearing at an iPad near you shortly..... Any particular request for music genre in that ’shoot-out’...? Regards |
This comparison is a little more complex..... Not only do we have different arms, but also different turntables. The Direct-Drive Victor TT-101 against the Belt-Drive TW Raven AC-2. There are many who will claim this renders the comparison 'invalid' and I can appreciate their viewpoint. However....I switch between the turntables on a regular basis and find the differences between the two, to be 'technical' rather than 'emotional'. The Victor is precise and detailed with unflappable timing and rhythm. The Raven is more relaxed and just slightly less precise....but sometimes more enjoyable 🙃 AS PALLADIAN LOMC CartridgeLONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge |
Thank you Harold for the above Post.......
Full of emotion and enthusiasm 🥳
I suspect however that you meant it to appear in the 'Glanz Thread' where it would be read by more appropriate contributors.....?🧐
Regards
|
Wow Frogman........🤯
I wasn't expecting THAT...!!
Firstly....I agree completely how far we are from truly creating the illusion of a 'live orchestra'....even for million dollar systems (and I've heard several).
That's why at HiFi shows.....even Munich.... you rarely hear a room prepared to demonstrate its gear with a complex massed orchestral piece.
Well recorded studio sessions of female soloists with minimal backing instruments, are relatively easy (less demanding) for hifi systems to reproduce impressively.....even for midfi systems.
That's why you hear the same, boring female vocal tracks played interminably in the demonstration rooms at hifi shows and on web-based hifi zines like AV Showrooms...🤬
Even jazz ensembles are far easier for systems to reproduce convincingly in the living room.
And this may be one of the keys to the limitations with orchestral music.
To reproduce the reflections and volume of a concert hall with 80-120 instruments playing simultaneously, in a domestic living room, is simply asking too much.
However....there are some concert halls I've been in..... with seating from which the 'sound' is LESS impressive than that which I hear in my living room.
Now a trained musician like Frogman will still hear the sound of "real" even in these poor seats in mediocre halls.
I, it now appears......listen (or hear) things completely differently 🥴🙃?!
For instance...even now...after reading Frogman's illuminating review of the Palladian vs the LDR.....I can still listen 'live' (in my living room)...and not be able to tell which cartridge I was listening to (if I were blindfolded)...🤔
This has caused me endless consternation recently as I feel like an 'idiot'...😵
On what basis have I selectively assembled a system and conducted comparisons of a dozen tonearms and countless cartridges...?
Perhaps my hearing requires testing.....I've made an appointment 👂
|
Thank you Frogman, for taking the time and trouble to write your last Post.
It made me realise that there is perhaps nothing wrong with my hearing...it's just that we all have different priorities and preferences.
It dawned on me that, whereas a musician is obviously concerned about INSTRUMENTAL accuracy, tonality and 'realism'.....those qualities don't 'consciously' factor in my assessments and appreciation.
Mainly because I don't KNOW the differences in sound of individual instruments and therefore don't know whether what I hear reproduced, is 'accurate' or true to 'live'.
I do of course, know what 'live' music sounds like but again.....it doesn't matter to me if the saxophone's reed is worn or split, or if the Steinway Concert Grand is more suited to the venue than the Bosendorfer the pianist has selected to play....
My priorities begin with the ability of a 'system' (and its parts) to reproduce all the qualities contained within the grooves of records I am intimately familiar with.
Firstly, the 'balance' of the frequencies without any unnatural emphases.
Secondly, the 'quality' of the individual frequencies.....
How extended are the 'highs', how deeply (and convincingly) do the lower registers go.
How 'realistic' and satisfying is the midrange....this is a 'sine qua non' for me and eliminates many cartridges, tonearms, phonostages, amplifiers and speakers from my 'orbit'.
Next in importance for me is 'transparency'....
Is there 'air' around the instruments (as there is in reality) and is there 'depth'.
Do the extreme highs 'shimmer' and decay in the air realistically and beautifully.
Next is 'soundstage'...
How widely beyond the speakers does it project and how deeply behind (and in front) can one hear.
And finally, the most important ingredient and the most elusive.....
Is there 'magic' and 'emotional projection' that allows the sound to move me to tears or quiver with excitement or shake my head in disbelief....
This quality is hard to reproduce via the Youtube videos.
Therefore....in my system......there are cartridges which have more 'shimmering' highs.
There are cartridges which have more 'air' and 'transparency'.
There are cartridges which go convincingly lower.
There are cartridges which project a wider and deeper 'soundstage' and yes.......there are cartridges which manage to give me more 'magic' and 'emotion'.
So whilst I do love the LDR......I wouldn't listen to it exclusively 🤗
Thank you again Frogman....
Even though you have proclaimed a new 'Benchmark' in the cartridge comparisons....do you think it still relevant if we continue to compare cartridges to the Palladian?
Regards
|
So I've had the most frustrating 'listening' week...and I blame Frogman ☝️ I've had the AZDEN YM P50VL for 10 years but when I first tried it then....it didn't 'make the cut' and so ended up collecting dust in a drawer. At Frogman's suggestion....I mounted it in the DV-507/II whilst I admired its NUDE LINE CONTACT DIAMOND and sat back to listen.... Aaaaahhh 😱.... Unlistenable!!! Bass was bloated and ill-defined, treble was screechy and distorted and the mids were flat, recessed and boring. There was no soundstage (either side to side or back to front) and no air or transparency. In a sentence....it was one of the worst sounds I had heard from any cartridge in my system 🤬 But I persisted, hoping that 'break-in' might save the day...? I tried adjusting VTA up and down...I altered the VTF up and down...I tried loading it from 10K Ohm to 60K Ohm and tried capacitance values from 70pF to 430pF....and all combinations and permutations. Nothing seemed to help...so I kept playing the miserable thing for day after day...🥵 One day, I raised the VTA to the maximum setting that the DV-507/II allows 'On-The-Fly' so that the arm seemed to slope downward severely from the pivot....and this produced the most tolerable sound to date. So as an experiment....I used an Allen Key to physically raise the arm structure within it's VTA adjustment 'pod'. This now allowed an even HIGHER elevation at the Pivot (which no cartridge had ever required) and suddenly.....there was improvement 👋 So I raised it even further 'on-the-fly' whilst listening to the results...and at a certain point....it all clicked 🤗 If you look at the SIDE-VIEW of the mounted cartridge, you can see the severe slope downwards of the front with the stylus tip further below this. Added to the thickness of the top metal adapter for the P-Mount body....this places the stylus tip far below any cartridge I've owned and thus, thinking a HORIZONTAL headshell or tonearm is a nice 'starting point' for SRA......is a recipe for disaster. AS PALLADIAN LOMC CartridgeAZDEN YM P50VL MM Cartridge |
Interesting comments Frogman...... My apologies for leaving the glass doors open for the Azden so that the AC unit could be heard. I closed them for the Palladian 🙃 Interesting comments on the record quality because I have some friends who insist on hearing this track every time they come over....🤔 This may be an ideal time to hear what the DLR can do with the same track......? Princi has made his decision...🤗 LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge |
I managed to acquire an unused FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7fz LOMC cartridge from 1984. This NOS FR-7fz is the 'Holy Grail' for those who appreciate the FR-7 Series of LOMCs designed by the legendary Ikeda-san. As Art Dudley wrote... Way back in 1967, Ikeda-san founded Fidelity Research, a celebrated Japanese firm that left its mark on the world of phonography with its FR-64 series of tonearms and FR-1 and MC-202 cartridges. (One could say that Isamu Ikeda has left another, more personal mark, inasmuch as many of Japan's well-known cartridge builders have served him as apprentices.) After the earlier FR-7 and FR-7f, the final version FR-7fz came with an advanced nude LINE-CONTACT diamond pressure-fitted to an aluminium cantilever and cost an incredible 120,000 Yen in 1984. The Acoustic Systems PALLADIAN LOMC cartridge was designed by Dietrich Brakemeier as a 'tribute' to the FR-7fz and it will be interesting to hear what progress has been made in MC cartridge design in the last 35 years....🧐
FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7fz
AS PALLADIAN
FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7fz
(Sorry for overloading the mic in places)
AS PALLADIAN
(Sorry for overloading the mic in places)
|
Thanks for the clarification on the FR7 Dover.... I didn't know of the FR-7fc but note that is has a CONICAL STYLUS instead of the LINE CONTACT of the FR-7fz.... Have you ever heard one? What about it do you think, could make it different to the FR-7f and FR-7fz? And why.....if this was the 'ultimate' FR-7.....did Ikeda-san produce the FR-7fz as his final Fidelity Research design? I've heard the Sony XL-88D in direct comparison to the XL-88.... And I was tempted to acquire a Karat Nova 13D after reading your thoughts years ago.....but luckily, your warnings about the particular sample I had in mind, saved me from that possible disaster 😱 Of course I tried the PALLADIAN IN THE FR-66S and it did sound slightly better than in the WE8000.....but that's primarily because the FR-66S is the better arm 🤗 Contrary to your thoughts on knife-edge bearings handling the high-energy of LOMCs.....I find that the WE8000 is more comfortable with LOMCs than with the high-compliance MMs. There is an interesting development in the 'uber High-End' with its adoption of the vintage double knife-edge bearing SME3012R tonearm as the BEST arm for all LOMC cartridges. Read this THREAD from What's the Best Forum and you can see where users prefer it to even the SAT tonearm....and that's with modern LOMCs like the Colibri XPP, AirTight Supreme, My Sonic Labs Sig. Gold, Lyra Atlas and Etna and all the stone-bodied Koetsus. Thuchan loves the double knife-edge bearing SAEC 506/16 for his LOMCs and loves his WE8000 even more...😎 I re-listened to the first track with the Palladian and agree that 2/3 the way in....there appears to be distortion but I think it's mic overload or at one point....it's my fingers touching the microphone 🙃 |
@dover
I'm pleased you've been following (and like) the cartridge comparisons...😀
Are you able to easily hear the differences from the YouTube videos?
What about the differences between the LOMCs and the MMs?
Do you think there is a 'generic' difference in sound or presentation.....and if there is....do you think it's worth the enormous pricing differentials?
I'm interested in your thoughts on this latest comparison between the 35 year-old Ikeda designed FR-7fz and the modern tribute by Brakemeier...?
And of course....I'm eagerly awaiting Frogman's inimitable assessment 🧐
I also have found there are arm/cartridge synergies....
For instance....the WE-8000/ST does not allow high-compliance MMs to give of their best, but sounds sweet enough on MCs.
Great idea of yours to try the Sony XL-88 in it...👍
The Dynavector DV-507/II...surprisingly.....sounds brilliantly with virtually all the MMs I throw at it. That's why you see it used so prominently in these comparisons 🎶
Yet it doesn't 'shine' with the few LOMCs I've tried.....
There are however.....two (or three) arms I've found which are 'universal'.
The Copperhead and FR-64s/66s seem to allow ALL the cartridges I've tried in them, to deliver their best 😘
Quite special.....
|
Thanks for the great feedback guys 😘 It's good to have Dover's new perspective... I know you are both Decca fanboys.....so as a reward, I hope you enjoy this comparison....🤗 FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7fzLONDON DECCA REFERENCELet's see if Princi got it right again...? Regards |
Thanks Frogman,
You get no argument from me on this one....👌
Is there something that you are able to deduce from these comparisons with the LDR that separates the sound of the Deccas from LOMCs in general...?
Thanks again for a brilliant analysis 👍
|
Most audiophiles never have the opportunity to hear the legendary Fidelity Research LOMC cartridges comprising the FR-7 Series. Here's what Jonathan Carr says:- Here you can see just how huge the magnet structure is, and if you understand cartridge design, the uniqueness of the 7's innards will be very apparent. The magnet structure alone would spill over the body sides of any non-integrated headshell MC cartridge (at least that I am aware of), and underscores why FR never made a non-integrated headshell version of the 7. From my perspective (that of an active cartridge designer), the closest thing to a non-integrated headshell version of the FR-7 was the PMC-3, but even this remained quite a way off. The FR-7 had a radically different coil former (cube-shaped), likewise for the magnetics (dual magnets, quad polepieces). IMO, the FR7s were by far the most interesting of FR's MC designs, but the 7's basic design concept dictated that they would always be big, heavy monsters, suited for relatively few modern arms... My favorite FR-7s are the f and fz. The very low coil inductance of the FR-7 implies that loading can be fairly flexible, so I wouldn't be so concerned with the low impedance. Also, none of the FR-7s are overachievers in detail, and the top end extension is a little curtailed. so the downsides of transformer stepups won't be overly apparent. However, in consideration of the low coil inductance, should you choose a stepup transformer, I would look for a toroidal-core type.
FR-7fFidelity-Research FR-7f specs: ■ Price in 1980 was 77,000 yen ■ Power generation method: MC type cartridge ■ Output voltage: 0.15 mV (3.54 cm / sec., 45 °) ■ Output voltage: 0.2 mV (5 cm / sec., 45 °) ■ Output power: 2 × 10 -8 W (5 cm / sec 45 °) ■ Needle pressure: 2 g to 3 g ■ Load impedance: 3 Ω ■ Coil impedance: 2 Ω ■ Playback frequency: 10 Hz to 45 kHz ■ Channel separation: 28 dB (1 kHz) ■ Channel balance: 1 dB (1 kHz) ■ Compliance: 7 × 10 -6 cm / dyne (100 Hz, 20 ° C.), the compliance measured at conventional 10Hz will be about 13cu! ■ Tip: 0.15 mm square Refined contact, Solid Diamond needle (LINE CONTACT) ■ Weight: 30 g Even fewer audiophile ever have the opportunity to compare the BEST of the FR-7 Series.....the FR-7f and FR-7fz FR-7fz Fidelity Research FR-7fz Specifications Frequency Response: 10 Hz to 35 kHz
Channel Balance: 1 dB at 1 kHz
Dynamic Compliance: 13 m/mN at 10 Hz
Output Voltage: 0.24 mV at 1 kHz, 5 cm/s
Internal Impedance: 5 Ω
Tracking Force: 2.0-3.0 g, 2.5 g recommended
Stylus Tip: Modified with Ultimate Q4 Diamond
Weight: 29 g (including integral headshell) FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f LOMC Cartridge FIDELTY RESEARCH FR-7fz LOMC Cartridge |
- 7f is fuller sounding
- 7f is slightly more “refined” sounding That's what I hear....🤗
For me, more so with the 7f and while both sound very good they both sound “dated”. Interesting Frogman. Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "dated"?
unless I’m mistaken, the first in which the tone arm and turntable are the same for both cartridges. Almost ALL the tests between MM cartridges are conducted on the same turntable with the same arm (DV-507/II).
And the test with the vintage SPU and the modern SPU are on the same turntable with same arm as is the test of the LDR and FR-7f and the LDR and TK-7LCa.
The DenonDL-103R and FR-6SE are also on the same turntable and arm as are the Sony XL-55 and SPU Silver Meister as are the Palladian and MIT-1 and also the FR-7fz vs the LDR.
Thanks again for the feedback and glad you enjoyed the "fun" with Screaming Jay Hawkins....😀 |
Thanks Frogman, for amplifying (😜) your use of the word "dated" relating in particular, to MC cartridges..... It is here, where I believe we diverge significantly in our preferences and I believe you highlighted in an earlier Post, that your all-tube amplification system may be a factor...? Looking through the MCs that you've had/have in your system....I can't see many/any that could really be called 'modern' designs so I'm curious as to which 'modern' MCs you refer to when you state... Imo, excellent modern MC cartridges, are generally more refined sounding and offer better performance at the frequency extremes, the highs in particular. They do a better job of conveying the natural timbres and texture of instruments without harshness. My experience is quite the reverse....🤔 I find the 'modern' Lyras (Helikon, Titan i, Atlas) to be either coloured (Helikon) or unlistenable, with etched and screeching highs, recessed mids and little depth or realism in my SS system. I also, like you, had the VDH Grasshopper (aka Symphonic Line) which, whilst I preferred to the Titan i....shared many of its mid to high traits. The Koetsu Urishi I found decidedly boring whilst the Clearaudio Concerto and Insider Gold were coloured 'warm' in direct contrast to the Lyras. The Dynavector XV-1s was amongst the best (least flawed) of the 'modern' MCs in my system, but definitely added some tonal colouration to the presentation as well as having a monotonous 'signature' to everything played through it. The ZYX UNIverse was perhaps the most 'neutral' and least offensive of all the 'modern' MCs I've heard in my system and I lived with it for 8 years (going through two with a third as backup). It was only when I heard the 'old' LOMCs (and vintage MMs) from the 'Golden Age' of analogue...that I realised just what was missing from the ZYX 🧐 The Palladian, I agree.....is easily the best modern LOMC I've heard, but as I described, was designed by Dietrich Brakemeier with the 'sound' of the vintage FR-7f and 7fz in mind. Like Chakster....I don't see any progress or innovation in cartridge design (MM or MC) over the last 30 years to warrant better performance at the frequency extremes. In fact, most printed FR charts which regularly came with the vintage cartridges...are similar of better than those which can be found for 'modern' ones and we've actually lost some technology (beryllium cantilevers) that we had in the past. So what can account for our quite opposite 'general' views and preferences on cartridge design and sound...? Obviously your tube-based system vs my SS one is a significant factor....but in the end, it has to be 'preferences' and individual 'hearing' differences that set us apart. For instance...you often refer to the sound of 'horn' speakers in a somewhat derogative fashion whereas I like horns and the very best speakers I have heard are the AvantGarde Trios with triple-stacked Basshorns 🤯 It's commendable then, that faced with the difference in preferences between us...we are still able to have a meaningful dialogue on cartridge comparisons...🤝 |
I am a bit confused by your comment. First, I will point out that I did not say “current” MC’s. But you did call the sound of the FR-7f and 7fz "dated"......
Imo, excellent modern MC cartridges, the Palladian in particular and as heard in your comparisons are generally more refined sounding and offer better performance at the frequency extremes, the highs in particular. They do a better job of conveying the natural timbres and texture of instruments without harshness. Your use of the term "modern MC cartridges" to me.....seemed to imply 'current' 🧐
You have to admit, that the term "dated" has negative connotations...?
If I were to call 'tube technology' "dated"......it would sound 'judgemental'...although technically accurate.
In MY world..and IME and YMMV etc etc......the 'dated' cartridges (pre-digital) often sound more realistic, transparent and 'alive' (as opposed to 'live') than "modern MC cartridges".
So on this....we must agree to differ 🙃
On most other things...I agree with you 😀
I think "tube equipment captures/reproduces more of the nuances in the sound, texture and expression in the sound of live music than does solid state."
I lived with a complete tube phono/line preamp for 20 years and loved it.
As good as the Halcro DM10 preamp is (and it is)....it can't quite capture the 'air', transparency and three-dimensionality of tubes.
I tried many tube amplifiers in my system but unfortunately....because my 12" undamped paper-cone woofers are run 'full range' (no crossovers)....tubes did not have the damping factor needed to control the woofers 😢
I also agree about electrostatic speakers....
The best speakers I ever heard (in terms of realism and transparency) were the original Martin Logan CLS driven by Audio Research tube amplification.
Their sound is permanently embedded in my consciousness even after 25 years has passed.
And their midrange to high frequency presentation, is the benchmark in everything I try to achieve in my system.
We are now, two generations into the 'digital music' age, with most people on the planet having heard little else other than CD and digital music presentation.
To this day....I cannot sit and listen to CDs on my system for longer than 20 minutes without feeling annoyed and uncomfortable.
Whereas your brain is finely tuned to instrumental realism....mine is somehow 'wired' to reject 'digital'...🤯
I can discern very quickly, whether an analogue record has been digitally recorded...and unfortunately for me.....they are never (up to this point)...as musically satisfying.
Because of this 'digital age' which has inevitably engulfed us....I feel that 'modern' cartridge designers have (perhaps unknowingly) tried to emulate some of the perceived digital 'advantages' like increased high-frequency detail in the belief that it is perceived as 'more revealing...🙉
Now in regards to Screaming Jay Hawkins.....are you trying to imply that he is not classically trained.....😜
Regards
Henry
|
|
Could you tell which one is lighter or darker in colour ? Is boron darker ? Hi Harold, The Glanz MFG-610LX is darker than most of my Beryllium cantilevers....but not as dark as most of my Boron ones 🧐 So I don't think colour (in this case) is an infallible indicator..... Regards |
I agree with you Frogman....
And it's something I didn't expect as I generally prefer beryllium cantilevers...🤔
And my apologies for messing up the cartridge names....
Of course they are the GRACE LEVEL II/Beryllium and GRACE LEVEL II/Ruby.
Not SHURES.........
Trouble is, I can't now edit the Post to correct the titles.
I've done it on the YouTube videos though.
Thanks again for the comments...
|
You’re welcome Harold.
I think you’re probably right, except it’s a ‘hollow’ tube....and I don’t recall seeing a hollow boron tube before?
The cartridges in the shoot-out above are NOT F-9 Graces.
They are F-8 Level II....
Different animals altogether. Two to three times the price of an F-9 Ruby 🤪
|
The inevitable 'Shootout'....... The music and performer may be 'corny' to some, but the recording on this album does some extraordinary things in my Living Room which the video comes nowhere near conveying...☹️ The sound has incredible depth and height seeming to 'bend' around the room and enveloping the space like 4-Channel tried to... GRACE LEVEL II/RubyAS PALLADIAN LOMC |
Unabashed ear-candy Haha....soooo right 🥳 Thanks again for the wonderfully detailed commentary Frogman. I won't comment until you hear a 'proper' test...🧐 Personally, I would love to hear the two cartridges playing something like the Stravinsky “Firebird”. Rather than repeating an album....I think I might have your 'number' Frogman, when it comes to musical tastes......🤞 GRACE LEVEL II/Ruby AS PALLADIAN LOMC |
What a bummer......💩 YouTube advised me that due to copyright issues it was blocked in some countries but normally it lists the countries. This time it didn't...... And I'm sure you would have like it Frogman.....Final movement of Copland/Dance Symphony on RCA Victor 👅 Oh well...we'll have to 'settle' for some more Stravinsky..... GRACE LEVEL II/Ruby AS PALLADIAN LOMC |
Strangely enough.....in the reality of my listening room....the "unabashed ear-candy" of Julio Iglesias immediately revealed the differences between the two cartridges.
And not in a subtle way......
The Palladian doubled the 'air envelope' within my room pushing the sound higher, wider and deeper whilst at the same time, separating the vocals and digitally manipulated instrumentals into some semblance of three-dimensionality.
The background noise-floor was also lowered.
A pity none of this is perceivable on the video...
The Stravinsky on the other hand, was far more subtle and difficult for me to distinguish the differences.
That's why we need YOU Frogman....😜
Thanks again.
|
The first Shure cartridge I owned, was the little known ML140HE. recommended by a US audio buddy..... In what was a cheap and unassuming plastic body....Shure had armed the ML140HE with a nude Line-Contact stylus on a THIN WALLED HOLLOW BERYLLIUM CANTILEVER 🤯 My next experience with a Shure, was the ubiquitous V15/III which I actually bought, so I could transplant a JICO SAS STYLUS therein. This to me, sounded far better than the original V15/III stylus. Frogman does not like Shure cartridges..... but I doubt he has heard the ML140HE? 🤔 SHURE ML140HE SHURE V15/III/SAS |
More detailed comments forthcoming, but Princi and I are in complete agreement; Hahaha........😂 |
Is the HE referring to hyper elliptical stylus btw ? I think you might be right..... I thought the ML could stand for 'MicroLine'...but the specs call it hyper-elliptical. Imagine back then....we had the technology to produce, not only solid beryllium but also HOLLOW beryllium cantilevers. They could also produce hollow boron and titanium cantilevers. These days, the only HOLLOW they can do is aluminium. For boron, sapphire, ruby, diamond....solid is the only choice. BTW....the SAS stylus for the V15/III is on a solid boron cantilever. |
I preferred both my V15vxmr & V15vmr with a brazillian and a dab of superglue on the stylus holder - as used in my Eminent Technology ET2. Accurate tonearm set up, properly grounded TT & clean records obviate the need for heath robinson type solutions. I agree..... The Dynamic Stabiliser also acts as a stylus protector so I just keep it in the fully 'up' position when playing a disc. |
Thanks for that Shure 'Ranking Chart' Harold......
Very useful 👍
|
Thanks to Harold's Shure Cartridge Ranking Guide (above).....I managed to find a SHURE ULTRA 500 in mint condition with its MICRO RIDGE STYLUS still sharp and shiny 🤗 Unfortunately for the last month, one of my Halcro DM-58 Monoblocks has been in Adelaide (with its maker) having a faulty capacitor in one of the protection circuits replaced so I have only been able to listen through headphones or to mono records on one speaker 😢 The ULTRA 500 is certainly a step-up from the rather flimsy plastic construction of both the ML140 HE and V15/III. So with a TRIPLE-COMPLEMENT of Shures......does one hear what one pays for.....? Hopefully Frogman and Harold won't let us down with their contributions....🧐 SHURE V15/III/SASSHURE ML140HESHURE ULTRA 500 |
Thanks for the feedback Dover..... Good stuff 👍 I'll refrain from comment in case Frogman gives his appraisal (I hope he hasn't abandoned us?)..... I have no doubts that the ET2 is a superlative arm as I've heard nothing but praise for it from many people I trust (including you)... It will just never find a spot in my system for various reasons... I'm not convinced your lovely dog is a Linda Rondstadt fan though. Au contraire mon frère..... You will notice that Princi was absent for the V15/III performance but stayed on the couch opposite my listening spot for the whole ML140HE performance. For the Ultra 500, he started on the couch opposite me but quickly came over to join me at the best listening position. Make of that what you will......🤗 |
Agree with you Dover on your Shure rankings.....
Despite Princi's preferences, the V15/III/SAS sounds more refined than the ML140HE.
Just be aware that the substitution of the SAS stylus improves the 'standard' V15/III and its ranking ahead of the 140HE would not guaranteed without stylus upgrade.
I suspect that if Shure had given the ML140HE a better designed body (more like the Ultra 500)....it could sound better than it does.
The Ultra 500 is in a different class altogether 🤗
It's refinement, cohesion, transparency and detail retrieval is impressive.
No matter what I throw at it (genre-wise)....I never tire of listening to this super cartridge.
Certainly amongst the top of my MM cartridge collection.
Will be interesting to hear it against the 'King'.....the Palladian 🧐
|
The stylus holder on mine is grey.
Is there any significance to the different colours?
|
Thanks Frogman....
I thought we had 'lost' you...😢
I was going to dedicate the next 'Shootout' to the 'late' Frogman 👅
I hope you have clicked on the 'Follow' note at the top of the discussion Thread as you will then receive an Email notification of all new Posts?
Great to have you back...
|
Some audiophiles seem to think that 'Uber Systems' are only worthwhile when playing perfectly recorded Classical or Jazz recordings (unamplified instruments in real space a la H. Pearson and The Absolute Sound). I especially have avoided most of the known 'Audiophile Test Records' in these videos, mainly because I generally don't agree they are 'great' but also because I mostly can't stand the music....🙉 I have found that ALL types of music and recordings benefit from higher resolution systems IF the system is REALLY good. I've heard several million dollar systems I wish I hadn't.....😂 I have a large collection of Reggae, Electronica, Hip-Hop, Rap, R&B, Zydeco, Pop which ALL benefit from higher resolution playback. This 'Shootout' is dedicated to Frogman (thus the LDR) who I suspect is a 'closet' Hip-Hop/Rap fan....... SHURE ULTRA 500 MM CartridgeLONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI CartridgeSHURE ULTRA 500 MM CartridgeLONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge |
Haha....no no Frogman.
All good 😘
I've been busy lately attending to things around the house which seem to pile up till they become almost overwhelming 🥵
The 'end' however is hopefully in sight....
I am a little perplexed though with your opinions on the Shures, as I really can't hear what you describe no matter what genre I throw at them.
Particularly the Ultra 500 which, in my listening room....is one of the finest and most enjoyable of all my cartridges.
We'll have to agree to differ on this one...🤔
It's interesting to see what are the most viewed cartridges on Youtube...
The Victor X-1 and Z1/SAS are the most watched with the Empire 400D/III Gold in hot pursuit.
The LDR is racking up views across its many videos as is the Shure V15/III/SAS.
The FR-7fz is surprisingly heavily viewed....probably because of its reputation and rarity?
I'm thinking about the next 'shoot-out'.....
Any suggestions?
Regards |
Again, they can’t both be equally good at replicating the sound of music if they each sound so different from the other. But ALL my cartridges sound different to each other....👅
That's the beauty (to me) of having these two different turntables, six arms and 50+ cartridges 🥳
If you were right (in the absolute sense).....I would keep the LDR and the Palladian and sell all my other cartridges..🧐
The LDR is not the favourite cartridge of my collection....
Nor is the Palladian....
They are BOTH amongst my favourite 10-12 👍
But I would be devastated if I couldn't listen to my Victors or SPUs or Signets or Graces or Shures or FRs or Sonys or Empires...
It's the DIFFERENCES between all these gorgeous creatures that I celebrate 🥳
Of course they all can't be RIGHT.....
But they CAN all be wrong....even the LDR.
Is the Ultra 500 the equal of the LDR....?
I can only say that I can listen to the Ultra 500 for longer (without the itch to change) than I can the LDR...
But I really do appreciate your insight and comments.....
Now....which two cartridges would you like to hear next? 😀
|
Addendum to my Post above:
During the month that one of my DM-58 Monoblocks was being repaired......I was forced to listen through headphones (Audeze LCD-2 Magnetic Planars with Schiit Audio Lyr Valve Headphone Amp).
Having listened to my cartridges for 40 years solely through speakers...I was unable to recognise or differentiate any of my cartridges through the headphones.
The sense of transparency, soundstage, depth of field, bass location, room dynamics etc were all missing and thus my 'knowledge' of the specific cartridge traits had disappeared.
This is not to say Frogman, that your method of listening through headphones is flawed.....only that it's far far different from the way I experience my cartridges in my listening room.
Could you perhaps try to listen through speakers (or iPad) to see if you can hear some differences in presentation?
Regards |
Thanks for the comments Dover.
There have been more than a few cartridges I've had that "I simply cannot stand"......two of them, much-acclaimed LOMCs with $12,000 pricetags 😱
In these cases, I sell them off fairly quickly....
Of the other 50 I still have, they all have "shortcomings" but also they all have 'something' that enlightens me and their "shortcomings" are not significant enough (nor annoying enough) to prevent my enjoyment.
Unfortunately....I 'fried' my original XV-1s (don't ask) and sent it to Axel who saved it by rewiring the coils (and replacing the stylus).
In doing so, he reduced the output to about 0.12mV but it sounded good 😃
Then one day......the right channel 'burnt out' 🥵
And I haven't decided if I liked it enough (in comparison to some of my other cartridges) to send it to Peter Ledermann.....?
|
I thought it might be interesting to hear the differences between the two cheap Fidelity Research MM cartridges the FR-5E and FR-6SE. There are different opinions on which is the better cartridge 🧐 The FR-5E is a low-compliance elliptical stylus on aluminium cantilever obviously designed to suit the heavy Fidelity Research tonearms like the FR-64s and FR-66s. The FR-6SE is a similarly specified elliptical stylus which cost $210 (on release) compared to the $130 of the 5E. What the differences are with the 'motor' I have no idea.....? FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-5E MM CartridgeFIDELITY RESEARCH FR-6SE MM Cartridge |
Something I said Frogman? 🙂
|
Agree with you both on the FR-5E and 6SE,,,,,,
I have always preferred the 6SE to the 5 and 5E and have been confounded by the preference of some (J Carr and Chakster) for the FR-5E?
They are BOTH coloured cartridges in that they emphasise the 'warmth' of presentation (in a good way-like tubes 😀).
But whilst the FR-6SE keeps a happy balance in the spectrum between bass to treble....the 5E doesn't, almost descending into 'syrupy'.
The beauty of both of them, to me, is the projection into the room of the entire soundstage.
It envelopes you and because they are so warm and free of any brittleness....the louder one plays, the better (and more natural) they become.
In fact they are the ideal cartridges for turning 'digital' recordings into 'analogue-sounding' recordings 🤩
Despite the 'easy' preference for the FR-6SE....I can still happily listen to the FR-5E.....at least on the Victor DD.
On the Raven AC-2, it becomes admittedly annoying 🥴
I will elaborate on the previous discussion about the LDR and the Ultra 500 shortly Frogman....😎
I feel there is some resistance to appreciating my 'in-room' experiences...? 🙉
I started off with the LDR in the FR-64S on the TT-101 Noromance...but the notorious reputation of the Deccas for mistracking, were borne out on all my tonearms other than the FR-66S 🙏🏽
Regards
|
Are you certain it wasn’t a setup or record issue? Well I'm certain it wasn't a record issue because it occurred on all records.
I'm not certain it wasn't a setup issue but it occurred on the three tonearms surrounding the Victor......the knife-edge bearing SAEC, the gimbal-bearing FR-64S and the DV-507/II. By 'mistracking'....I mean it 'jumped' a groove in only two spots (perhaps the nulls?) on each record. Not too annoying, but nada with the FR-66S 🤗 |
But, some get closer to it than others. And that is what I hear and try to describe. The differences may be very subtle, but they are there. To me, the Decca sounds closer to the sound of music as I know it than the Shure does. So, if that is to be the case, then there have to be differences between the two. I suspect that you are reacting more strongly to what I am describing as the differences (and reason for the preference) than is warranted? Also keep in mind that, as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues. For me that is the most important aspect of it all. I get it Frogman....🤗 And I appreciate how as a musician....this is surely the most important thing for you. For me however....there are too many variables in the performance, recording-quality, mastering, editing, cutting and stamping of the vinyl discs that I am not consciously 'comparing' the sound to 'live music'. I've been to so many live concerts (classical, rock, electronic, reggae, jazz) that I know, when the sound is at its best (and particularly with amplified music)......there is no way that a recording can compete with the guttural, body-tingling, stomach-churning, ear-splitting and mind-blowing sound of 'LIVE' music. Conversely.....when the live sound is POORLY produced (at the mixing desk with amplified music or due to the acoustics of the venue or seating position with unamplified music)....I can easily prefer the sound I achieve at home. So despite the fact that the instruments are 'REAL' and their sounds are 'AUTHENTIC'....if the END RESULT is flawed in any way.....I am not moved 🥶 HERE is a concert I attended a few years ago in Ravello (Italy) performed by the Shenzhen Symphony Orchestra on a clifftop overlooking the Amalfi Coast. Despite the presence of 65 live musicians playing REAL instruments in open air.....the 'sound' was abysmal!!!! I firstly sat in the middle, three rows back and could not believe what I was hearing... No oomph, no bass, no dynamics, no 'soundstage', little volume and definitely no MAGIC 😱. I changed my seating on 5 occasions to see if the sound might improve with elevation or positioning....all to no avail. When I listen to a particular cartridge in my system at home....It needs to have the tonal balance from lower bass, mid-bass, midrange to treble reasonably balanced. The midrange to me is fundamental.... If it is not convincing and doesn't reproduce a palpable three dimensionality to my ears....it fails. The important differences I hear between cartridges are in their presentations of 'Soundstage'...side to side, front to back, illusion of depth, separation of instruments and the air around them. As much as I like the LDR.....the Ultra 500 goes slightly down lower with more authority in the bass. The 'highs' on the Ultra 500 have slightly more 'air' and 'transparency'. The LDR is definitely not a 'soundstage' champ 👎 Its 'width' remains inside the two speakers whereas the Ultra 500 extends past the outsides of both. The LDR has little 'back' depth and virtually no forward projection whereas the Ultra 500 fairly 'bulges' in a parabolic manner INTO the listening room so that if I turn the volume really high...I fear it might 'push' against me 😝 These characteristics I believe, may only be apparent from my listening position 'in situ'. We can't expect them to be heard or appreciated over a Youtube video... And that's why I think we are not quite connecting Frogman...🤔 But then I'm surprised you manage to hear ANY of the distinctions you so ably describe via such a limited medium.. I'll keep 'em coming as long as you keep liking and contributing...🥳 Regards |
Thanks Frogman.....
The reason I showed and commented on the live orchestra in Ravello is that they were all REAL unamplified instruments in 'real' space yet to me.....it didn't matter 😴
It left me cold 🥶 and unmoved 🙉....and I really didn't want to stay till the end. And I DIDN'T......🏃🏻♂️
My point is, that despite this being 'The Absolute Sound' by HP's definition......it wasn't 'The Holy Grail' and if my system sounded anything like this, the Classifieds on A'Gon would be full of my components 🤣
And no..........it really wasn't easily recognisable as 'live' instruments to me 👎 and I've had previous similar experiences.
I understand completely how important the 'live' experience is to you....but to me, I want 'theatre' ⚡️💥🎉
I want to be immersed, astounded, moved and left shaking my head in disbelief at what I am hearing in my own room.....
That's what keeps me turning it on almost every day (as I have for 40 years).
But I suspect that most in this enigmatic hobby of ours....have slightly different personal priorities.
And that's also why I simply 'hang' on your descriptions of my cartridges.....most of the time I don't know what you're talking about until I go back and listen to what you have pointed out...🤔
Vive les differences....🙃
Regards and thanks again.
|
