I prefer the DD rendition of both pieces. Admittedly, there is a little more euphony with the Raven but I prefer the cleaner and crisper Victor. Frogman’s astute observation is of note too. I wonder if this is why the LDR never quite sounded 100% on the Raven-something I have pointed out before. Interesting...
|
I agree with @frogman on the piano being recessed somewhat and the better air around instruments on the Victor. However, in other aspects, it's as if he's listening to swapped versions of what I hear. I hear the Palladian as romantic and euphonic, and even colored, overly saturated and dense. The Vic sounds like someone is in the room - clean, neutral, airy, transparent. The Palladian like it's been studio enhanced. Admittedly, there are qualities of warmth and woody tone with the MC, and the piano is definately more present. I just prefer that cooler, more honest rendering of the MM.
|
I used reasonably good over the ear headphones on my phone. It's weirding me out! I'm going to have to try on PC to my second rig downstairs later. Keep well. |
I listened again on my all tube/Spendor/REL S30 rig. Amazing how it now sounds so more like a recording in free space compared to my headphones. I'm sure I heard your dog bark. I am convinced the Raven adds a golden warmth to the reproduction. There is also a thickening in the upper bass and lower mids. You played the AS on your SAEC arm in 2019, and it doesn't have that sound on the Victor. I also heard an album I know intimately on a Raven (Basis table?) at AXPONA '19 and that aspect was there then too. So, I can't be certain how the actual cartridges perform in their own right.Â
|
My wife even heard the difference playing the phone on the table. Much the same as what @dover said. Nicer tone and easier to follow. Transient attack might be a little slower.
Interestingly, I prefer 47k on my lesser Deccas. Mostly because I love detail and the sound I get.Â
|
Interesting. Love the Albinoni Adagio. The X1 reminds me of the older Decca C4.Â
|
Lisrened 3 times to each alternating between the recordings.
Initial reaction was:
1. Palladian - Where did the band go?
2. Z1 - Where did the strings go?
The Palladian sounded very syrupy while the Z1 had better air and sou ded cleaner.Â
|
From a quick listen on phone speaker.
MC is lush, sweet, detailed, and colored.
MM is clear, neutral, spacious, easy to follow. |
LOL.Â
Keep 'em coming. Love hearing these.
The truth is that a great table and arm will make inexpensive cartridges sing. |
I listened to the track on Tidal and the tweets are NOT there. I think it's his phone!
|
From my phone. Prefer the JMAS.
Why? At 1:15-1:30, there is a simple melody that is easily followed on the MIT1. On the P77, it falls apart.
The MC has more detail and longer sustains.
However, the MM has a somewhat cleaner, more neutral sound. There is some steeliness to the sound. |
Golly. That is interesting. Apologies for my musical ignorance compared to @frogman . Again this is just through my phone speaker.
MM - very easy to follow the basic melody of the piece. Clean sounding. Maybe even more dynamic. But that could be because fine detail is missing which may be swamping the system.Â
MC - initially sounded more cluttered by lots of additional information. Sustains and harmonics were elaborate. As the piece progressed, I could hear the colors of the instrument. Different timbres made it come alive. There was a fuller, richer bass. I much preferred this. I did think there was some over-saturation at times on some chords which didn’t sound right but I’ve no reference point.
PS. Your speakers seem too close to the turntables and right wall. Too far apart? The sofa in the middle and glass table are objects I would remove. |
Ha! Thanks for the smile, frogman.
I have the mono original of Love Letters. Now, I'll have to dig it out and see how it sounds on my Decca SG/P.
|
Decca - Clean, open, uncolored, unveiled, musical, emotional. Ketty is in the room.
FR - Nice (damned already!), musical in a warm and slightly irritating way, veiled by comparison, bass seems deeper but not quite as clear.
I listened to the MIT/Victor again - this time on PC/headphones. The MIT didn’t sound as good as this time - therefore aligning me more towards the Victor - with the caveat that there was more detail in the MIT.
You sure the Decca works well at 15k? Some say 33k, or 47k. But what about 1meg? You may be surprised.
|
The Signet is more forward with better air and is sweet as a nut.
I believe it's compliance is high but the FR66 is high mass. I wonder if this is causing excessive brightness.
The
Decca is amazingly less dynamic and immediate sounding in comparison.
Which makes me a little suspicious as to the accuracy of the Signet.
That notwithstanding, Â the Signet sounds very musical with lots more detail.
|
Thanks to your video, I held off buying a used Reference. And I run a SG/p as you know.Â
|
Dammit... another Audiogon post error. Lost long post @Admin |
Lost long post.
Long story short.
Sony just plays it, Signet tells the whole story. Better bass, drive, clarity, delineation, and purpose.Â
|
Thanks @frogman. I listened to both again and while acknowledging the Sony has more initial bite, things quickly fall apart when things get going. The Signet also gives an initial perception - that of being a little muddy and gray... but then the lower-end grunt lets you know it’s not messing around! Further listening through the Signet lets you into the construction of the music. I once had a Croft 4S power amp. It was finely detailed and warm and I enjoyed it. One day a friend hauled an early 90 pound Michelson & Austin TVA KT88 monster up the stairs. Hearing the same music through it was a revelation. Gone was the enveloping warmth and detail, replaced with a new, unprepared for coherence, neutrality and most importantly, insight. In the same manner, the Sony is not unlike that Croft amp. And the Signet is the M&A.
|
PS - Yes, a vote for same arm/same cartridge comparisons.
|
Why not put the FR-6SE on the FR-66S arm?
|
On my phone. Signet for me. Better separation of instruments and easier to follow the melodies weaving through the piece. |
SPU Silver sounds thin and spluttery on much of the pipe blowing, especially in the higher frequencies.
|
150 is clearer with more insight and I prefer it. There is something sweet and SPU Gold about the 180 though.
|
I agree with both. The Shure is in between so that's a pick. The Glanz is lovely and smooth with a rich musicality. I'd have to go with the Victor due to its more neutral sound. |
On my phone. Simon and Garfunkle sound more live with the Victor. The MC sounds more colorful initially ...until it just sounds colored and somewhat recessed. The MM is like opening the windows and hearing the live sound.
|
Interesting notes @frogman .Â
I'm recovering from illness so not able to listen through my digital rig.Â
By colored I mean that I can hear a color superimposed over the recording like a thin veil. I know it's probably an odd description and perception. Â Once I detect it in a setup, I hear it with every recording. Whether there are frequency response variations in the MM, I don't really notice on the phone but now I'm curious. Nevertheless, it sounds clearer and more live and exciting.
|
That was fun. It's a relief that B was not the LDR! |
Glanz - nice open sound, free and loose of damping which give it a dynamic quality. Initially, it almost sounds better than the MC...
Palladian - nice open sound, I can feel that there is more control over the music. Bass is tighter and more delineated, In fact, this is how most of it sounds. Voice and piano are more controlled, more etched and consequently, more musical information is imparted.
|
Lawnmower? I remember that song. "Jacob, wake up!"Â
|
Wonderful Harmonia Mundi record. The MM sounds great. On first listen, it sounded more fun to listen to. Bowed cello sounded purposeful and driven. It took three listens to appreciate the essential additional detail, sustain and decay of the (glass) bells and the snappier, spacious, colorful, playful percussion of sticks on rims by the Palladian to have the MC win it for me. I'm noticing a trend. The magnets are lively and free and make you wanna dance whilst the coils are detailed and precise.
|
Looking forward to more comparisons. Frogman summed it up. Always a great read. Thanks for the compliment Halcro. I'm partial to your Ketty Lester Love Letters track. I was somewhat disappointed by the London Reference when you played it before. I know the Decca's style of presentation can be a little Garrardy but was surprised by the relatively low level of fine detail. My Super Gold with Reference diamond sounds better. Something I put down to losses in the recording. Maybe this time, it'll be better!
|
Had a quick listen at the office on Sennheiser headphones. I can hear greatness in the London and lighter, sharper transients in the AS. I had a look over the other videos and see the London is in the FR66 on the Raven, all the time. As I mentioned above, and will stand corrected, the London is not performing at its best on that rig.
|
I’ll listen later. But for now, I see the Decca is in the belt drive. Is this the same video we saw before? If so, it might explain the slight softness and lack of detail I heard. I think the Decca excels when in an idler (or perhaps a DD) with no damping (like springs or cork etc.) whatsoever.
|
The vinyl does sound damaged especially on the right channel. Decca sounds the most live and immediate with good depth although it really picks up that surface noise. MC almost sounds like there's dirt on the stylus. Azden is in between. |
|
FR-6SE sounds better on my half inch piezoelectric Optiplex micro PC speaker.
|
@frogman Ha! I actually edited my reply by adding in "slight" as I felt it was on the recording and not the fault of the cartridge. |
Listened to them on my headphones. The 6 is in a different league. More snap, air, drums have a reverb against back wall, rim shots audible, clearer diction, more slight sibilance (not necessarily a good thing but at least you can hear it- tracking?), louder. The 5 is muddy and dull. It's not even worth go on about it any further!
|
When are you going to try the London Reference on the
TT-101/FR?
|
@halcro That’s disappointing. Are you certain it wasn’t a setup or record issue? I run all my Deccas on 2 lowly Jelco 850 12" and 9" (and a 12" 750 gimbal on another table) arms with knife-edge bearings (albeit good ones) and have no issues with mistracking.
Of course, now I’m second guessing my interpretation of mistracking!
|
I have three well-sorted Deccas and enjoy them. Recently, I bought an Audio Technica 750 with Shibata tip as it was highly recommended and I needed something for a second table. It does have seemingly better depth and sometimes more air. However, it is not as fast on transients as the Deccas. Consequently, when I do play a record with it, I feel as if something is fundamentally wrong with the presentation of the idea of the music. And, no matter what, I cannot use it for critical listening. I was going to send it back but...we collect things, and there's always background music!
|
I wish there was a Decca Reference with UP-OCC or silver wire and a beryllium "cantilever". (Although the Be might shatter!)
|
The Wall. Both sound great.
-- LDR
Pros - Clean, uncolored, transparent, lack of glare, rhythmically coherent, percussion sounded right. The helicopter sounded real and Water’s multi-tracked laugh sounded like Rog’s voice. The kids ethereal voices were more intelligible.
Cons - Flatter sounding. Instruments had less body.
-- Palladian
Pros - 3D space, instruments had a spacial feel about them like the were made of something tangible. Appearance of fine inner detail. You can feel the bass guitar strings twanging and the depth of the instrument from front to back. Nice. The kids' voices occupied space with reflected echoes adding to the detail but losing intelligibility.
Cons - Added a pale gold-colored haze. Music seemed less coherent and muddled. Listen to Waters laugh mentioned above. It sounds confused. Can't get the sense that the MC sounds processed out of my mind.
|
I compared both with my own original copy on my second rig. Not kidding and not surprised and I know you know this but golly, the YouTube version is bad.
EDIT - played the YouTube versions again after listening to the real record. The hell... they sounded much better than the pre-real record listening session.
EDIT - played it again on my main rig. Slate modded 401 with retipped Decca Gold (Garrott Bros Microscanner Decapod with LDR line contact).
Man. Nearfield on the Quad ESL, it is holophonic. Wow. I haven't played this record in ages. Great recording.
|
Heard the ice plop! What scotch are you drinking?
Wife said Shure sounds nicer playing on the phone, in bed.
|
You could always sell a cartridge and afford the good stuff!
Because of this post, I’m tasting 3 tonight. The Benriach 16, Auchentoshan 12, and The Balvenie Peat Week 14. Hic.
|
|
I prefer the Sony. There is more drive and menace in what I hear from it. Piccolo and tympani are clearer and easier to follow. The AS sounds cluttered and almost confused at times, even though it sounds more detailed.
|
Interesting that you brought up the ’powering through the stylus drag’ aspect of the DD. It’s both the very reason I run idlers and why I think you’re not hearing the best the LDR has to offer. (!) Speaking of 40 years. One of my Deccas is 35 years old and sounds excellent.
Wonderful Prokofiev. I’m listening to Symphony No.7 thanks to you!
|
