2. analog
  3. 140043-486

Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Many Forums have a 'Show your Turntables' Thread or 'Show your Cartridges' Thread but that's just 'eye-candy'.... These days, it's possible to see and HEAR your turntables/arms and cartridges via YouTube videos.
Peter Breuninger does it on his AV Showrooms Site and Michael Fremer does it with high-res digital files made from his analogue front ends.
Now Fremer claims that the 'sound' on his high-res digital files captures the complex, ephemeral nuances and differences that he hears directly from the analogue equipment in his room.
That may well be....when he plays it through the rest of his high-end setup 😎
But when I play his files through my humble iMac speakers or even worse.....my iPad speakers.....they sound no more convincing than the YouTube videos produced by Breuninger.
Of course YouTube videos struggle to capture 'soundstage' (side to side and front to back) and obviously can't reproduce the effects of the lowest octaves out of subwoofers.....but.....they can sometimes give a reasonably accurate IMPRESSION of the overall sound of a system.

With that in mind.....see if any of you can distinguish the differences between some of my vintage (and modern) cartridges.
VICTOR X1
This cartridge is the pinnacle of the Victor MM designs and has a Shibata stylus on a beryllium cantilever. Almost impossible to find these days with its original Victor stylus assembly but if you are lucky enough to do so.....be prepared to pay over US$1000.....🤪
VICTOR 4MD-X1
This cartridge is down the ladder from the X1 but still has a Shibata stylus (don't know if the cantilever is beryllium?)
This cartridge was designed for 4-Channel reproduction and so has a wide frequency response 10Hz-60KHz.
Easier to find than the X1 but a lot cheaper (I got this one for US$130).
AUDIO TECHNICA AT ML180 OCC
Top of the line MM cartridge from Audio Technica with Microline Stylus on Gold-Plated Boron Tube cantilever.
Expensive if you can find one....think US$1000.

I will be interested if people can hear any differences in these three vintage MM cartridges....
Then I might post some vintage MMs against vintage and MODERN LOMC cartridges.....🤗
halcro

Showing 14 responses by rauliruegas

rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @noromance  :  " come across a better combination... "
That it's: " combination " not isolated cartridge test and gradinig it.


"""   selected the best combination of arm/table to enable each cartridge to perform at its best.... """

When we own several tonearms, headshells and TTs I know by first hand experiences that " at its best " exist but because exist too almost endless combinations for each cartridge well the task needs several months to do it only for one or two cartridges and only if you have a precise accurate repeatable test overall proccess.

Anyway I really appreciated your gentle wise answers. Just  follow with the fun !

R.


rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @frogman : In good shape. Don't you think that could be more appropiated to " talk "/grade not about cartridges but about two analog rigs?

In your posts and the other gentleamans ones always refered that this cartridge is better than the " other ", Denon, Shure, Sony or whatever.

If you think that it's ok to follow stating " this cartridge " and the " other cartridge " then I would like to understand how  you aisle the cartridge it self from the analog rig is surrounded when those analog rigs are way way different and where the cartridge overall set-up: alignment, VTA/SRA, AZ, VTF and the like were fixed by Halcro self music/sound priorities and even that SPL was not matched?

It has to be a coherent explanation to talk of cartridges instead analog rigs.  I know that you have a lot of fun with but I just " wonder " about because all of you are mature audiophiles and music lovers.


Thank's in advance,

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @lewm  : Even tthat all here is about of fun you have to think that cartridge quality performance is " disturbed " by " thousands " of different kind of " parameters/conditions ". 
In the example you posted: 

one TT is BD and the other in a DD one, both arm boards different, both TT plynth different, both TT platter surface in touch with the LP surface different, both tonearms with different effective length and effective mass, both tonearms with different wiring, one tonearm with removable headshell and the other with out it, different resonance frequency in both tonearms, different tracking error too and other additional " disturbing " parameters.

When things are so different it's ovbious that exist differences in the overall performance.

Anyway, my target was and is not to go in deep about and as I said before: fun is fun and this is the thread target.

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @halcro  and Magicians : and I mean it in good shape. I know that all of you are really getting big fun in this cartridge party, good and please continue with.

For me is not very atractive this kind of " fest ". Anyway I wonder if this is a true cartridge " game " or something else and I have a question for all the Magicians:

how any one of you can separate the cartridge quality performance from the headshell or tonearm or TT or arm board where @halcro  mounted each cartridge?  I know for sure I can't do it especially for grading each cartridge quality level performance against others and if we add our each music/sounds preferences things goes more complicated for me. Btw the OP title is: " hear my cartridges ".

I know I can do it when everything is the same for each cartridge and even with is not an easy task.
 In the other side I never had patience for shoot-outs through headphones maybe because I'm accustom to live room/system.

I ask my self : It's a valuable excercise for the " magicians " that can't validate it?

Anyway and as I said this post is in good shape so go a head gentlemans  ! ! ! fun is fun no matter what.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.




rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @bydlo  : That cartridge needs a very well damped tonearm and that the cartridge will mates with the cartridge the range of frequency resonance and that the phono stage has high overload margin.

You are playing with load resistance but you need to play too with load capacitance and you can't do it.

""   I do not dare to touch VTA as I think I’m in the sweet spot and I don’t use VTA for tonal adjustments. ""

Why do you think are in the sweet spot? if you have the " rigth " damped tonearm and phono stage high overload margins and is reallya good phono stage: why all those troubles?

Certainly is not an easy set-up cartridge but seems to me that you are testing at random with out have well defined your targets according your system limitations, nothing is perfect.

Maybe the change on VTF that noromance posted helps him but is not a very good advise to set the VTF lower than the manufacturer specs especially with cantilever-less cartridges that could makes more gharm to the LPs than good.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear friends @halcro  : As with ruby/saphyre diamond is synthetic too and more a hype than a true reality that cartridge with diamond cantilevers performs best, it's only marketing.

The manufacturers of diamond cantilever cartridges put very special attention/care on each one an all parameters, measures and voicing with their diamond cantilever models to the cartridges can achieve a different ( but not really better ) sound quality than the same models with boron cantilevers but if those same designers put the same grade of care, tigth tolerances, voicing, etc, etc with the boron ones these boron cantilever cartridge will outperforms the diamond one.

For me and till today boron in that specific job is unbeatable.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
@dover  : Those 1.3/1.7 Dyna cantilevers has another characteristic that is near the cantilever-less cartridge designs and it's : quickness perception on the MUSIC we are listen to because the transients has that quickness " sensation/feeling ".

Even that I don't like any more the Dyna short cantilever cartridges but the other ones but this is because what you posted: overall design characteristics.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.

rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @dover  : "  The short cantilevered Dynavectors being an extreme example with super extended high frequency response. "

Well that wie band frequency is not exactly because the short cantilever. 
I think that the advantage of that short cantilever in Dynavector cartridges is that exist or is reduced at minimum the additional self developed cantilever vibrations/resonances and this helps a lot for better quality level performance of what we are listen it through in our systems.

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @frogman  : Something you have to remember that the ruby/saphyre material in cartridge cantilevers are not the real gems but synthetic one so are the same material. Don't you think?.

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @frogman  : Other than wikipedia:

https://geology.com/gemstones/ruby-and-sapphire/

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @dover  : """  At the end of the day there is no magic bullet - the sound of a particular cartridge is just the sum of parts, materials and technologies employed and the overall design objectives of the designer. "

Totally true, that is all about and that's why halcro does not likes the cartridges he experienced with boron cantilever but he did not like it not because the boron  but because the cartridge overall design and quality level excecution to that design. Tha's all because per sé boron is a superior material in that specific application.

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @frogman  : You are rigth, technically are not the " same " but on cartridge cantilever job performs the same.

Btw, I had the ruby/sapphire and boron JICO with the Garrot and my first hand experiences with was like you: boron hands down the jewels.

Everything the same is almost imposible to beat boron cantilever material. Boron get together all desired characteristics to fulfill top cartridge designs, it's as this material exist becauase the needs for cantilever cartridges.


R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @sdrsdrsdr  : Many years ago but with no doubt the boron version performed better.

Now, the 180 is very good cartridge but not the best MM out there. His ceramic body material used is way resonant but in those times manufacturers of analog items were in love with ceramic: SAEC headshells, JVC/VICTOR headshell, AT turntable mats, Audiocraft turntable mats and many more. 
From there Ortofon started to use ceramic in its MC 3000 to the MC5000. Now ceramic is not only resonant but to fragile too.

R.
rauliruegas
13,125 posts
 
Dear @halcro  : "" 
Can you actually hear the differences between cantilever materials....?
My answer.......I'm not sure 🤔

The reason I'm regularly asked this question is because I've often written that I prefer Beryllium to all other materials.
This is no accident.....
.I have discovered that the majority of the 80+ cartridges that I LOVE.....seem to share Beryllium as their only common feature.
On the other hand.....the cartridges that disappoint me the most, seem to share Boron as their only common feature.  ""


Well, not only you but any audiophile with a decent room/system should be abble to listen the differences between cartridge different cantilever materials. 
Listen experiences of different cantilevermaterials in the same cartridge is a rare opportunity for some of us: as the Jico ruby/sapphire/boron .

In other thread J.Carr was very specific answering the question : which more important the stylus shape or cantilever?. His answer was that cantilever always makes a higher difference than cartridge stylus shape. That was him.

In the other side and as cantilever material beryllium  is way inferior to boron or diamond in that specific job where we requires  high stiffness with non-self vibrational/resonace at all..Here you can read facts that tell you that boron is superior to the beryllium:

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/young-modulus-d_417.html

beryllium elasticity modulus: 287


http://biotsavart.tripod.com/bmt.htm

boron: 400.   Way superior

https://www.azom.com/properties.aspx?ArticleID=591

beryllium hardness: 3800

in the boron link you can read:  9800.

Tensile strength:

beryllium: 800    boron: 3100


Halcro, this is at least the third time that I post those facts about in other threads where you participated and is a little funny that till today you just can't learned on that specific subject.

What you prefer means nothing other that that is what you like it. What it count here is which is better cantilever material and facts are facts like it or not.

@lewm , yes you are rigth both are same material: corundum, with different color.

No one can question that Diamond and boron are the ones for cartridge cantilever as a material characteristic facts no matters what.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
More to discover