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 đ 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.....đ€Ș 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.....đ€
Some crazy post here again about ceramic base of the Audio-Technica cartridges, it looks like someone pretending to be more knowledgeable that Audio-Technica engineers, right ?
Let me add one quote directly from the Audio-Technica manual for their AT-ML series of reference MM cartridges:
*** "Audio-Technica engineers have ensured against unwanted parasitic vibration with an anti-resonance ceramic mounting base." ***
In other worlds Ceramic Base is there only for one reason and this reason is to eliminate resonance, but the Mexican claimed the anti-resonance base increasing the resonance. One of the most stup*d statements I have ever read on this forum!
AT-ML180 is one of the best MM cartridges ever made. Ceramic base is anti-resonance base designed by AT engineers for this cartridge. This is all you need to know.
Anybody asked about Saec or Victor headshell ? How those shells from different manufacturers related to AT-ML top of the line moving magnet cartridges ?
Hey @halcro :)) ! I hope it is ok to post it here, could not find a better thread. I've finally tested very low (16.5k) load on my London Decca Reference, motivated by your earlier findings from may 2020 "
At 15K Ohms and 430pF....the cartridge simply comes 'alive'.... The changes in loading produce more fundamental differences than heard on many of the cartridge vs cartridge comparisons IMO
" I first went down from 49k to 33k. Together with a VTA adjustment and one magic trick (change of....ekhm...fuses in the amp...;) this gave me absolutely thrilling sound. Super direct, "naked", alive but to extreme, wild, unpredictable, soundstage to die for, music touching me deeply so that I had to make frequent stops while listening to digest what I was hearing. Or so was the 1st impression. On the downside the tonal balance was still shifted upwards or so I suspect. Great operatic voices of the past like Sutherland would quite frequently run into an overload on the highest notes.
I then went to 16.5k. I have not control over the capacitance so in both cases 33k and 16.5k it was the same, around 300pf including the tonearm cable. The sound: More polite, a bit recessed, flowing, musical, creamy and syrupy, not so raw and unpredictable, soundstage more recessed and a bit less detailed. The tonal balance seemed better, the high note overload gone without the bass becoming loose and boomy. But I had a feeling I've lost something. This incredible "naked directness". I've changed output tube in the phono and some of the sparkle came back but still there is this a bit of that syrupy souce of politeness left.
I plan to test 25k tomorrow to "control the sparkle" as you have put it nicely :)
Thank you v much for sharing your experience and a continuous inspiration Halcro!
@noromance Surprisingly 47k in my circumstances (all this loading is very very âpersonalâ) wasnât that sparkling. The bass was cut, which I could easily verify changing to SPU Silver Meister mounted on the same deck and well, deeply loaded. But the crazy sparkle of 33k wasnât there. BTW the bass of 33k and lower is simply superb! Deep organic, explosive when needed. Just the heights that run into overload sometimes which i guess was not the recording engineers' intention.
Iâm using RN60 Dales for finding the right value, then switching to Charcroft Z-foils. Very transparent resistors.
I settled on 22k vishays for Garrott Bros modified Decca London Gold with micro scanner. Probably set up about 10-15 of them in various arms. Also tried mounting resistors on cartridge, end of arm and emd of phono cable. Each position changed subtlely but getting the R optimised had the biggest impact.
Hi @bydlo đ, Thanks for the update and the kind words.... As you rightly state.... loading is very personal and inherently 'system dependent'. I suspect your intended loading of 25K may be just 'on the money' đ€ Just remember to try slight changes to VTA and VTF which are all part of the complex recipe. Looking forward to your continuing updates. Regards
My LDR assault continues... At 16.5k, changed VTF from 1.90 to 1.81. Opened up the sound a bit. Good. I do not dare to touch VTA as I think Iâm in the sweet spot and I donât use VTA for tonal adjustments. Keeping 1.81g, I jumped from 16.5k straight to 28.8k. Wow again! First thing to notice - paradoxically - was the bass! More punchy, more present, giving a better foundation for the rest. The syrup of 16.k loading almost gone. More contrast both dynamical and in frequency extremes. More drama almost at the 33k level but still not there. Like a ride on high speed where do donât know whatâs rounder the next turn (although the LPâs Iâm using I know by heart). Damn loving it!
As for the HF overload I reported with 33k - I had that epiphany at night. What if my amp is overloaded or the headphones (I listen on Stax O2mkI) overload my ears? Cause the rest sounded to damn right to be accidental. It was it! Me bimbo, big bimbo. Was enough to lower a bit the volume...Some sharpness at the highest notes/volumes still remained but recalling the ancient times when we still had live concerts in Europe, my ears (esp. the left one) would get occasionally overloaded at high pitch/high volume tones. So I choose to live with that given the rest of the benefits.
Summarizing, Iâm returning to 33k. But instead of a dirty, long leaded parallel connection of two Dale resistors Iâve been using now, I will use Z-foils, pre-burnt for a week and soldered with short leads directly at the RCA sockets. I believe this location works best for me, picking least of environmental EMI (measured once). This can also give some extra clarity and clean some artefacts- witnessed that already a couple of times. Then will play with VTF only.
Now a bit of speculations why 33k works for me: The manufacturer states the optimal LDR parameters (I guess optimal means the flattest FR) as 33k/220pF with the cart inductance 130mH. I suspect having around 290-300pf - the EAR834 is around 200pF = AQ leopard cable 60pf + my DIY EAR has an input selector and extra wiring around it so adds some pF. In theory a lower load should be best. Calculation shows 21k, adding some 35% extra as London does gives 28.5k. However my Staxes are a bit recessed and darker sounding. Extra few kOhms at 33k possibly compensate for that. Just my speculations :)
Apologies for being on the lower rungs of the London hierarchy with a SG (with Decapod and LDR paratrace stylus).
I also have 2 other Decca cartridges. My application may not transfer to the LDR. Nevertheless, I run them all at 1.55-1.65 VTF and it opens them up so they really sing. If your rig and arm are good, you should have no tracking issues. I also find raising the back of the arm above parallel locks in focus. Try it. you might be surprised.
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.
""Â
 I do not dare to touch VTA as I think Iâm in the sweet spot and I donât 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.
Without getting in the weeds too much most folk use high frequency and base response to adjust VTA., effectively using  it as a tone control for their particular system This is wrong.
Correct VTA is when the stylus aligns with the cutting angle, this gives maximum groove contact for the stylus profile the designer came up with and the maximum amount of information recovered from the groove.
Because of system deviations, or distortions as Raul would put it, the only correct way to adjust VTA is by listening for maximum information recovery, maximum soundstage size and maximum preservation of the harmonic structure of instruments.
By the same token, estimado Raul, the tonearm I use is the one used by the cartridge designer himself - FR64S. Not to get into random walking yourself, it's good to first make sure you know what you are writing about.
Halcro, Heartless is a bit harsh - we all aspire to great sound and wish it upon all. I'm reading forums to take a break from renovations and politics.
From a quick listen XL88 vs Signet - XL88 sounding a little brittle, but compared to the Signet has more accurate presentation of instruments ( Signet sounds coloured like the FR7 ) and better timing through the midrange.
Whilst the Signet initially sounds very nice, very fruity midrange, it loses composure ( timing ) through the upper bass midrange area. To me it sounds very coloured - if it were a movie I would say 50's jive. The Sony is more even handed, very quick and better timng across the board, more articulate. In terms of the brittleness with the XL88, unless the VTA  needs tweaking, I think you may be doing it a disservice using the super heavy FR headshell - the Sony is a medium compliance MC. Since you dont like Orsonics, I might suggest you try something like one of the Audiotechnica Technihard head shells - nid weight version - 12-15g if you have one.
XL88D vs Signet -Â I thought XL88 sounded way better on the SAEC, then realised you had switched to XL88D. It was very noticeable the tonal qualities of the XL88D in the SAEC arm are closer to the Signet with a more fullsome midrange Having said that again the timing and refinement of the Sony XL88D Â across the full frequency range shines through to my ears. Again - the XL88D is a medium compliant cartridge and I think there are gains to be had in using a lighter headshell in the 12-15g range.
Good to see you back in action, Halcro. Hope that you and all here are well.
I agree wholeheartedly with Doverâs comments. I would describe what I hear somewhat differently, but the gist of it all is the same.
First and in full disclosure, as you may remember I have never been a great fan of AT/Signet cartridges. For years, I have tried to get truly satisfactory sound from, among other AT MMâs, my sample of the vaunted ATML170OCC and I have always been left dissatisfied. I bring this up because what I always hear from the ATML170 is precisely what I hear from the Signet on the Ellington (a recording I know well).
âColoredâ means different things to different folks. I believe I understand what Dover means when he describes the Signet as âcoloredâ. I would actually describe the sound as lacking in color...the richness and variety of natural tonal color that the sound of acoustic instruments have. I hear that colorless sound as having a pervasive âgrayâ cast that homogenizes the distinctive sound of instruments. âColoredâ in gray. Timbral blandness. Btw, I hear a similar quality from most Shure cartridges that I have tried.
On the plus side. in spite of this tonal blandness, there is a welcome fullness in the midrange. I say welcome because the Sony sounds a little lean through the midrange and upper mids; and when the whole orchestra is playing, bordering on slight harshness (but not quite). With the Sony the clarinetâs naturally plush mid register sounds too lean, while with the Signet sounds more correct in this respect. However, I suspect that, just as with the sound of the flute heard here, the upper register of the clarinet would sound lacking in harmonics. The flute sounds too covered with the Signet; little sense of the sound of metal (silver). The Signet sounds lacking in air and the upper partials of the timbre of individual instruments. In general, the distinctive tones of the winds is much easier to recognize with the Sony; in spite of the perceived high frequency leanness. While there is seldom a way to confirm this, the Sony gives me a very strong sense that what I am hearing is what is actually on the recording and not the inherent sound of the cartridge. This may very well account for the âbrittlenessâ that Dover hears, and what I hear as leanness through the upper mids. I believe this is a result of the mics and other recording equipment used. I hear this same quality playing this recording on my own system.
Even more so than the tonal issues the most important difference for me is with, and what Dover points out, the âtimingâ. To me, with the Signet just as with my ATML170 there is a perception that the performance is actually a little bit slower than with the Sony. There is a noticeable decrease in the wonderful propulsive and forward moving feeling of the rhythm sectionâs playing that one hears clearly with the Sony. With the Signet the music simply doesnât move the same way; sounds almost static by comparison.
Btw, this example gave the best sense of âstereoâ of any of your prior examples, Halcro. Much more clear left to right panning of instruments, whereas prior examples tended to mostly sound almost as in mono.
I wonât comment on the Bela Fleck track because I find too much of a volume inbalance between the two examples to make a fair judgment.
I suspect that in my all tube system, mounted on my ET2, the Sony would a no brainer.
Thank you Frogman..... And thank you to Dover and you for demonstrating your rare hearing abilities for the umpteenth time.... Many people (most) do not credit these YouTube videos with the gravitas they deserve because they are unable to hear the details that you and Dover so obviously do.
The main point I have learned from initiating this Thread, is that just because I can't hear something....may not mean it doesn't exist? For over 40 years of High End involvement, I have naturally believed that I hear as well as (or better than) most others. I have demonstrated this on many occasions in the past with friends and HiFi dealers, pointing out faults and subtleties in various systems which are obvious to me but not to them..... This has led me to make inaccurate claims based on my own hearing abilities such as:-
People can't consistently discern MM cartridges from MCs in controlled blind listening tests
Frogman and Dover have proved me wrong! But their hearing abilities are not the 'norm'. They are exceedingly rare and thus expose three alarming facts in this hobby:-
How can we trust (or rate) all the various opinions promoted on the Internet by 'strangers' whose hearing abilities are unknown?
How can we trust (or rate) all the various opinions espoused by HiFi journalists and Reviewers whose hearing abilities are unknown?
How vulnerable are we consumers, to the fact that all the designers of HiFi equipment may not be blessed by the unique hearing abilities of Frogman and Dover?
This last point is disturbing.....đ§ If cartridges, tonearms, turntables, cables, phono-amps, preamps, amplifiers, speakers and all the aftermarket tweaks designed and sold today....are designed by humans whose hearing abilities are largely in question...this industry appears flawed.
That's the bad news.... The good news is that despite the fact that my hearing is not the equal of those naturally gifted individuals like Frogman and Dover.....I can still happily listen to those cartridges I might own, whose qualities would not pass muster with the 'elites' đ€
Regards and good health and happy listening to all. Thanks for teaching me heaps..... Halcro
How can we trust (or rate) all the various opinions espoused by HiFi journalists and Reviewers whose hearing abilities are unknown?
Many years ago at a show in London, where they were demoing an Aragon system, I crossed paths with one Ken Kessler. I asked him how could anyone like that sound as it was rolled off, plodding, and simply dull. His reply knocked me. "That's the way music is supposed to sound."
Yes. Apart from the qualifier that, for me, MM cartridges are like green eggs and ham. So with my mac air & Air buds circa 2012..
With the FR3 shell I can hear the initial rosiny striking of the bow on Ottos violin. This initial strike is lost with the Yamamoto. To me in general the violin sounds quite congealed in the upper mid lower treble on the Yamamoto.
With the harpsichord, I can hear more of the key strike on the strings, and more acoustical space around the individal notes with the FR3.
The FR3 to my ears presents a more robust and developed upper base lower mid, particularly when the full orhestra comes in - more weight.
FR3 a clear winner on this comparison.
I'll leave frogman to provide the technical analysis. I suspect he might find the FR3 a little coloured like the FR7 cartridges - be interesting to hear his view.
As an aside did you know Audiosilente does an aluminium screw for the FR3 - I assume this would reduce the mass somewhat.
Have you tried the newer Ikeda heashell IS2-T with the titanium collar, I have the older one that came with my Ikeda Kiwame cartridge, it has quite a robust sound that works well with some cartridges. I used it on my Dynavector from time to time.
Unfortunately I don't have the playback tools and/or the golden ears of dover and frogman to make a valid judgment call on these audio files. But it's nice that others acknowledge the merits of the FR-3 headshell. For some reason it has a bad rep with several members of this community. It's clunky and looks decidedly old school, but I like the way it sounds, especially with FR64S. Robust and meaty are indeed words that come to mind. Same with the slightly less bulbous FR-S/5. But perhaps I'm biased as I really dislike carbon fiber headshells like Yamamoto or Oyaide, both of which I tried.
For threaded cartridges the later FR RS-121 and RS-141 are also recommended, while for unthreaded cartridges I've always had great results with the Audiocraft AS-4PL and AS-12K headshells.
@dover I have several versions of the Ikeda IS-2T headshell (2TB, 2TW and 2TCR) and they are better than the regular IS-2 as well as the earlier IS-1R series. The T's are the most neutral headshells I have tried so far. They're a perfect match for the 'high precision' school of cartridges, like Transfiguration and MSL. But for my Ikeda 9 Rex I kept the IS-1G in place, simply because it looks so pretty.Â
In simple answer to the question, a resounding YES. Frankly, I am surprised by how different the same cartridge sounds in each of the two head shells. I am not sure about the âgolden earsâ part đ, but the differences are pretty obvious.
I am in complete agreement with Dover in that the FR is the clear winner in this comparison and I agree with his specific observations. Not to put too fine a point on this, but I would also have to stress âin this comparisonâ. I will explain what I mean, but first to add to Doverâs excellent comments:
The sound with the Yamamoto head shell is simply too dry. There is a âbleachedâ quality to the overall sound and upper strings in particular sound too thin and borderline steely compared to how they sound in real life. There is a âhashyâ (âcongealedâ?) quality to the upper strings that tends to, as Dover observed, mask the initial attack of the harpsichord. Likewise, the lower strings, lack a bit of tonal meat on the bone. Surprisingly, the push-pull of the tempo in the playersâ phrasing is more obvious with FR. On the plus side for the Yamamoto is that probably as a result of its dry quality, pitch definition is perhaps slightly better in the lower registers.
The reason I would stress âin this comparisonâ (mostly speculation):
I am not a fan of AT/Signet cartridges (nor most MMâs) as far as their rendering of tonal quality/timbre goes. The sounds of live acoustic instruments have quite a bit of natural color. Sometimes what some listeners describe as âneutralâ or lacking in coloration to me is a sound lacking in that natural color; âbleachedâ sounding or having what I would describe as a âgrayâ coloration. In spite of their other positive traits I would put AT/Signet cartridges in that camp (Shureâs, worst of all in my experience).
Having said all that, Signets have never struck me as cartridges that are thin or steely sounding; quite the contrary; if anything, lacking some natural high frequency sparkle and color. So, why that type of sound in the Yamamoto head shell? At the same time, why would a cartridge that tends to sound gray and colorless (in a negative sense) sound more naturally colorful in the FR headshell?
Dover suspected that I might find the sound with the FR âcoloredâ. Actially, I find the sound to be pretty close to my sense of what tonally correct is. However, he may be correct in that I also have a suspicion that a cartridge like my âvintageâ Koetsu Rosewood which is inherently romantic sounding might in fact sound unnaturally âcoloredâ in the FR, but might benefit from what is possibly the Yamamotoâs inherent dryness.
You guys never disappoint.....đ€ Even Princi agrees with you đ¶ I would never have imagined when I began this Thread nearly three years ago.....that subtleties (like the effects of different headshells) could be heard over the YouTube platform đ€
Like Edgewear....I have read nothing but disdain for the FR-3 headshell over the last 20 years or so. Even some of my most trusted mentors share this view..... Yet for the last 15 years, that's NOT what I have heard. Without exception...the FR-3 headshell outperforms any other headshell on the heavy FR tonearms like the FR-64s/FR-66s in my System. About a year ago, I tried it on different tonearms like the SAEC WE-8000/ST and DV-507Mk II and was amazed at the improvements over other headshells.
Unlike Edgewear.....the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fibre headshell has easily defeated all other contenders for 'Headshell of Choice' in my tonearms (it ain't Chopped Liver) đ€Ș So the comparison you are hearing above.....is between the No.1 and No. 2 headshells I have experienced (and I have heard literally hundreds of combinations and permutations) between dozens of different brands and materials.
I began this Thread initially to demonstrate the 'fine' differences between expensive LOMC Cartridges and low-cost vintage MMs. I hoped to save inexperienced listeners from thinking they had to spend multiple thousands of dollars to hear the 'Holy Grail of Sound' in their analogue Systems. If the differences they could hear on my comparisons were insignificant to them (as they mostly are to me).....it may help them make a decision that saves them money?
For the past 8 months or so.....I have been distracted with two of my other hobbies....watches and cars đ So no time to even read Audio Forums let alone contribute..... Compromised my daily listening habits slightly but that's now returned to 'normal'. After a 6 month wait.....my new 992 Carrera SÂ finally arrived.... The first Porsche 911Â in 60 years to be able to stand aesthetically with my beloved 356B Super Coupe.
It arrived however in mid June which coincided with the Delta strain of the Covid 19 outbreak in Sydney, and 'stay-at-home' orders were issued. Frustration.......đ€Ź!!!!
After a few weeks it got too much for me and I took the Carrera SÂ onto the Freeway...... At which point I was clocked by the Police doing 180 Km/Hr on the M1 (which has a 110Km limit) đ±
The Constable cancelled my Licence for 6 months there and then, and proceeded to unscrew the car's plates which were confiscated for 3 months. I asked him if I should further punish the 'guilty' car when I got it back home ...đ He was not amused.... He then waited till I called a tow-truck and loaded it for the journey home before he would leave the scene.
So now I have oodles of time to record comparisons for you....đ„Ž
The Constable cancelled my Licence for 6 months there and then, and proceeded to unscrew the car's plates which were confiscated for 3 months. I asked him if I should further punish the 'guilty' car when I got it back home ...đ He was not amused....
Sorry to hear that - my memorables are Audi S3 - cop says "money wont hurt you you rich B, but the points will get ya, ha ha " - I took them to court and they lost. And in the US - "I've been trying to catch up for 1/2 an hour, I like to throw you in jail but I cant cos you're a D### foreigner" - got back to the hotel and found he'd ripped out most of the pages on my international license.
@dover I managed to get an early Court hearing and in front of a packed Courtroom with an elderly Magistrate.....I explained my story with the long-awaited car and the frustration at not being able to drive it and stressed that this was no 'excuse' but just an insight into my state of mind đ„ When I finished, the Magistrate said:-
May I ask what car you purchased?
When I replied....a Porsche Carrera S, the Courtroom erupted in laughter...đ Startled....I turned around to find that the women were the most amused. The Magistrate called for order and proceeded with his determination:-
You were on a Freeway with no pedestrians or parked cars so no lives were endangered. It is very easy to exceed the speed limit with a high performance vehicle and your long driving history is pretty good. I don't find you a fit and proper person to hold a licence TODAY.....but I find you a fit and proper person to hold a licence in a month!
When I reported this result to my solicitor...he said I did better than any lawyer could have đ Only two weeks to go......đ Â
Having been settled with the selection of cartridges surrounding my Raven AC-2 for about a year, I have been messing back and forwards searching for the best two MM Cartridges for my Victor TT-101.Â
Do I go with one of the Signets? One of the ATs? One of the Shures? One of the Victors? One of the Empires? One of the Fidelity Researches? One of the Graces? Perhaps the Glanz MFG 610LX?
After a year of testing combinations...I think I've settled on the Victor X-1 and the Signet MR-5.0LCÂ (this will not please Frogman đ„Ž)
Both these cartridges are very difficult to find with original styli in good condition and the X-1 is virtually 'unobtainium' đ„ I managed to get the only one I've seen advertised in five years with not only its original stylus intact....but also a spare NOS unused one đ
Nice music selections! One of my favorite Rock records from one of the all time best R&R bands that many have never heard of. Love the music of Astor Piazzola! Wonderful music. If you donât have it, may I recommend âZero Hourâ; arguably, his greatest recording.
**** this will not please Frogman đ„Ž ****
Not displeased at all! The Signet is a very fine cartridge and clearly one of the very best MMâs in your collection, based on what has been heard here. However, itâs all relative isnât it? Compared to a great MC or DeccaâŠ.âŠ..or the Victor X1, to my ears there is just something not quite right with the top end which also affects the upper partials of the lower frequency spectrum. There is always an obvious high frequency ceiling that causes a kind of subtle dullness and sameness of instrumental colors. With few exceptions, I have heard something similar with most of the MMâs I have owned, or heard here.  Of course, the Signet and Victor are on different tonearms, but stillâŠâŠ.. I have heard the same things to one degree or another regardless of arm. The Signet, however, seems to do a better job in the tracking department. Both carts had trouble with the Piazzola recording, but the Signet less so.
Overall, the Victor sounds much better balanced and without the hf ceiling. With the Signet, perhaps partially as a psychoacoustic result of the hf ceiling the midrange sounds a bit thick and the bass drummy and too corpulent and with inferior pitch definition compared to the Victor.
All relative. Fine sounds as always; and, once again, Princi got it right đ.
Like you Frogman, I love Little Feat...... but it's ironic that the best recording of their music happens to be their only 'live' album đą Their studio albums are so uniformly poorly recorded/mixed/mastered that whenever I force myself to play one.....I keep shaking my head incredulously wondering if the band members/managers ever actually LISTENED to their records!!!? Absolutely devoid of bass and the lower heft essential for the contagious transmission of the emotion contained in rock and R&B....surely their oeuvre is ripe for a complete all-analogue remix/mastering/pressing đ§?
Agree with you about Zero Hour being Astor's best......first turned me on to him 30 years ago but I only have it on cassette. Just ordered it from Discogs on vinyl đ€...so thanks Frogman.
I was most interested to see what you and Dover might say about these two cartridges because listening to them 'live'.....I can't hear any differences đ Even after your comments....I just can't hear any! What does it say when two different manufacturers produce two different cartridges that sound identical (to the cloth-eared)? And what's the point of me having both installed in my System? I should install another cartridge which gives me a differing perspective....đ Are cartridges just 'tone-controls'.....đ€
@halcro Congrats on the new car. I have never liked carbon fiber. It sounds grey and lacking in detail. It's overdamped. I belive I have commented on this thread before on this subject.Â
Let's try something slightly different đ€ I've readily admitted that I can't discern the differences between MCs and MMs (all things being equal)...... But I profess to hear the differences with a boron cantilever.....đ€Ź
So we all hear differently depending on our brain/ear interfaces and genetic predispositions.
I think we've accepted that two golden-eared contributors here (Frogman and Dover) CAN discern between MCs and MMs......but they've had it too easy up to now with me REVEALING the cartridges a priori.....đ Can they do it BLIND......? đ
And how many others (like Noromance, Edgewear, et al) can hear attributable sonic signatures...?
Now I thought I could be tricky by actually using two MMs or MCs, but that may be for another time...? đ€
Apologies for the mic overloads on occasions. The human voice is powerful đŁ
Perhaps in the first instance (so that others are not swayed).....if Frogman and Dover could just say whether they find it 'easy' to tell or not.....with comments to follow in a few days? That would be great guys.....
Anyone else....don't be shy. This could save people money đ°
Gorgeous aria from Verdiâs âSimon Boccanegraâ
And so beautifully sung by Maria Chiara đ
Btw, gesundheit, Princi! Â Or, perhaps it was Halcro.
Hahaha....đ Princi is nearly 16 years old and seems to have developed a constricted throat which he needs to 'clear' from time to time. Sometimes it can go on for hours....đą Now the real question for you Frogman....... Could you tell this was 'live' sound as opposed to the 'illusion' of the 'reproduced' sound?Â
Easy to tell that the two cartridges sound significantly different.
I was afraid you might say this...... But as evidenced by the lack of confidence here.....there seems to be very few audiophiles who share your gift?? Does it surprise you, that with over 30 'hearings' there seem to be only 3 audiophiles (including you) who claim to hear the differences between MCs and MMs? Less than 10%....?!!! đ€Ż I can't help but think that a goodly number of audiophiles with expensive MC cartridges are simply buying on 'reputation' rather than audibility?
Quick listen on the phone so there's that. A sounds better to me. It's probably your Sony XL88D! But knowing your penchant for MM finds, it wouldn't surprise me if A was a vintage MM.
How are you. We are in lockdown here now, so sanding and painting is the daily routine. Tomorrow - more sanding and painting.
Well they are quite different - if I was a gastronome I would describe "A" as a fine consumme, "B" as gruel.
If I was attending a live performance and Maria sounded like "B" then I would ask the singer if she could put her teeth back in.
"A" has far more resolution, bandwidth, is quicker and communicates the tempo much better. The voice alone is vastly more transparent.Ditto with the orchestra. "B" is bandwidth limited, the top end of Marias vocal has gone awol, leading edges of notes notes are lost. Both the orchestra and vocals are  homogeinised into a thick gruel.Â
I would assume A is the moving coil - now you can tell me if you got me !
If A is the moving coil - I might hazard a guess its the Acoustical Sounds Palladian, its a little ragged at times.
Okay, Iâve finally made a serious attempt to listen through the limitations and distortions of the iPad speakers.
Cartridge A is much clearer and open than cartridge B. Much more dynamic as well but perhaps also a little edgy, if the distortion on these little âspeakersâ is anything to go by. Probably one of the modern high resolution MCâs, perhaps the Palladium which Iâm not familiar with. Iâd be surprised if it would turn out to be the XL-88D, which is also wide open and transparent, but has a more full bodied and warmer presentation (based on my experience with the Takai Lab Final version).
Cartridge B sounds very limited and constricted, almost AM sound compared to FM. Itâs probably the MM cartridge, but this assumption is not based on any recognition of the âspeciesâ, as I donât have any MMâs to compare. It could just as well be a Denon DL103 or some other limited MC with a less advanced or perhaps even spherical tip. If so, than cartridge A would be the MM. In that case Iâd be most curious to find out what it is and get one.
Excellent and astute observations by all. With a couple of exceptions, I agree with most of what has been written about these two cartridges. I may be stating the obvious, but I should also point out that while I generally prefer MCâs over MMâs, I donât believe that any and every MC is superior to all MMâs. This thread has shown that handily; Halcro owns many fine MMâs. So far there seems to be pretty general agreement that cartridge A is superior to B. However, the question is not about preference, but identification of the type that each is.
By comparison, cartridge A exhibits some of the typical MC traits. As has been pointed out it seems to offer higher resolution than cartridge B leading one to think that it is of the MC type. However, the detail that this âhigherâ resolution gives is of the âmore in your faceâ type. Cartridge B requires (allows) that the listener âlean intoâ the music instead of it being pushed in the direction of the listener.
âAâ seems to present a more generous soundstage and with larger individual images. âBâ âs soundstage seems more compact with smaller individual images. However, although it is smaller, âBâ âs soundstage seems better proportioned, hence more realistic. When the voice enters, the accompanying woodwind arpeggiated filigrees are much more clearly set behind the singer, as they should be. That is a type of âresolutionâ, no?
At first, âAâ seems to be more rhythmic. However, this may be due in part to the above observation about the more âup frontâ quality and possibly also the fact that the volume level heard from âAâ is slightly higher than that of âBâ.
âAâ is more generous through the lower midrange and bass. However, it is also a little plummy in that range with a bit of overhang of bass notes. âBâ is slightly leaner through this frequency range, but sounds more realistic due to the lack of the overhang which results in better pitch definition; it is easier to hear actual pitches from the basses and not just low frequency energy. This also makes it easier to hear when the bassoons play in unison with lower strings. Again, resolution of a sort.
To my ears, âBâ is a better tracker than âAâ. With âAâ there is audible breakup, not just on the vocalâs dynamic peaks, but also leading up to those peaks. With âBâ the sound sound stays fairly well controlled up until those peaks. âBâ also does a better job with the passages in which the full orchestra plays along with the singer. âAâ sounds more congested in those passages.
So far it could go either way. With the possible exception of the slightly plummy quality in the bass, which is fairly typical of MMâs, I have heard cartridges of either persuasion that exhibit the above characteristics. What tipped the scale for me is the following:
I canât claim to have owned anywhere near as many different cartridges as have been heard on this thread, but in my experience there is one characteristic that I have heard from practically all MMâs that I seldom hear from a good MCâŠ..with two exceptions. I almost always hear some degree of a kind of âgrayâ or bleached tonal quality in the sound of music played with even the best MMâs that is almost always absent with a good MC. This robs the sound of instruments and voice of their natural color; and hence their distinctiveness as heard in real life. I hear that quality from âAâ. âBâ lets one hear more of that natural timbral color. I mentioned the arpeggiated woodwind filigrees heard when the voice enters. With âBâ it is obvious that the piccolo is a wooden piccolo. With âAâ its not so obvious. Wood or metal? In the same passages, with âBâ one hears more of the clarinetâs wonderful round quality; what players call a âpingyâ sound. More importantly, each instrumentâs color is very different. Once again, higher resolution of a sort. âAâ homogenizes their (and the voiceâs) individual colors and sounds a bit dry overall. Â
There has been one MM cartridgeâs that I have heard here that does not exhibit some degree of that tonal bleaching, the Victor X1. Another is the Azden which I own, but which is not nearly on the same level as the Victor overall; and highly unlikely to have been Halcroâs choice for MM. So, if âBâ is in fact the Victor, then all bets are off. Otherwise, I will go out on a limb and in spite of the things heard that tell me that âAâ SHOULD be the MC (and I do prefer âAâ in some ways) I will play devilâs advocate and buck the trend by stating that âAâ is the MM and âBâ the MC.
đ±
Btw, âAâ is very reminiscent of the sound heard from the recent âSignetâ MM with FR headshell. Edgewearâs âBâ/Denon comment is something that also came to mind; although the Denon 103R that I own is not on the same level overall.
Fabulous.......!!! đ Thanks guys for all your comments....especially @noromance and 'virgin' @edgewear đ I wouldn't have been game enough to risk public humiliation đł although there is absolutely nothing shameful about getting this 'right' or 'wrong'.... That's exactly why I began this Thread in the first place! To demonstrate AUDIBLY that good cartridges needn't necessarily cost an arm and a leg đ°
And thank you especially to @frogman who, although spending years patiently explaining to us the subtleties a musician like he can hear....has explained it again in a way that finally makes sense to even me!! đ€Ș
The only disappointment here is @dover ....... Aussies and Kiwis share many similarities. One of the most noticable is their penchant for saying what they mean and never 'beating around the bush'!!! Yet here we have @dover ......umming and aarhing....dillying and dallying and leaving us with no idea what he actually thinks đ€Ł
If I was attending a live performance and Maria sounded like "B" then I would ask the singer if she could put her teeth back in.
Priceless!!!!!
And now for the big 'reveal'...... Cartridge A ORTOFON SPU Ae GOLDÂ A vintage LOMC
@halcro Thanks for the reveal. After @frogman 's last post I thought maybe I screwed up, unless he was being devil's advocate.
But alas "MM" for me is green eggs and ham. I knew "A" was a MC, as I called it, the only doubt was was it the Decca ? or a MI/IM, but it sounded too uneven to be a Decca.
I was surprised at some of frogman's qualitative comments - this has only happened once before - I think my standard i buds are presenting quite differently to his stax headphones as you would expect.
The actual cartridges are a surprise - my faded memeory of the SPU was a little warmer in tone than in the video.
Now the Glanz MFG 610LX is an interesting one - of course it is a moving flux, not a moving magnet. It sounds quite different to my MFG61 which would seem to be more extended in the top end.
I am wondering if your capacitance and/or resistive loading is out. It sounds like mine with too much capacitance. With the MFG61 the recommended capacitance is 100-150pf and resistance 47k. I'm running 146pf - to get there I have to change my phono cable to an ultralow capacitance Audioplan ( 46pf total  ) instead of my usual MIT which is very capacitive ( not a problem with MC's ). Try these and let us know - you will have to allow for your phono cable. From what I can see on the net if you are using Cardas Golden Reference RCA , then 3m is about 120pf, and you would need about 30pf max on the phono input. If you are using CGR XL your cables are about 70pf, you would need 30-80 pf max on the phono input.
Great experiment - and as you say it shows we can hear differences via youtube video's online.
Fun indeed!  Yes, playing devilâs advocate can get one in trouble.  My wife always tells me I like to be contrarian.  Much in the sound of âAâ told me that it should be the MC, but stillâŠâŠ Thanks, Halcro.  Interesting as always.
Thanks for the advice @dover re the Glanz MFG 610LX. As you suggest.....I find mine to be PARTICULARLY sensitive to all the parameters of set-up, although that may be exacerbated by the fact that I have less than 100 hours playing time on it?
I found I was needing to load it at nearly 20 Ohms initially to tame its high-frequency response and I added about 100pf capacitance. This was with a VTF of 1.35Gm...... That is how the YouTube video was recorded.
Strangely enough.....the day after posting the video, I was listening to it with some familiar music and it sounded awful đ After some adjusting....I increased the VTF to 1.5Gm, changed the loading to 40 Ohms and the Capacitance to 70pf together with subtle changes to VTA.
I don't think the adjustments are anyway near final and a lot more playing is obviously required.
Recommended VTF for the MFG61 is 1.5g plus/minus 0.25g. From memory initally I started at 1.7 due to the age of the cartridge - my rational is that the suspension can stiffen up with age ( or collapse - which will result in a low rider ) and therefore to avoid mistracking I start at the higher end ( I do this with new cartridges as well ). Then once I am happy it is running well and tracking well, after running in I'll lower the tracking force. I'm pretty sure I ended up around 1.6gm. Dont forget when you adjust VTF you change the VTA, and it needs adjusting. For correct tracking force I use "feel" rather than frequency response - in other words at what VTF does the cartridge sound like its tracking securely but not slugged ( too heavy ).
When you say 40ohms loading - do you mean 40k ? I would suggest stick to 47k. This is the recommended load ( for 61 )
Do you have the specs for the 610 ?? I'm curious to know whether the cartrdiges are the same.
Unfortunately my Glanz came without box or specs. I seem to recall that some Poster on AâGon alerted us to the fact that there was a Seller offloading a handful of these NOS cartridges....
HERE is a close-up of the cantilever/stylus which is the best I can do for you. Any similarities to the MFG61?
Needless to say, I am very surprised at the sound heard from the Glanz. I will have to go back and search for my reaction to the first time you included it here, Halcro. I donât remember having a similar reaction. The Glanz is now one of two MMâs heard here that, for me, play with realistic tonal color and no hint of tonal blandness which for me is most important above all else. May I ask which arm/headshell it was mounted on for this most recent shootout? Thanks.
I seem to recall Frogman, that you really liked the Glanz the previous comparisons I posted as that is why I mounted it in the Dynavector DV-507Mk 2 last week for an extended listening. And I agree with you đ
It is beginning to sound even better with the changes to the setup suggested by Dover and the further break-in of the cartridge. We may have a real challenger here.....đȘ
Thanks. Â Also, as Dover pointed out it is a Moving Flux, not a MM. Â In your and Doverâs (or anyone elseâs) experience, could this explain the absence of the telltale HF ceiling that I usually hear from MMâs?
I found the specs for your MFG610LX Recommended load 47k Recommended Capacitance 100pf Recommended tracking force 1.5g plus/minus 0.25g
In theory you should set your MM input to 47k and lowest capacitance possible for linear response. From what I can find due to its low inductance the Glanz are more sensitive to resistive loading than capacitive loading.
The MFG610LX and MFG61 have slightly different specifications -
MFG61 has better channel separation 25db versus 23 for the 610LX. MFG61 has a Special Polyhedron stylus profile versus a Line Contact in the 610LX. "Special Polyhedron" is according to Glanz patents more refined - looks to me its moving towards to van den hul/geiger profile. MFG61 has very slightly higher compliance - 25 vs approx 15-20 for the 610LX ( at 10hz ).
From my understanding it has a unique construction that provides a very linear flux density field as the cantilever moves.
It also has very low inductance ( approx 120mH ) compared to most typical MM's at 400-800mH.
As a consequence of the low inductance it is very sensitive to resistive loading, less sensitive to capacitive loading.
My MFG61 has at times blown away my Koetsu Black Goldline, at other times it has sounded as dead as a doornail. It's a very sensitive beast to tonearms/loading/cabling.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
