Hear my Cartridges....🎶

Thanks @dover .....

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. 

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-5.0LC (this will not please Frogman 🥴)

Both these cartridges are very difficult to find with original styli in good condition and the X-1 is virtually 'unobtainium' 😥
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 🎉

Naturally they both come equipped with Beryllium Cantilevers ....

Turn this one UP and boogie....
With YouTube unfortunately....we lose the bottom two octaves 😢

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1 MM CARTRIDGE 

VINTAGE SIGNET MR-5.0LC MM CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE SIGNET MR-5.0LC MM CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1 MM CARTRIDGE 

@halcro 
Awesome, well done.

@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 😥
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...😂
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 👏
Only two weeks to go......👍
 

@halcro 

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 ...😂
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.

For the past 8 months or so.....I have been distracted with two of my other hobbies....watches and cars 👀
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 S finally arrived....
The first Porsche 911 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.......🤬!!!!

After a few weeks it got too much for me and I took the Carrera S onto the Freeway......
At which point I was clocked by the Police doing 180 Km/Hr on the M1 (which has a 110Km limit) 😱

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 ...😂
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....🥴

You guys never disappoint.....🤗
Even Princi agrees with you 🐶
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 🤔

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) 🤪
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?

Strangely enough Frogman......the Signets are among my favourite MM cartridges 🤩
And were the ones that first introduced me to the beauties of of the Beryllium cantilever....
But let's put that divergence down to 'taste' or 'The Vibe' as we say Downunder....🙃

Wonderful music and lovely performance!

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 “golden ears” part 😊, 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 “in this comparison”. I will explain what I mean, but first to add to Dover’s excellent comments:

The sound with the Yamamoto head shell is simply too dry. There is a “bleached” 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 “hashy” (“congealed”?) 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 players’ 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 “in this comparison” (mostly speculation):

I am not a fan of AT/Signet cartridges (nor most MM’s) 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 “neutral” or lacking in coloration to me is a sound lacking in that natural color; “bleached” sounding or having what I would describe as a “gray” coloration. In spite of their other positive traits I would put AT/Signet cartridges in that camp (Shure’s, 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 “colored”. 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 “vintage” Koetsu Rosewood which is inherently romantic sounding might in fact sound unnaturally “colored” in the FR, but might benefit from what is possibly the Yamamoto’s inherent dryness.

“It’s all about synergy” says Princi 😌

Interesting as always, Halcro. Thanks.

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. 

@halcro 
@frogman 

Re headshell comparison.

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.

Can you HEAR a Headshell.....?

YAMAMOTO HS-4 CARBON FIBRE HEADSHELL

FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-3 HEADSHELL

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."

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.....🧐
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' 🤗

Regards and good health and happy listening to all.
Thanks for teaching me heaps.....
Halcro

Good to see you back in action, Halcro. Hope that you and all here are well.

I agree wholeheartedly with Dover’s 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 MM’s, 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).

“Colored” means different things to different folks. I believe I understand what Dover means when he describes the Signet as “colored”. 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 “gray” cast that homogenizes the distinctive sound of instruments. “Colored” 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 clarinet’s 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 “brittleness” 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 “timing”. 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 section’s playing that one hears clearly with the Sony. With the Signet the music simply doesn’t move the same way; sounds almost static by comparison.

Btw, this example gave the best sense of “stereo” 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 won’t 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.

Thanks, as always, Halcro and best to all.

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 - 
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  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.

I have been busy of late with other interests.....watches, cars, architecture.Have still found time to listen to music every day.....but not reading Forums 🥱Last week I plugged in a NOS Signet MR 5.0 lc Vintage MM Cartridge which has a Line Contact Nude Stylus on Beryllium Cantilever (for which I have a NOS replacement).After playing around with VTF(1.5Gm) and VTA.....I also adjusted Loading to 40 Ohms and Capacitance to 250uF.I was really impressed with the sound and have spent days debating whether I should risk the heartless Golden-Eared Critics and Adjudicators on this Site 🥴 with a ’comparison’....?
VINTAGE SONY XL-88 LOMC CARTRIDGE
VINTAGE SIGNET MR 5.0 LC MM CARTRIDGE
VINTAGE SIGNET MR 5.0 LC MM CARTRIDGE
VINTAGE SONY XL-88D LOMC CARTRIDGE
Don’t hold back......🙉

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.

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

JW, the builder of London cartridges in the UK specs a VTF of 1.8g +/- 0.2g. Therefore 1.6g is perfectly fine. Thank you.

VTA Adjustment

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.

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.

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.

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 I’m in the sweet spot and I don’t 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 don’t know what’s rounder the next turn (although the LP’s I’m 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, I’m returning to 33k. But instead of a dirty, long leaded parallel connection of two Dale resistors I’ve 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 :)

Hi @bydlo 😉,
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' 🤞
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

@bydlo 

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.

@noromance Surprisingly 47k in my circumstances (all this loading is very very ’personal’) wasn’t 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 wasn’t 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.

I’m using RN60 Dales for finding the right value, then switching to Charcroft Z-foils. Very transparent resistors.

@bydlo I load my Super Gold at 51k with Vishay bulk foil resistors. I love the sparkle.

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!

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 ?

...and fretless; for that distinctive singing sound. Great player, Victor Wooten. Some bass! 👍

These guys are great. 5 string bass. 

Some bass with the 

SONY XL-88D

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.

@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.

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.

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.

Great observations (as always) Frogman.
Thank you 😃
Your detailed descriptions allow me (of the cloth-eared).....to actually hear what you mean.

And thank you for the Link to that very interesting 'stylistic' comparison.

Dear @frogman  : Other than wikipedia:

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

R.

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.

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.

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.

Excellent observations and comments by Dover. His reactions to the three different cantilevers are almost exactly in line with mine and I rank the three in the same order.

For me, the Ruby ranks a distant third, sounding rough and less refined than the other two. That one out of the way, the choice between the Boron and the Sapphire is more interesting. Plainly put, for me, the Boron sounds more natural (realistic). The sapphire, while it "appears" more resolving in the highs, I hear as more generous in that range, but a range that is not as well integrated with the midrange. For me, a top end which is more generous will often tend to cause the midrange to seem less fully developed. The better integrated highs of the Boron help its midrange to sound more "fully developed". As far as overall tonal balance goes, in the context of a different system, one might easily be preferable to the other. In this context, he Boron wins for me.

Two observations that would tip the scale for me in favor of the Boron regardless of system context:

Listen to the kettle drum roll that one hears at the opening of the Prokofiev (thank you, Halcro) and its percussive accent on the arrival of the roll which is accompanied by the entrance of the low brass. With the Sapphire, I hear a hint of strain in the sound of demanding (loud/densely orchestrated) passages in the music. The Boron sounds a bit more composed (sorry) in those spots. While I suspect that it does, this may or may not be related to the second observation:

Listen to that great violin section beginning at :59. Wonderful musical passage with very exciting syncopated and accented notes intended to "jump out" of the overall texture of running sixteenth notes. With the Boron those accented notes leave that texture of running sixteenth notes more obviously and decisively....more music.

Interesting comparison as always, Halcro. Thank you.

Now, and please forgive me for this, but the subject of the Weavers’ song is a little too close to home (literally) for me to ignore. As we all know, that is a wonderful and wonderful sounding record. As wonderful sounding as is that "Guantanamera" , a beautiful song that is practically a second national anthem for Cubans, it leaves some to be desired on stylistic grounds. Here is a more stylistically authentic version; hope you enjoy it (or, at least appreciate it):

https://youtu.be/gdYIpvnzoW8

Victor nails it for me on my Macbook Pro.....more musical...less mechanical

@lewm 
Thanks for the info, I was aware of the science on this, and use them myself in this application. It was the $$$ silver grounding cables I'm less sure about. Do you have any experience with the original non magnetic shinkoh tantalum resistors in the signal path with tube preamps ?  I have enough to replace the signal resistors in my Marantz 7 but have never got around to it. I use nude vishays for loading.

As I understand it, there is a "science"-based reason for using carbon composition resistors as grid-stoppers.  This is because CC resistors maintain their resistivity up to very high frequencies, higher than other types of resistors that may otherwise sound better and are also non-inductive.  At very high frequencies, most other resistor types reach a resonance point and become capacitative.  The purpose of the grid-stop resistance is to dampen oscillations of the tube that depend upon its Miller capacitance and its transconductance.  (High transconductance tubes are more prone to oscillate and more likely to require a grid-stopper to keep them quiet.) If the resistor itself becomes reactive at very high frequencies, then in theory the dampening effect is lost.  That said, some good designers ignore the issue and just use resistor types that they like.

@frogman 

Does single crystal oxygen free copper have an inherently different sound than plain old copper? Some feel it does. Both are copper....no? Why should it? 

I don’t know. Jus’ sayin.. 

I have spoken to some designers who believe "dirty copper" should be used on ground planes and screening of interconnects because it attracts and dissipates noise better than "pure materials".

This is analagous to some tube designers who advocate the use of carbon resistors as grid stoppers, because although they are generally noisier than other types, they actually are more effective at reducing noise in high voltage power supplies.

Again an example of no magic bullets, it is always about the overall design topology, criteria and context.

Some other designers are now pushing very high purity silver ground cables, in other words, the opposite view. Is this marketing hype ??

Unfortunately audiophiles who proclaim a "magic component" in every situation usually are unaware of the design criteria of the component, they just assume more $$ equals better sound, not always the case.

@halcro

What could possibly explain the differences here, is that the proportions of the RUBY CANTILEVER to the SAPPHIRE CANTILEVER appear to be different?

The main theory for going to exotic cantilever materials is not only stiffness, to improve resolution, but also to push the resonant frequency of the cantilever/stylus assembly as high up as possible out of the "audio band", mostly to extend high frquency response.

The mass also comes into play.

Cantilever shape, and whether it is a tube or rod also come into play.

The short cantilevered Dynavectors being an extreme example with super extended high frequency response.

And of course how the stylus is connected - glued or nude.

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.

As an aside, if anyone out there has experience with the new "cactus cantilever" I am interested to know if watering it improves the sound.

I ask is it not the case that so-called "ruby" and "sapphire" cantilevers are one and the same material?

I think it IS basically @lewm .....
What could possibly explain the differences here, is that the proportions of the RUBY CANTILEVER to the SAPPHIRE CANTILEVER appear to be different?

Both Ruby and Sapphire are the mineral Corundum. However, they each contain different amounts of trace minerals such as chromium which account for the differences in color, from red (Ruby) to blue (Sapphire); and shades in between. They each have a different molecular formula. So, technically, they are not “the same”.

Does single crystal oxygen free copper have an inherently different sound than plain old copper? Some feel it does. Both are copper....no? Why should it?

I don’t know. Jus’ sayin..

@rauliruegas 

I think I remember reading that you had owned both versions of Audio Technica AT-ML180, the boron and the beryllium. OFC and OCC. Do you recall how they differed  in sound?

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.