Hear my Cartridges....🎶

I used reasonably good over the ear headphones on my phone. It's weirding me out! I'm going to have to try on PC to my second rig downstairs later. Keep well.

Re 1rst vs 2nd generation YouTube videos:

No comparison. Differences were so obvious and immediate that it seems almost pointless to describe in detail. I was taken aback the contrast as I wasn’t expecting it to be so great.

2nd generation, overall much lower "fi". Loss of detail in about every respect. Loss of highs, muddy mids and lows, shrunken soundstage both side to side and front to back. As a result and most importantly, obvious decrease in musical aliveness. Wow!

Fascinating our perceived differences between the Victor and Palladian, noromance. When I read your original comment describing the Victor as "crisper"/"cleaner" and the Palladian as more "euphonic", I had the same reaction as you; like the cartridges were swapped. I hear it as just the reverse. A semantics issue perhaps? I wlll even up the ante (so to speak) by pointing out that what I described as "subtle texture in the air around instruments" was not meant to suggest that the Victor had better air as you hear; just the opposite. I heard an extraneous texture in the spaces between instruments that the Palladian did not add. Palladian sounds cleaner to me and certainly not romantic, nor the Victor cooler; as I define the terms.

All very interesting and I don’t doubt for a moment that this is what you hear. Fascinating. Vive la differance!!

I agree with @frogman on the piano being recessed somewhat and the better air around instruments on the Victor. However, in other aspects, it's as if he's listening to swapped versions of what I hear. I hear the Palladian as romantic and euphonic, and even colored, overly saturated and dense. The Vic sounds like someone is in the room - clean, neutral, airy, transparent. The Palladian like it's been studio enhanced. Admittedly, there are qualities of warmth and woody tone with the MC, and the piano is definately more present. I just prefer that cooler, more honest rendering of the MM.

Steve, I’’m certain that when you read through your misunderstanding will be made clear. I will let Halcro, OP, explain in more detail. (Not relevant, but my arm of choice is the Eminent Technology ET2 HP) . Regards.

Halcro, I will respond to your request later today.

@frogman 
I’ll read through tomorrow, you probably already stated this, but what arm did you use to compare these cartridges? Steve.

Hi Frogman,
Seeing that you're 'captive' and have 'Time on you Hands' so to speak 🤗......I wonder if you could do me a favour....?

About 8 Posts up from here.....I posted recordings of a 1ST GENERATION YouTube file just like all the ones contained in this Thread and then posted a comparison 2ND GENERATION recording of the 1ST recording being played back through my System.
As expected...there are losses which are obvious, but I wondered if you could, in your inimitable 'Golden-Eared' way....describe the losses as YOU hear them for they may inform us of the 'degree' of fidelity YouTube videos provide?

Hope you can Frogman..🤪
Regards

Hi Frogman,
Glad to hear you're all ok and taking the opportunity to 'chill out' 🙃🥃
The extra time you now have allows me the benefit of your latest (and even more detailed) cartridge comparisons....
I am grateful, as always...for your observations with which I agree  entirely 😃
As you indicate...the differences between the $10,000 Palladian LOMC and the 36 year old Victor X-1II MM are very subtle, and in the absence of these instantly available comparisons.....I'm just as happy listening to the Victor 🤗

One thing I'd like to add (because you continually point it out but it can be often forgotten)......the Palladian is an incredible cartridge.
Certainly the best currently available phono cartridge I have heard (excepting the DLR)....
It demonstrates to me, that the humble aluminium cantilever (albeit a specific alloy thereof)....is as equally adept as even the most exotic materials like Beryllium, Ruby or Diamond.
It's all in the understanding and execution of the cartridge designer, and it's no surprise that Dietrich Brakemeier has chosen it as his preferred material given his long history with, and love of....the Ikeda-designed Fidelity Research FR-7 Series of cartridges.

And whilst on the subject of cantilever materials.....after owning close to 100 different cartridges of all types and brands, I can say that to my ears....Boron Cantilevers are to cartridges, what Kryptonite is to Superman 🤮
There is not a single cartridge with Boron Cantilever I have heard, do justice to the 'soul' of MUSIC as I know and love it....
Even when the designers try to mitigate the weaknesses by GOLD-PLATING the Boron. It's like putting lipstick on a pig 🐖
I'm hoping to find an AT-ML180/OCC with its original Beryllium choice for cantilever 🧐 
The ONLY Boron Cantilever I can live with is that of the Jico SAS although I prefer it with their Sapphire or Ruby.
But that's my personal preference based on my personal experiences.
As always YMMV...😝

Thank you again Frogman...
Keep well and safe.

Aah, much better! Thank you. And, thank you for your concern. The pandemic has ground all live performance to a halt and, unfortunately, I’m afraid that my industry will be one of the last to return to "normal". My family and I are fine in all respects though and we left NYC for our place in upstate NY where we are with nature and no neighbors nearby. I’m enjoying having some down time; wish circumstances were different.

I don’t have my Stax headphone ("earspeakers" 😏) setup up here, but do have a system more modest than my all tube/electrostatics system downstate. Meitner ss amplification (PA6i/MTR101 monos), Totem floorstanders, REL sub and Nordost cabling. I listened on that system as well as Panasonic earbuds with iPad as source for both. My impressions were consistent both ways.

As expected, great sound from both cartridges. However, my preference is not for the Victor mm. Differences were all relatively subtle, but obvious and go to my personal sonic priorities of truthfulness in timbre and tonality and clarity of musical interaction above all else.

The sound with the Victor mm had the advantage of the dd table’s rock solid speed stability. The Raven’s is very good, but a very subtle pitch waver could still be heard on sustained piano notes; and would probably not be noticed if not comparing to the Victor. Interestingly, this seemed less obvious than when the Raven was running fast. Again, very subtle. That was about the only area in which, for me, the sound with the Victor mm was superior.

In comparison to the Palladian the Victor sounds a little thick and slightly covered sounding in the highs. This causes the piano’s left hand low register passages to sound a little muddled compared to the Palladian’s ability to let one hear the vibrating piano stings more clearly and with better defined pitch (1:15+/-). The end result is that more subtle musical detail and interaction is heard with the Palladian. The Palladian reveals more of the sound of rosin on string than the Victor does and the timbre is more consistent from low register to high register. With the Victor, violin sounds a little covered as does the piano which sounds as if the lid is closed as opposed to open as with the Palladian. I suspect that in the context of a system voiced to the hot side of neutral the Palladian could make the violin sound a little steely. An interesting effect which I think is the result of the extra thickness in the sound of the Victor is that when the violin plays forte, its image in the soundstage gets larger causing the spatial relationship between violin and piano to change: the violin ends up sounding much larger than the piano. The Palladian doesn’t exibit this and the relationship remains closer to what one years when the music is not as loud. At first I thought that the two selections were not level matched with the Victor being slightly louder, but this may be the result of the previous observation.

Surprisingly, a lot of the above was even more obvious in the Armatrading selection (loved it, btw).

Overall, the vintage Victor mm sounds....a little vintage. The Palladian doesn’t sound as romantic and as spatially enveloping as the Victor does; but, for me, the sounds it makes sound less like a recording. A sound that is a little cleaner overall while the Victor seems to have a subtle texture in the "air" around the instruments. Needless to say, it is incredible that a vintage cartridge can sound so good for so much less money than something like the Palladian; and, of course, all this based on my personal preferences only.

As always, a treat to have a chance to hear and compare such great cartridges.

Thanks and regards.

OK......let’s try again 🤪

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1II MM CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1II MM CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

Welcome Frogman...and thank you for the kind words re my system...
It's really appreciated 🤩
I've been thinking a lot about you since this crisis has hit...
Being a professional musician, I feared that your livelihood had been guillotined overnight..?
I sincerely hope that you are coping and are in line for the Government 'Bail-Out' that others in the States will receive?

As usual....your 'Golden Ears' are spot-on 👂
I don't know how it happened, but I checked the speeds using the Timeline and they were indeed 'bizarre' 🥴 Both 33.33 and 45 RPM.
As I had just re-set them both recently, this was a shock 🤔
I will keep a careful eye (and ear) on them for the immediate future...

I will re-record this afternoon, with the adjusted speed.
Will be interesting...

Also interesting is the verdict of Noromance with which I agree....
However, it's puzzling how he associates his preferences with the DD Turntable rather than the cartridge...?
And hopefully....on the adjusted recordings, we can all hear the true cartridge comparisons?

Regards to you both 🤗

Also interesting because I never noticed the Raven’s faster speed in prior comparisons.  Did something change?  One semitone equals a big difference in speed; about 6%! 

I prefer the DD rendition of both pieces. Admittedly, there is a little more euphony with the Raven but I prefer the cleaner and crisper Victor. Frogman’s astute observation is of note too. I wonder if this is why the LDR never quite sounded 100% on the Raven-something I have pointed out before. Interesting...

Good to see you back, Halcro. First, I hope that you and yours are well and staying healthy during this crazy time we are all living through.

Interesting cartridge comparison as always. Stunning playing by Stern and, as usual, your system sounds fabulous (with the Victors; but, with a very strong caveat). I will offer two observations that may or may not be related; although I suspect that they are. I hesitated to point these out, but it really makes a fair comparison impossible for me.

You have treated us to the sound of your TW Acustic Raven several times previously and while its beautiful sound has shown some qualities that in comparison to the Victor’s direct drive design could be attributed to its belt drive design never did I hear anything that I would describe as speed instability of any kind (however subtle). Admittedly, sustained piano notes as in the Bloch’s introduction are a brutal test for any turntable. However, in comparison to the Victor turntable’s rock solid speed stability the Raven shows a subtle pitch waver in the sustained piano notes. More importantly and re my comment about another possibly related observation is the fact that the Raven is running a full semitone (half step) too fast; not a small deviation. This changes the key of both the Bloch and Armatrading selections (semitone higher). Could all this point to a problem with the Raven’s drive system?

Warm regards.

Those who have been following this Thread, will know that I’ve been advocating the great sound available from some of the best vintage MM Cartridges from the Golden Age of Analogue.
Let's try this Shoot-Out....

VINTAGE VICTOR X1II MM CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1II MM CARTRIDGE

One thing I’ve learnt for sure.......those Victor Engineers in Japan, we will never see the likes of again 😢

In my last Post, I mentioned the fact that I couldn't hear the subway trains under Kings Hall on the Tchaikovsky with either my iPad or Computer speakers.....hardly surprising 🥴
In the meantime I managed to playback the YouTube Video through my actual system and could HEAR the subway trains....🤗

So I thought it might be revealing to hear the differences between the 1st Generation Youtube Video of the actual VINYL with the Youtube recording of the YouTube Video.....🤔
I can hear significant losses......

1ST GENERATION YOUTUBE VIDEO

2ND GENERATION YOUTUBE VIDEO  

Thank you Frogman...firstly for the kind words about this Thread and my System....and secondly, for all your significant and valuable contributions over the year 🤗
Of the 25,000 views.....I've been told that just as many people are reading for your comments, as to actually listen to the cartridges.

I've personally learnt a great deal myself....not the least, that you are correct about MC Cartridges being inherently slightly better than MMs 'when they are done RIGHT' 🙃.
The discovery of the Sony XL-88 and XL-88D and the reinforcement of my appreciation for the JMAS MIT-1 and PALLADIAN conclusively places them at the pinnacle of my cartridge collection.
I have also, thanks to your comments.....developed an increased appreciation for the singular attributes of the Decca London Reference.

Let me say that I agree totally with your comments re the Victor X-1 and Palladian.....
I also feel that the 'air' and 'reality' surrounding the higher frequencies with the Palladian....are superior to the Victor.
One thing I must ask you.......
On the Tchaikovsky, there are three subway trains passing under Kingsway Hall which are not only clearly audible in my listening room....but are also FELT with vibrations of the stomach-lining...
I can hear nothing of these on playback over my iPad or my upstairs computer and was wondering if, with your sophisticated headphones and amp....you can detect anything?

Finally I would like to thank the other regular contributors....Noromance, Dover and Harold (when he finds time to leave his barrel) 🤪

May 2020 be kinder than 2019 and.....
Let The Music Play 🎼🎹🥁🎷🎺🎸🎻

First, thank you again for what has been a very interesting thread. A great and rare opportunity to hear so many great cartridges.

I think your motivation for starting this thread is commendable. I can’t really comment on whether, in absolute terms, you met all your goals since I think that those are very personal calls. I think your first premise that MC’s are not necessarily better than MM’s was proven (again) handily. The top cartridges that you have treated us to are at an extremely high level of sonic excellence. Still, there remain differences between them that in the context of a particular system may swing our preference for one over the other because one moves the overall sound of a system a little closer to, not away from, our sense of what the sound of the real thing is. As with so many things in our hobby context is, if not everything, extremely important. I don’t know how one attaches a “correct” or “fair” cost to a cartridge that pushes the overall sound of a particular system a step closer to that sense of what reality is in a sonic area of personal priority.


For me, this thread has made clearer two things in particular. Just how much musical detail and nuance can be heard in a YouTube download recorded using rudimentary and portable recording gear was a big surprise. Then, the unexpected amount of detail reinforced and confirmed for me what I have always felt about MM’s vs MC’s.

i know some disagree with this premise, but I have always felt that in the area of tonality and timbre each type has, in a very fundamental way, a sound and character, or aspects of those, that carries to just about every cartridge of the same type that I have heard; a family sound. However, each does it by deviating from MY sense of what tonal truth is by going in opposite directions. My impressions of the Victor vs the Palladian confirmed once again why I feel this way.

The Victor sounds gorgeous. Maybe a little too gorgeous? The violin sounds just amazing. What a fantastic recording! Your system sounds particularly great with that record. However, there is a plummy character in the overall sound and a little bit of a “cupped hands around mouth” character in the frequency range of the woodwinds. The plummy character makes the harp’s lower strings too round and thick, and the upper strings don’t have as much of the characteristic gentle incisiveness and snap that is evident with the Palladian.

The Palladian swings a little the other way. It sounds a little dry. But, it sounds more linear without the excess in the lower mids and I would say that it swings toward the dry less so than the Victor swings toward the beautifully plummy. The main reason that I like the Decca so much is that, for me, it seems to strike a tonal balance between the two. As they say, “the truth is usually somewhere in the middle”. The sound staging seems amazing with the Victor. However, while the Palladian’s individual images sound smaller, they seem more correctly proportioned (size wise) relative to each other and better organized within the soundstage.

A surprise was that these characteristics were even more evident on the Brubeck clip. The generous lower mids and below character of the Victor made the piano’s left hand too full and thick robbing the piano of a little bit of its percussive role in the music. The absence of that extra fullness with the Palladian makes the musical flow a little more lithe. Paul Desmond’s is one my very favorite alto saxophone sounds. I have heard just about everything that he has recorded and I feel I have a pretty good idea of what his sound was. He famously said, when asked how he got that sound, that he wanted to sound “like a dry martini”. Great analogy that I get. With the Victor his tone is a little too wet. With the Palladian it sounds closer to real with the distinctive dryness as well as a little bit of brass sheen that seems totally absent with the Victor. Tonally, the Palladian sounds a little less like a recording than the Victor does.

Would I pay $10,000 for the Palladian? Of course not, I could live more than happily with the Victor. The differences are subtle and the Victor can sound absolutely gorgeous. But, .....

I hope none of my comments come across as attempting to dispute any of your premises. Just personal impressions based on my own preferences and biases. All very interesting and thank you again for one of the most interesting threads on Agon.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

As the New Year looms....I think it's time to try our final Shootout 🤼‍♂️
I began this Thread mainly to demonstrate that MM cartridges are not necessarily inferior to MCs......
The fact that LOMCs (and MI) have taken the top spots should not condemn the hypothesis...🧐
The price differential between current LOMC cartridges and MMs is indefensible.
No cartridge is worth $10,000-$20,000 based on the sonic benefits delivered in reality.

The second aim of this Thread was to demonstrate that little progress in cartridge design technology, has occurred in the last 30 years.
This applies emphatically in MM cartridge design....but also in LOMC designs.
The vintage cartridges of both types that have been presented here, generally exceed the sonic qualities of current 'modern' designs.

Without further ado.....let's hear how close a 35 year-old MM cartridge, can come to a $10,000 current-production 'uber' LOMC...😝

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1 MM CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

VINTAGE VICTOR X-1 MM CARTRIDGE

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

Spoiler Alert: The Palladian has been training for this contest and is 'On Fire'.....🔥

Hi guys, thanks for the encouragement :) I’ve ordered through via the only possible way - through Presence Audio and Brian Smith. I’ll specify that I want more lively rather than darker signature. I think the headshell can do something here too. I’ll start with Orsonic 101 which is the heaviest I have. BTW after reading @Halcro comments I tried bending it with my fingers. No freaking way I could deform it.

Congratulations on the LDR Bydlo.....
A fabulous present for the New Decade 🎉

it was not a warranty repair after only a few weeks of use?

Unfortunately it was not a product fault.....I had damaged the cartridge holder by dipping the stylus in Zerodust (after dipping it in Magic Eraser) as I do with all my cartridges...🤗
The LDR does not have a cantilever like normal cartridges and is 'held' in a 'holder' and tied in place.
The Zerodust actually 'clamps' the stylus and pulls it away as you remove it. I can see how that can damage the 'holder' and dislodge the stylus....😱
So I now only use Magic Eraser with the LDR......NO ZERODUST!!!!!

And I've been thinking about Noromance's comments on what the effect would be if the material of the 'holder' were to be varied...?
We all know what different cantilever materials can do to the sound....
Do you think that John Wright has tried different materials and listened to the results...?
Interesting 🤔

Please let us know when you receive the LDR Bydlo and have had a chance to become acquainted with it.....
I think I'm almost as excited as you....🤪

@bydlo Congrats on the LDR. It should sound magnificent in your 930/FR64. If it doesn't, send it back for adjustment. I don't believe you can buy direct from JW but perhaps you could specify a sonic signature from the distributor per @halcro posts above.

@bydlo Most likely. Although their effective mass is listed as the same on Jelco's site. I posted the issue as a separate post on Analog.

@noromance can it be that the 12" arm has a higher effective mass which Decca's seem to prefer?

Well I've just ordered an LDR motivated by Halcro's videos. Let's see what I get. BTW, @Halcro it was not a warranty repair after only a few weeks of use?

Thanks for sharing that insider info. I had no idea JW would vary materials like that. Does it mean each cartridge has to be fine tuned for brightness by changing the "stylus holder" materials? Can you imagine the possibilities? Tungsten, silicon carbide, bamboo spines, diamond?

The Deccas are notoriously finicky and selective....
My LDR suddenly began to distort and mistrack after a few weeks of use and I sent it to John Wright who repaired it

The Stylus holder is damaged and needs replacing. 1. London Reference Cartridge serial no.LR-84.    Remove stylus assembly from cartridge, extract diamond from holder and clean.    Fit diamond into new holder and attach tie cord.     Install stylus assembly into cartridge, recalibrate and test........................£200.00                                                                                        Carriage...........   20.00                                                                                        Total................£220.00

When I received it back and played it....it was boring and sounded unlike it had before the damage so I sent it back to John who responded:

I have fitted your diamond stylus in a slightly stiffer holder. This will give you the brighter sound you had before.
Yes I have listened to the cartridge and I agree it didn't have the 'brightness' usually associated with the Decca cartridges.Sometimes they can be too bright and I try to obtain a balance between the two extremes.

So the cartridge can be 'tuned' in several ways....
Makes for interesting listening experiences...😳

Thanks for the feedback 😃
The FR-S3 is a hard plastic (don't know if it's Bakelite) but it's obviously the same as the body design for their FR-7 Series cartridges which look, in turn....inspired by the A Series SPU Bodies.

Speaking of different arms and decks and the difference they make, especially with your "Decca" LDR in mind, I just got my Super Gold back from John Wright with a Decapod fitted and new Paratrace stylus. I installed it in my 9" Jelco TK-850 and it didn't sound good. Lot of surface noise and missing inner detail. I adjusted VTA and VTF and improved it some but it hadn't a patch on the other Decca (Garrott Bros Gold with new LC stylis and Decapod) on the 12". A little irked, I tried it in the 12" version of the same arm on the same table. Ridiculous. Transformed. No surface noise. Tons of detail. Crystal clear. Musical as all hell. In fact, I can't stop playing album after album. Ridiculous! 

I did some quick listening to both with the Strauss on the LCa. The FRS3 sounded slightly cleaner and more detailed if not a little thinner and edgier. Is it bakelite or hard plastic? The CF had better bass and control but lacked sparkle.

If anyone heard any differences with the Signet in the carbon-fiber headshell over the heavy FR-S3 headshell.....you've got better ears than I have 👂
Both in my listening room and over multiple listens to the video....the cartridge sounds identical to me in both shells 🙌
This was a little surprising after hearing the clear improvements with all the LOMC Cartridges that I tried.
The Sony XL55, Sony XL88, Sony XL88D, JMAS MIT-1 all sounded clearly superior with the heavy S3 headshell in the WE-8000/ST tonearm, so just why this did not occur with the MM is a mystery...🤔
Of course we can always postulate 'theories' such as 'higher compliance' but why this should affect the result is pure speculation.

I think this demonstrates how little we really know of the 'science' behind our hobby.
The only maxim we can apply is....try everything and LISTEN 🤗
To attempt to predict the 'sound' of anything based purely on specifications or 'accepted wisdom' is foolhardy.
That's why I have only one tonearm with a 'fixed' headshell and will never buy another......
The differences that come with changing headshells is mind-blowing 🤯 and is just as important to maximising the performance of any cartridge as VTF, VTA, Azimuth and Antiskate.
Those audiophiles who demand tonearms with non-detachable headshells are merely depriving themselves of one of the easiest paths to Audio Nirvana 😎

Having seen how the heavy FR-S3 headshell transforms the double knife-edged SAEC WE-8000/ST tonearm....at least with LOMC cartridges....I wondered if the same would hold true for MMs 🤔

One of my long-term favourite cartridges has been the vintage SIGNET TK-LCa MM Cartridge.
It didn't however seem to do well in the 'Shootouts' against other cartridges whether mounted in the COPPERHEAD TONEARM or the DYNAVECTOR DV-507/II.
Let's hear it again with the lightweight YAMAMOTO HS-4S CARBON-FIBER HEADSHELL against the heavy FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-S3 HEADSHELL.

SIGNET TK-7LCa + CARBON-FIBER HEADSHELL

SIGNET TK-7LCa + FR-S3 HEADSHELL

SIGNET TK-7LCa + CARBON-FIBRE HEADSHELL

SIGNET TK-7LCa + FR-S3 HEADSHELL 

I agree....but how much of that we can attribute to the DD Victor over the Belt-Drive Raven, I don't know?

Possibly more than you'd think. That's why I'd love to hear the LDR on the JVC. I listened to a Raven for hours at AXPONA and the system had a warm beguiling sound but not what I would call clear or incisive. Was it the big tube amps or the table? I must look it up and see what gear was being used.

And yet the price differential between the ’cheapest’ Onyx and dearest Blue Lace is $5000!!!!!

Isn't it an outrage Edgewear....🤬
At least Koetsu have a neat formula for launching new and evermore expensive models......change the stone-type 🤗
But what about all the other manufacturers....?
Having managed to ramp-up the prices for second-rate MC cartridges...how do you justify even higher prices for the new MODELS?
Those well-heeled audiophiles who have bought their $15,000 Uber cartridges believing them to be the 'best', are not about to 'downsize' to a $10,000 cartridge next year.
They believe that higher performance comes with higher prices...
So to justify even higher prices and tempt this hapless group of willing audiophiles, the manufacturers are desperately adding diamond cantilevers (Ortofon Century and Anna Diamond) and other 'gimmicks' whilst being unable to develop any real progressive intellectual design solutions.
You can fool some of the people.......

The original record is certainly expensive Dhcod......
I can assure you I didn't pay the prices asked for these 🤯
About 10 years ago, they did a reissue in a TRIPLE BOXED SET which was reasonably priced.
It appears that supply of this set may no longer be available, however you could pick up some bargain copies at MUSICSTACK or the complete reissued set at DISCOGS.
Good luck...

I never gave those Koetsus much attention, but your links made me take a closer look at their pricing as well as their specs. It appears they’re all the same cartridges with the same silver coils, platinum magnets and boron cantilevers (not even diamond cantilevers at these prices). And yet the price differential between the ’cheapest’ Onyx and dearest Blue Lace is $5000!!!!! Talk about cynical. I almost feel sorry for the folks who buy into this nonsense.

Holy crap that's an expensive record!

Thanks for the feedback Noromance....

JMAS seems to have a cleaner midband, more transparent and less congested upper bass.

I agree....but how much of that we can attribute to the DD Victor over the Belt-Drive Raven, I don't know?
But the fact that we can even have this comparison with a 40 year-old $250 cartridge over a megabuck current Uber LOMC is pause for reflection....🤔

Let's face it.....there have been no technical advances or revolutions in cartridge design during the last 30 years, despite what the manufacturers and reviewers like to tell you...🤥
In fact, if anything, there has been a 'loss' of material and technical know-how that precludes current-day cartridge designers from even matching the designs of the Golden Age of Analogue.
The loss of Beryllium as a cantilever material for example.....
The loss of tapered-tubes (or even rods) for cantilevers....
The loss of composite cantilevers as in the Sony XL-55 and XL-88..
The loss of the technical (or economic) ability to create a cantilever out one single piece of gemstone as in the vintage Sony XL-88D for another...
Instead of technical and intellectual advancements these days....cartridge designers and manufacturers find the only 'point-of-difference'  they can offer, is more complex and costly cartridge BODIES such as the various stone-bodies of the Koetsus and the fancy-shaped titanium bodies of the Lyras, Ortofons and Acoustical Systems ostensibly all designed to prevent internal cartridge resonances 😂
But no-one has ever proven that these internal resonances even exist, let alone quantify them.
And despite the fact that the great cartridges of the past (which outperform the current fancy-bodied ones) often have plain plastic, boxy bodies......Sony XL-88, Sony XL-88D, London Decca Reference, JMAS MIT-1, Fidelity Research FR-7f and FR-7fz 🤪
No cartridge design warrants the cost of $10,000, $12,000, $15,000, $20,000 today unless it contains one-piece solid diamond stylus/cantilever.
The fancy exotic-looking stone bodies of the Koetsus (Tiger-Eye, Onyx Platinum, Jade Platinum, Azule, Rhodonite, Coralstone, Blue Lace) are cynical marketing strategies aimed at wealthy audiophile dilettantes.
They do nothing for the 'sound' of the cartridges other than 'colour' them 😡

'Normal' Audiophiles🙃....and reviewers, generally don't have the use of two turntables, 6 tonearms and 40-50 cartridges (old and new) to enable direct listening comparisons.
I hope that this Thread provides the platform to actually 'hear' the differences between multiple cartridges on various tonearms so that everyone can decide for themselves whether 'new' is better than 'old'.

And for those who think that YouTube videos are limited to MP3 quality sound.....

YouTube currently streams in 128 kbps ACC in an MP4 container when you select the Normal quality. Premium subscribers can also select the High quality, which streams at 256 kbps AAC (equal quality to GPM's 320 CBR kbps).

Cheapish headphones on PC. One listen quick A-B.
AS has a fuller bass, with more room-filling power and drive. JMAS seems to have a cleaner midband, more transparent and less congested upper bass. Listen to the French horn? around 5 mins in to hear what I mean. The JMAS sounds more exciting, somewhat ragged, and a little less veiled too.

One of the reasons I began this Thread was to demonstrate ’sonically’ that differences in the ways cartridges present music (ie. sound)...are not always related to their typology (MM, MC, MI) or cost. Nor is it related to their genealogy (new vs old) (current vs vintage).
When I began collecting vintage cartridges about 12 years ago (both MM and LOMC).....I was astonished at how much better most of them sounded, compared to the current ones I had heard 😳. At that time, they were also cheap in comparison to the ’new’.....These days they have become rather more expensive as audiophiles have cottoned on....🥴
For those who have been following this Thread......many YouTube ’Shoot-outs’ and comparisons have resulted in a consensus that the current $10,000 AS Palladian LOMC proved itself one of the best performers in my collection of 40-50 cartridges.That was until I obtained my Holy Grail Cartridge....the 40 year old Vintage Sony XL-88D (Diamond Cantilever).
Concurrently with this event.....I discovered that by using the heavy Fidelity Research S3 Headshell on my SAEC WE-8000/ST Tonearm, it transformed this arm to possibly my ’best’ 🙃
Five years ago, I discovered an (unknown to me) vintage 1981 LOMC Cartridge JMAS MIT-1 which I thought was one of the best I had heard. An A’Gon Member from the Netherlands made me aware that a stash of NOS MIT-1s was being liquidated for $250 each and I bought the last one 😝.
Based on the Coral MC-81which had a Shibata Stylus on Beryllium Cantilever....John Marovski (an audio dealer in NY) got Coral to use a VdH Stylus on Beryllium Cantilever for his MIT-1.
Can a 40 year old LOMC Cartridge which cost $250 in NOS condition 5 years ago, compete with a current $10,000 Uber LOMC Cartridge?
I think it can.....Dover might tell me if I’m wrong.......🤥

AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE

JMAS MIT-1 LOMC CARTRIDGE

@halcro 
Thanks.
My suspicion would be that the extra mass anchors the sound a little more whereas the metal headshell imparts a little more of the vibrancy.
I did notice the worst mistracking appeared on the left channel.
Van den hul styli do tend to be very fine and more twitchy on VTA etc, even his early work. I have recently installed a Van den hul Colibri on a Kuzma 4 Point 11 and can hear vast repeatable changes to soundstage with as little as 0.1mm change in height at the back of the arm. 

Cheers.

Halcro -
I am not sure if you are having me on.

I am a bit Dover...😛

There is significantly more surface noise with the carbon fiber headshell.
It is possible the VTA is not the same on both shells.

Could be VTA but more likely Azimuth, as the cartridge appeared visibly askew in the Yamamoto. I turned the headshell to level the cartridge but the noise was still there. Don't know why the same is not the case with the FR-S3....? I think the VdH stylus is rather fussy 🥴

In some parts the cf on violins becomes quite screachy, compared to the FRS3 less so.

Quite noticeably in fact... 

For me the FRS3 is more musically listenable because the better presentation of tempo in the lower ranges underpins the musical flow and enjoyment.

Perfect summary for my in-room experience Dover....
Your comments on the "dumbell" effect of the heavy headshell and the need for the counterweight to move back to compensate are interesting.
Could explain why the FR-S3 headshell brings the knife-edge SAEC tonearm to 'life'...?

Thanks for the valuable feedback 👍

Halcro -
I am not sure if you are having me on.
There is significantly more surface noise with the carbon fiber headshell.
It is possible the VTA is not the same on both shells.
Listening to both this is what I hear ( on ear buds ) -
On violins with the carbon fiber you can hear more of the acoustic recording space of the whole orchestra, whereas with the FRS3 the leading violin is crisper and cleaner, more vibrant but with less acoustical information. In some parts the cf on violins becomes quite screachy, compared to the FRS3 less so.
From the midrange down to mid bass the FRS3 appears to have better articulation, and again fuller and more vibrant. The carbon fiber sounds a bit congealed through the upper bass to midrange.  On some passages the cf presents a clearer leading edge in the mid bass, but the more vibrant FRS3 conveys better tempo and clearer presentation of space in the lower end to my ears, and ultimately more transparency in this region.
For me the FRS3 is more musically listenable because the better presentation of tempo in the lower ranges underpins the musical flow and enjoyment.

How does this compare with your in room experience.

As an aside, when you use a heavy headshell, you will be altering the counterweight to compensate for the increased mass at the headshell end. The end result is that you are adding mass loading to the knife edge bearings, so the changes to sound will be a combo of cartridge/headshell resonances, inceased effective mass and most importantly increased load on the jewelled knife edge bearings. I know that some Japanese audio fetishists would add mass over the bearing on unipivots/knife edge bearings to improve bottom end without altering the effective mass - like dumbells each side of the bearings.

Encouraged by the positive results yielded with the heavy FR-S3 headshell on the SAEC WE8000/ST tonearm, I wondered if EVERY cartridge would benefit from this headshell 🤔

An unexpected discovery in my listening experiences has been the JMAS MIT 1 LOMC Cartridge which was a slightly modified Coral mc81 from the late '80s with the first true VdH diamond fitted on beryllium cantilever available in the States.

MIT 1 ON CARBON FIBER HEADSHELL

MIT 1 ON FR-S3 HEADSHELL
Perhaps slightly unfair comparison due to the increased volume level on the S3 together with the better recording technique....but it seems to sound better on the S3 headshell?

MIT ON CARBON FIBER HEADSHELL

MIT ON FR-S3 HEADSHELL
Fairer comparison here where I'm struggling to hear much difference between the two...?
Perhaps Dover could be enticed to see if he can hear any.....?

All help and comments greatly appreciated 😃

Ry Cooder sounded better on the Raven. The music was more coherent. The Victor was brighter but it was a mess.
Dire Straits however was the opposite. Dull and plodding on the Raven, lively and musical on the Victor.

Interesting comments Noromance....🤔
I wonder if anyone else also hears it like this?
I personally, prefer the WE-8000/ST tonearm on both samples...🙃

Thanks for the Link Bydlo....
I hadn't seen that Thread although in many Threads on many Forums, it's surprising how much of a consensus there is, for the FR-64s/66s tonearms being the best arms for the Deccas (particularly the LDR).
You're correct that I did have my LDR mounted in the YAMAMOTO HS-1AS EBONY HEADSHELL. Here you can see it mounted on the DV-507/II around the Victor Direct Drive.
It sounded fine in that headshell but sounded even better in the YAMAMOTO HS-4S CARBON FIBER HEADSHELL which is where it remains.
I hadn't heard of the 'match' with the Arche Headshell so I might have to investigate....🤔
And yes.....the SONY XL88D is so good, it makes even the LDR take a 'backseat' 🪑
But stay tuned.......
There may be a LOMC cartridge I have that cost $250 NOS, which could come close to the 88D 🤫

Hi Halcro,
Thank you for your explanations. Contrary to you I feel quite ok with KorfAudio mesurement techniques. Impulse excitation is a completely standard method in vibroanalysis (the usual knuckle test is a simple version of it ;) That his results may not correlate with listening is another story of course. BTW, the weirdest hammers I’ve seen where in vibration labs - so called impact hammers with coax cable sticking out of them :) One of the basic tools.
Do I see correctly that you use Yamamoto ebony with LDR? There is another A’gon fellow reporting better results using LDR with Yamamoto than (the lighter) Orsonic:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/arche-headshell-with-london-reference-cartridge-fantastic-res...

Structure-borne Sound Transmission is the single most damaging phenomenon to vinyl playback but suspended decks cannot protect against the 1-10 Hz Structure-Borne resonances.

I’m sure your active Herzan or Accurion does :)

I have listened to the LDR on all three tonearms around the DD Victor TT-101 and the ’sound’ in my room (and headphones) is similar to what you are hearing on the Raven.
Frogman however, and many other listeners to the videos, are quite impressed with the sound from the LDR 😃

Ok, thank you, so the TT and suspension is not much of a factor here - seems 88D is just inherently more transparent than LDR. BTW, I am myself too quite impressed with LDR and considering it for my system is what has brought me here :) But that 88D is in your videos more impressive for my ears. If only I could get one..

Cheers,b

Hi Bydlo,
I’ve subscribed to Korfaudio for a while so I’m aware of his results with the Orsonic headshell.....
It was this result in fact that caused me to doubt the ’science’ behind his methodology and testing procedures. Apart from the fact that his group of headshells are all aluminium and third-rate (no wood, plastic, carbon fibre, ceramic).... his TESTING PROCEDURE is suspect to say the least.
As he himself states....

Usually, an actual signal being picked up from a rotating LP is the best way to excite the resonances in the playback system. After all, it duplicates the real use scenario almost perfectly.
However, it is impossible to truly separate the headshell’s performance from that of a tonearm while the headshell remains attached.

So instead.....he clamps the headshell in a vise and strikes it with a HAMMER 😂!!!!!!
Enough said......

What I can clearly hear from your videos (iphone+iphone earbuds) is that 88D is more transparent, open, and direct and DLR, however surprising, more recessed and somewhat muddier, less convincing.

I agree with you 🤗
However, the differences are not caused by Airborne Sound Transmission (which can virtually be disregarded in the real world).
This can be proven by listening with headphones and comparing the sound with the speakers at different volume levels.
Structure-borne Sound Transmission is the single most damaging phenomenon to vinyl playback but suspended decks cannot protect against the 1-10 Hz Structure-Borne resonances.
I have listened to the LDR on all three tonearms around the DD Victor TT-101 and the ’sound’ in my room (and headphones) is similar to what you are hearing on the Raven.
Frogman however, and many other listeners to the videos, are quite impressed with the sound from the LDR 😃

Ry Cooder sounded better on the Raven. The music was more coherent. The Victor was brighter but it was a mess.
Dire Straits however was the opposite. Dull and plodding on the Raven, lively and musical on the Victor. 

Hi @halcro & thank you for the kind words and explanations :)
It is interesting what you write about the Orsonic, here is a guy who measured a number of headshells and claims it is one of the most rigid:
http://korfaudio.com/blog51
While we are at vibrations, I have one somewhat non-orthodox comment regarding your DLR/88D/Palladian shootout: Your both TT's are very close to the speakers, making them potentially prone to strong structure and air borne vibrations. The Victor, carrying 88D in the test had a benefit of an active isolation platform (effectively cutting all vibs below at least 200Hz). The other TT, carrying DLR did not have that. What I can clearly hear from your videos (iphone+iphone earbuds) is that 88D is more transparent, open, and direct and DLR, however surprising, more recessed and somewhat muddier, less convincing. I've heard many times the effect of a proper suspension (have a small company doing that) and it is often quite similar to the 88D/DLR difference in your videos. So my suspicion is that some part of the DLR/88D difference re the transparency might be due to the lack of the suspension below the Raven (not to mention of course the difference between the TT's).
My 2c :)
Cheers, b
PS I listen on Stax headphones, mostly on O2MkI driven by Blue Hawaii SE amp.

Thanks for the kind words Bydlo 😃
I appreciate hearing that some folks are finding this Thread informative...

Wow...an EMT 930 and FR-64S with Silver Wiring 🤩
You're really 'cooking with gas'...🔥
I also have the FR-64S with 'Silver Inside Leads' and the LDR sounds very happy with them.
The ORSONIC HEADSHELL however....is a different 'kettle of fish'.
I tried many cartridges on mine before selling it, as I could physically see the headshell twisting and contorting whilst playing heavy modulated passages.
Contrary to the commonly propagated claim, that the FR-S3 is too heavy....I have found this to be an AUDIOPHILE MYTH, with my seven S3 SHELLS being the very best to use on, not only the FR-64S and FR-66S.....but also other arms, as demonstrated in the two previous 'Shootouts' in this Thread.

What amplifiers and speakers do own to go with your first-rate front end?
Regards