Hear my Cartridges....🎶

So as to not derail Halcro’s great thread too much, please forgive a bit of self-promotion (?) in pointing out this thread started several 😱 years ago. A little 🙄 hyperbolic on my part, but some may find something of interest:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/best-single-malt-scotch?highlight=Best%2Bsingle%2Bmalt%2Bscot...

Balvenie 25, Nikka 12 and Oban 25 I ❤️ 

Auchentoshan is very nice. I tend to drink more scotch in the wintee—maybe because I like peaty lowlands wirh iodine and funk. Lagavulin, Ardbeg, Talisker...not sure which arm/cartridge that would be  

Auchentoshan is very nice. I tend to drink more scotch in the wintee—maybe because I like peaty lowlands wirh iodine and funk. Lagavulin, Ardbeg, Talisker...not sure which arm/cartridge that would be  

I'm obviously out of my league here.....🥴

Auchentoshan!!!  Don’t hear that name too often.  A real sleeper and not too expensive.  One of my faves. 

You could always sell a cartridge and afford the good stuff!
Because of this post, I’m tasting 3 tonight. The Benriach 16, Auchentoshan 12, and The Balvenie Peat Week 14. Hic.

Hahaha....😀
Can't compete with rich musicians and their predilections for only 'The Best'.
I'm a 'Working Class' blended Scotch man....
In this case, Dimple is a fine drop 🤪🥃

Macallan 25? The Palladian of single malt Scotch. Bold, a little rounded, slightly sweet with a very long finish (that pesky overhang) and $$$$$.  Would recognize that sound anywhere 😄😄😄😄😄.

Heard the ice plop! What scotch are you drinking?
Wife said Shure sounds nicer playing on the phone, in bed.

From the 'sublime' to the 'ridiculous' 🤪
It seems that with careful selection, one can get what one pays for with phono cartridges....
The best (in my case) being the $5,000 LONDON DECCA REFERENCE  and the $10,000 AS PALLADIAN 
But the majority of audiophiles are not in the market for that kind of expenditure on a cartridge.
What can one purchase for a more modest $450...?
For decades....thousands of audiophiles have used the DENON DL-103R as their 'budget' LOMC cartridge.

DENON'S involvement with moving coil cartridges dates back to the 1930s when they were engaged in a joint R&D effort with NHK to produce a high performance and high reliability cartridge for broadcast use. The legendary DL-103 moving coil phono cartridge was introduced in 1963, which became one of the longest running products in audio history. 
Denon collaborated with the Japan Broadcasting Corporation Technical Research Laboratories in 1963 to make this extremely reliable, high-performance low-output phono cartridge. As the first moving coil cartridge, the DL-103 will always be the standard of reliability in every aspect, even the price.

It can still be bought today, 'brand new' for $450...

Then there is the venerable SHURE V15/III which can be purchased 'used' for less.
But most audiophiles will not accept or buy a 'used' cartridge with unknown provenance and usage hours.
For $200, one can purchase a 'used' V15/III WITHOUT its original stylus 😀 
For $200 more....one can purchase directly from Jico....their famous SAS stylus on a Boron cantilever or for $250, the SAS stylus on a Sapphire cantilever.
This will give you, essentially a 'Brand New' Shure V15/III which is much improved over the original because of the radical profile of the SAS diamond and the more sophisticated cantilever.

Which one is better....? 🤔

DENON DL-103R
A 'Wall of Sound' that would make Phil Spector blanch...

SHURE V15/III/SAS 

SHURE V15/III/SAS

DENON DL-103R
Listen at the 0.49 second mark for the 'ice pop' in the Scotch 🥃 

I'm pleased you like the Gary Karr 'Kol Nidre' Fogman 😃
I thought you would.....although it gets only half the views on YouTube that 'The Wall' gets 😞
Also really glad you enjoyed hearing 'The Wall' for the first time....
It deserves a place in your collection as does their 'WISH YOU WERE HERE' album.

As usual, your comments re the PALLADIAN vs LDR 'Shootout' were brilliant....but I appreciate how you went the 'Extra Mile' in putting into words...in fine detail...what you hear to be the differences.
I cannot disagree with a single description or observation you have made 👍
You even pre-empted what would have been my only contribution, by anticipating...

I can definitely understand why some listeners might prefer the Palladian’s spatial boldness and bass power to the Decca’s more organized and “neater” approach to imaging and sound staging.
At first the greater bass power and sheer bigness of it is impressive,

Two great cartridges, I agree....and I'm particularly pleased that your 'Winner' is not a Moving Coil Cartridge 🤗

I now have the Palladian permanently ensconced on the Copperhead Tonearm whilst the LDR is sitting pretty on one of the FR-66S Tonearms.
That allows for my other FR-66S to continue to serve as my 'Test Bed' and 'Flavour Change' for all my other LOMCs.

I now hope you can help me settle....in the same way.....the MM Cartridges to be 'selected' for the arms around the Victor TT-101?

Many thanks again Frogman..and Dover, Noromance, Harold and others who have commented...😃

Regards 

Two wonderful cartridges and each prioritizes different aspects of recorded sound. I can definitely understand why some listeners might prefer the Palladian’s spatial boldness and bass power to the Decca’s more organized and “neater” approach to imaging and sound staging. Assuming, of course, that those are sonic priorities for that listener; even when at the expense of other sonic considerations. Don’t get me wrong, there probably is nothing that the Palladian doesn’t do extremely well. However, the Decca’s tonal truthfulness is simply killer; and, that is the No.1 sonic priority for me. Once I hear that superior rendition of timbres, for me, it doesn’t matter how impressive the sound stage may be with another cartridge. Add to that the fact that tonality is inextricably linked to the perception of my No.2 sonic priority, rhythmic truthfulness, and for me the Decca is the clear winner.

Noromance makes some excellent observations and I agree once again with his comments. His comment re the children’s voices was one of the first things that I noticed. However, I don’t necessarily agree with his implication (?) that the fact that the LDR is “flatter” sounding with “less body” is a negative. As we all know, sometimes less is more; especially when we are striving for accuracy to a reference. This goes to my “spatial boldness” comment and I am not at all convinced that this boldness is not a distortion or some phase related issue. I would describe what I hear this way:

First, the Palladian tracks play slightly louder than the Decca tracks and I had to match volume levels for each. The Palladian seems to present larger individual images, but not a larger amount of information. In fact, I hear it as akin to expanding a visual image to a larger size; the detail becomes diffuse and there is less apparent detail compared to the smaller more concise image. The LDR’s images seem more concentrated and I can hear more inner detail in the sound of instruments and voices (as Noromance points out). More of the inner texture of their sounds is preserved; tonal truthfulness. The Palladian at first gives the impression of greater refinement, but that is because it rounds the leading edges compared to the LDR. One hears more realistic grit in the sound of electric guitar and bass with the LDR. I find that the finest inner details of instrumental textures are glossed over compared to the LDR. Personally, I think that the Palladian’s overall character (only compared to the LDR) is too smooth. The uppermost harmonics in the sound of instrumental timbres are diminished, Probably better now that it is in the Copperhead arm, but still a little of what Dover referred to as a “grey wash”....COMPARED TO THE LDR. The Palladian has greater bass power, but the sound of bass instruments is too rounded compared to the LDR. On the Karr recording (wonderful!) there is more of the realistic sound of rosin grabbing metal strings with the LDR which gives the sound more definition. All this goes to No.2 sonic priority, rhythm:

To my ears the bass quality of the Palladian is too “bloomy”. There is too much overhang of bass notes. At first the greater bass power and sheer bigness of it is impressive, but I think it actually mucks up the rhythmic interplay between instruments. On “The Wall”, check out the repeated bass note that begins at 4:03. Tight and well defined with the LDR. The absence of overhang allows the drums to sound more in synch with the bass for the feeling of greater rhythmic impetus in the music. With the LDR the rhythmic grooves simply sound a little groovier. On the Karr recording, his beautiful phrasing is somehow more expressive than with the Palladian. At 3:13 he begins a phrase with a suddenly aggressive bowed note. There is a certain amount of startle factor to that musical detail. With the Palladian’s there is less startle factor than with the LDR which sounds faster and more impactful due to the absence of the extra bloom and thickness of the Palladian’s bass.

All this is relatively subtle and both are great cartridges. However, as always, they can’t both sound equally close to the true sound of music while sounding so different. For me, the Decca gets closer.

Great comparison. Wonderful recordings. I love the Karr recording. Believer it or not, had never heard music from “The Wall” and had not followed the band since “Dark Side “ days. I liked it very much. One to pick up.

Thanks, as always.

I compared both with my own original copy on my second rig. Not kidding and not surprised and I know you know this but golly, the YouTube version is bad.

EDIT - played the YouTube versions again after listening to the real record. The hell... they sounded much better than the pre-real record listening session.

EDIT - played it again on my main rig. Slate modded 401 with retipped Decca Gold (Garrott Bros Microscanner Decapod with LDR line contact).
Man. Nearfield on the Quad ESL, it is holophonic. Wow. I haven't played this record in ages. Great recording.

The Wall. Both sound great.
-- LDR
Pros - Clean, uncolored, transparent, lack of glare, rhythmically coherent, percussion sounded right. The helicopter sounded real and Water’s multi-tracked laugh sounded like Rog’s voice. The kids ethereal voices were more intelligible.
Cons - Flatter sounding. Instruments had less body.
-- Palladian
Pros - 3D space, instruments had a spacial feel about them like the were made of something tangible. Appearance of fine inner detail. You can feel the bass guitar strings twanging and the depth of the instrument from front to back. Nice. The kids' voices occupied space with reflected echoes adding to the detail but losing intelligibility.
Cons - Added a pale gold-colored haze. Music seemed less coherent and muddled. Listen to Waters laugh mentioned above. It sounds confused. Can't get the sense that the MC sounds processed out of my mind.

Time for the CLASH OF THE TITANS ⚔️
The HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP of my cartridge collection.
The SHOOTOUT that the Maestro (Frogman) has been calling for 🧐

THE LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI CARTRIDGE 
                                      VS
THE AS PALLADIAN LOMC CARTRIDGE 

And we get to hear them both on the same turntable....😀

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge

AS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge

AS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge

LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge 

Great you like the Palladian in the Copperhead!
maybe I will try it in the Copperhead or Cobra.
Do not forget the SAECs (506 and 8000) need an internal rewiring (best silver) and I got lots of experiences with new headshells, also on the 8000 (a new headshell built by AS). It sounds so different to the old SAEC stuff. Nevertheless the arms are exquisite!
My Palladian feels pretty well in the Kuzma Airline at the moment.

best
E.

What a great sounding lp! One of my favorites. Wonderful performances.

Excellent comments by Dover. I agree completely with his assessments and descriptions; and, frankly, don’t have much to add except perhaps to describe some of what is heard somewhat differently.

The Copperhead is a better arm for the Palladian and it is obvious. The SAEC/Palladian combo has too much high frequency energy putting the tonal center of gravity too high in the overall spectrum. This results in what I think is what Dover describes as “lightness”. The “grey wash” is not so much the presence or addition of something, but the absence of something...realistic tonal color as with the Copperhead. Interestingly, and consistently, I described that very effect as “bleached” tonal colors in the previous Palladian/SPU/FR shootout. Instrumental timbres, particularly with upper strings and woodwinds, are more natural and realistic with the Copperhead.

**** The leading edge of the notes, decay and space around each instrument is far more resolved on the Continuum combo. I notice that bass notes on the Continuum combo have tremendous impact and start and stop on a dime, laying bare the acoustical space. On the SAEC there is speed in the upper end of the lower register, but it misses the leading edge and doesn’t really stop, just fades away. ****

Great comments. They go to what are, for me, the most important trait of this combo; it’s musical transparency. The Copperhead/Palladian combo makes clear the musical phrasing of the musicians while the SAEC glosses them over by comparison. The wonderful rallentandos (slowing of tempo) don’t seem to have as much musical meaning with the SAEC.

Very interesting comparison. Thanks.

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&hl=en-us&ei=IbVmXdrtIZLt_Qbn_JfQCw&q=you%27r...:

Dover,
I can't say too much until Frogman reports.....but you're spot-on and I'm still stunned.
Will give a full response after the Maestro....
Thanks again Dover 🤯

@halcro
Wow - that was quick. You wouldn’t know these were the same cartridge if you hadn’t labelled them. This is why I have 4 decent tonearms.
I’m very interested in what you think yourself as well as @frogman .

For me on this particular piece of music the SAEC/Palladian initial impression is quick and fluid, very light/tight on overall orchestral balance.
With the Copperhead/Palladian initially the sound was so different - gutsy, big - it sounded a little messy. But once I adjusted to the balance for me the Copperhead/Palladian ( on my earbuds ) was just as quick but has a lot more resolution. The leading edge of the notes, decay and space around each instrument is far more resolved on the Continuum combo. I notice that bass notes on the Continuum combo have tremendous impact and start and stop on a dime, laying bare the acoustical space. On the SAEC there is speed in the upper end of the lower register, but it misses the leading edge and doesn’t really stop, just fades away. doesn’t seem to go as deep as on the Continuum. There is a "grey wash" across the spectrum with the SAEC, this is not there with the Copperhead.

Initially I thought the SAEC was more coherent overall, but I think this is partially an illusion from the lightweight balance. Again as I adjusted to the vastly different presentation of the Copperhead this impression disappeared, the Copperhead was quick, fast and coherent.

For me the Palladian would stay on the Copperhead. It’s an easy decision.

Thanks so much Halcro for going the extra mile it really demonstrated the importance of tonearm/cartridge matching. Copernicus returns !

Following Dover's suggestion, I moved the Palladian to the Copperhead Tonearm but not before recording its performance in the SAEC WE-8000/ST.

PALLADIAN ON SAEC WE-8000/ST TONEARM

PALLADIAN ON CONTINUUM AUDIO LABS COPPERHEAD TONEARM

Thanks Frogman....
I think I had too much antiskate on the FR-7f which might explain its tracking performance?
I find it though, to be a delightful cartridge able to sound 'just right' whenever I come away from other cartridges.

The next 'shootout' should enliven you (I hope?) 🤯

Haha..
You'll have to ask Thuchan again for that 'shootout'....
He of course also has the LDR....😜

And I thought, based on the sequence of posts, that Thuchan’s recommendation of the Century was directed at me ☺️ Silly me. $12,000 !!! C’mon, Halcro we need a shootout between the Century and the Palladian. Better still, between the Century and LDR 😉

Spelling correction to prior post: “bases” should, of course, be basses.  

Dear Halcro,

The Palladian was and still is the best LIVE Mc cart I do know, the Century is even more open, surrounding the listener. I do not know how they do it. I did describe it on AudioCirc, also the differences. There is still one Century to be sold, not mine!

best
E.

Palladian:

Dover’s comment about the piano’s left hand is spot on. Sounds a little “cloudy” and indistinct in that register. This also causes the celli and bases to lack some definition and natural sound of rosin. Other than this issue the Palladian was my overall favorite; and by quite a bit. String and piano timbres were easily the most natural of the three cartridges and there was an ease to the rhythmic flow of the music that was very attractive and felt correct.

SPU Silver:

From the very first string entrance. Yikes! Didn’t like at all. Violins way too steely sounding; particularly when playing forte. However, there was much less difference in tonal character between the piano’s left and right hands. Much better weight and definition in this range. More saturated tonal colors even if rather “technicolor” overall. I find the overall sound to have an “in your face” quality with a rather strange tonal balance.

FR:

The worst tracker of the three with a constant sense of being on the verge of breakup. In spite of this I much prefer it to the SPU and in some ways it finds a (not quite) middle ground between the Palladian’s tonal naturalness and the SPU’s technicolor character. I find it a little heavy handed (no pun) and relentless rhythmically; whereas the Palladian sounds more relaxed and rhythmically coherent. I have to admit that when going to the Palladian from the FR, the Palladian sounds a bit bleached in the tonal color department and wish for a little more of the incisiveness that Dover mentions. However, overall the Palladian is the most refined and natural sounding.  It has the fewest distractions that tell us “this is not real”.

Thanks, Halcro.

Good idea Dover,
I'll mount it in the Copperhead and do a 'Shootout'....⚔️
We'll then see what's more important......Turntable or Tonearm 🎼🎹?

Halcro,
Probably yes. Just reinforcing the TT/Tonearm/Cartridge hierarchy. I still see many folk here putting expensive cartridges on cheap TT's & arms.
Having said that tonearm matching would be a critical part of selecting a $10k cartridge for me, even if it meant buying a new arm. I would want to buy a cartridge of that quality only if I could maximise its potential.

BTW I still have some reservations re the Palladian/SAEC combo - on the recording posted I feel the lower half of the piano register is a little vague and lacks incisiveness compared to the reproduction of the same piano above middle C. I would like to hear the Palladian on the FR ( I would assume Dieter has voiced this cartridge with this type of arm in mind ) and/or Cobra if at all possible with the same piece of music - I think that would be quite informative.

BTW Dover......
I think you have several top-flight tonearms....so you are warning other audiophiles..?

I think even Thuchan sets himself a limit on cartridge costs....🤪
That's why his opinion on the Ortofon Century vs the Palladian would be so valuable....

Halcro,
The answer is that depends. I wouldn't buy the Palladian unless I had a top flight tonearm. If you are looking for some of the atrributes of the Palladian ( speed and coherence ) for $2k a couple of possibilities are the London Decca range - Maroon to Gold or possibly the Dynavector 17DX ( short diamond cantilever ). The LDR is $5k.
Key question on value is how does the $10k Palladian compare to the current $15k crop of cartridges.

Thanks Dover,
Informative comments.....
The question though is:- 
Do these $2,000 cartridges miss out on the 'magic' of the Palladian sufficiently enough to make the $8,000 extra investment obligatory? 🤗
And note that the Palladian is the very best LOMC cartridge I have heard in my system.
There are several $5,000-$15,000 'modern' MCs which are trounced by many of my MMs.....🤪

Thuchan is being a little facetious in suggesting I should buy the ORTOFON CENTURY....🤑
Firstly, they made only 100 world-wide.
Secondly, they were all pre-sold before release.
Thirdly, the cost is US$12,000.
Thuchan just received his and is delighted.
As he also has the PALLADIAN ......perhaps he can comment on the comparisons between the two....?

The cartridge just released by Ortofon for us plebs to buy, is the new MC ANNA DIAMOND priced at US$10,500 😳

So the Ortofon in this comparison is the SILVER MEISTER II.

Princi makes his appearance in one of the videos to 'stare me down' as a reminder that it's dinner time.
No music should intrude on this crucial event...🦴

Regards

Thanks for the recommendation, Thuchan. Some impressions tomorrow, Halcro.  It’s been a little busy.

Hi Halcro,
Well my impression, the Palladian is a cut above, less coloured, more even handed/balanced across the spectrum. The Palladian appears to be much quicker and more resolving - first impression is it is quicker, on long term listening the instruments relate better to each other, the interplay between the various sections of the orchestra seem more coherent to me and on point with this cartridge.

The Ortofon Century/FR7f offer more colour and drama at the expense of coherence. The FR7f appears to me tighter and more resolving of individual notes whilst being truncated in the top end than the Ortofon - you hear more of the space around the piano notes for example. The Century whilst being more open in the upper mid/top end than the FR7f, it still doesn’t resolve the fundamentals as well. The Ortofon on long term listening reminds me of an old tonearm ( nameless but rhymes with tisme ) that has a charm/exhuberance, that if you listen to for some time, it becomes endearing and might be attracted to, colourations and all.

But for me the Palladian is too quick, the others cannot complete.
And then there is the Decca...

PS Nice little cameo by Princi on castanets.

Looking forward to this next comparison.  Later.

Frogman?...Frogman?....Bueller?.....Anyone?......

You should try the Ortofon Century 🧨

best
E.

Actually, and just for the sake of consistency and clarity, while I think the Palladian is fantastic, for me it definitely takes second place to the LDR in the ways that mater most to me.  I don’t remember feeling (or writing) that it ties the LDR.  I just revisited the comments for the Palladian/LDR comparison on page 5 of this thread to confirm this.  Interestingly, my comments about sound staging are consistent with more recent comments about the LDR; although, for me, not necessarily a negative at all.  Talk about splitting hairs! 💇‍♂️...two of the best cartridges available (maybe the two best?).

Looking forward to this next comparison.  Later.

Frogman (and I agree) has anointed the AS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge
as the 'benchmark' in my system (possibly a tie with the LDR for Frogman and Noromance?)....
The Palladian is a current production top-of-the-line LOMC from Acoustical Systems which costs US$10,000 😱
How close to this 'sound' can you get for approx. US$2,000....?

The current production ORTOFON SPU SILVER MEISTER II LOMC is a possibility and one that I like....😀

A 35 year old vintage FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f is another possibility for those owning high-mass arms with detachable headshells.
For those who are patient (and utilise HiFiShark)....you can often find a good FR-7f for less than US$2,000 or one without a stylus for US$1,200 and have it re-tipped with a Line-Contact stylus as I have done...👍

AS PALLADIAN LOMC Cartridge 

ORTOFON SPU SILVER MEISTER II LOMC Cartridge

VINTAGE FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-7f LOMC Cartridge

I think you're on the right track Rob 👍
Please let us know how it goes...?

Regards

Thanks again halcro

Your unbias views are very helpful ,
I am currently looking at a Grace F-9 with a re-tipped shibata stylus
( spelled correctly this time ! ) and aluminum cantilever,
a new AT150sa ( discontinued ) which has a shibata stylus
and a sapphire cantilever ,
and lastly a low hr ( ? ) Grado RM V2 .
I know these don't compare to the level of cartridges that you and many of the others here have but they do have many of the features that the expensive cartridges have .

p.s.  I use a Tavish Design Adagio phono pre and a passive pre .
    I'm playing it safe by looking for MM s with over 4mv output 
    so it will be an all tube output .
 

I wish there was a Decca Reference with UP-OCC or silver wire and a beryllium "cantilever". (Although the Be might shatter!)

Thanks for the kind words Rob.
I'm pleased you're enjoying the Thread...😀

As to your question on styli profiles and cantilever materials.....these are hotly debated topics and some audiophiles have rather staunch and dogmatic views on both.
I'm not one of those audiophiles...🤗
There is however, some general form of agreement that 'radical' styli profiles (Line Contact, Micro-Line, Micro-Ridge, Micro-Linear, Shibata, Ogura, Van den Hul, Fritz Gyger) are all variations of the 'Line Contact' class of styli which are designed to more closely align with the profile of the actual 'cutting head' and sit much further into the groove to retrieve the maximum amount of information.
I have generally found these profiles to predominate in my favourite cartridges (although I only have a few Shibatas).
Having said all that....I have cartridges with elliptical and hyper-elliptical styli which sound extremely fine 👍

I have cartridges with cantilevers made of ruby, sapphire, boron, carbon-fibre composite, duralumin (basically aluminium), aluminium, beryllium) and can say that most of my favourite cartridges seem to have beryllium cantilevers.
This is contradicted by the fact that my FAVOURITE cartridge (AS Palladian) has a duralumin (aluminium) cantilever as have all the SPUs and FR-7f/ FR-7fz.

Strangely enough.....I can report that, despite being the default cantilever of choice amongst the high-end LOMCs....I have never fallen in love with a cartridge that has a boron cantilever 🤔

Regards

Oh how wonderful the LDR sounds in MONO....when there's no sound-staging issues 🤗
I am completely "immersed, astounded, moved and left shaking my head in disbelief at what I am hearing in my own room....."
I didn't know Frogman, that Ray could even PLAY saxophone let alone be so good at it...?!
I'm glad you all confirm that it is really "no contest" 👊
The beauty of the LDR is just so evident!

So when I began listening to the AT-33MONO five years ago......it became evident that it brought nothing special to the presentation of 'mono' recordings in my system.
And then I realised how 'stupid' the whole idea of buying a 'mono' cartridge was in my particular situation...🤪
Here I was, buying and testing nearly 100 cartridges (both new and old), MM, MI and LOMC...searching for the elusive 'PERFECT' cartridge and discarding nearly 80 of them.
How could I then, insert a cheap ($400) Audio Technica LOMC and just ACCEPT the 'sound signature' it possesses.....just because it was 'mono'??
Apart from this comparison....I have not played it since 🥳

****  I feel as if something is fundamentally wrong with the presentation of the idea of the music ****

👍

Thank you Halcro 
for starting a very enjoyable and informative forum discusion .

So I have a question for the highly experienced and knowledgeable memebers ,  have you noticed liking or enjoying a certain
stylist shape or cantilever material ?

My limited experience has been with Grado only ,
a used MZ that came with the TT , then a used Gold , an estate sale Sonata ( new ! ) and what I am going to replace a Reference Master
( new and discounted  after the V2 came out ) .
All with eliptical stylist and aluminum cantilevers .

Thanks
Rob

Dear Halcro,
my beloved Mono is a Koetsu Coralstone.

i am not as good in visualization than you, and i do not have as many MMs as you. So true! 😂

best
E.

I have three well-sorted Deccas and enjoy them. Recently, I bought an Audio Technica 750 with Shibata tip as it was highly recommended and I needed something for a second table. It does have seemingly better depth and sometimes more air. However, it is not as fast on transients as the Deccas. Consequently, when I do play a record with it, I feel as if something is fundamentally wrong with the presentation of the idea of the music. And, no matter what, I cannot use it for critical listening.  I was going to send it back but...we collect things, and there's always background music!

AT-33/LDR:

Wonderful Ray Charles; thanks.

You keep reinforcing for for me why I need to buy a LDR. It’s really no contest between the two. I don’t know what spatial or sound staging drama one can hear “in situ”, but from the first one or two piano notes it is obvious that the AT sounds two covered in the highs. The piano (and all instruments) sound with diminished upper most harmonics in their sounds; a little dull. Less “leading edge” to the attack of notes. This contributes to an overall rhythmically polite and slightly “lazy”, (and not in a good musical way) rhythmic feel in the music. Specifically:

With the Decca one hears more appropriate sound of metal in the high hat cymbal beginning at :40. And, when the drummer begins to play the repeated triplets on brushes (ONE,2,3  ONE,2,3 ONE,2,3, etc.) at 2:20 the propulsive feeling that this is intended to create is almost lost with the AT; with the Decca it is obvious and signals the beginning of a new chorus in the music.

Overall, across the board more realistic instrumental timbres with the LDR with more realistic rhythmic impetus to the music; particularly important in music at a slow tempo such as this.

In spite of Decca’s not being known for their tracking ability, it sounds superior to the AT in that regard which sounds as if just on the verge of breakup on sharply struck piano notes or chords.

Btw, somewhat of a rarity, Ray himself is the alto saxophone player on this. Pretty good saxophone player for a great piano player/singer.

Thanks, as always.