Something I said? 😊
Hear my Cartridges....🎶
Many Forums have a 'Show your Turntables' Thread or 'Show your Cartridges' Thread but that's just 'eye-candy'.... These days, it's possible to see and HEAR your turntables/arms and cartridges via YouTube videos.
Peter Breuninger does it on his AV Showrooms Site and Michael Fremer does it with high-res digital files made from his analogue front ends.
Now Fremer claims that the 'sound' on his high-res digital files captures the complex, ephemeral nuances and differences that he hears directly from the analogue equipment in his room.
That may well be....when he plays it through the rest of his high-end setup 😎
But when I play his files through my humble iMac speakers or even worse.....my iPad speakers.....they sound no more convincing than the YouTube videos produced by Breuninger.
Of course YouTube videos struggle to capture 'soundstage' (side to side and front to back) and obviously can't reproduce the effects of the lowest octaves out of subwoofers.....but.....they can sometimes give a reasonably accurate IMPRESSION of the overall sound of a system.
With that in mind.....see if any of you can distinguish the differences between some of my vintage (and modern) cartridges.
VICTOR X1
This cartridge is the pinnacle of the Victor MM designs and has a Shibata stylus on a beryllium cantilever. Almost impossible to find these days with its original Victor stylus assembly but if you are lucky enough to do so.....be prepared to pay over US$1000.....🤪
VICTOR 4MD-X1
This cartridge is down the ladder from the X1 but still has a Shibata stylus (don't know if the cantilever is beryllium?)
This cartridge was designed for 4-Channel reproduction and so has a wide frequency response 10Hz-60KHz.
Easier to find than the X1 but a lot cheaper (I got this one for US$130).
AUDIO TECHNICA AT ML180 OCC
Top of the line MM cartridge from Audio Technica with Microline Stylus on Gold-Plated Boron Tube cantilever.
Expensive if you can find one....think US$1000.
I will be interested if people can hear any differences in these three vintage MM cartridges....
Then I might post some vintage MMs against vintage and MODERN LOMC cartridges.....🤗
Peter Breuninger does it on his AV Showrooms Site and Michael Fremer does it with high-res digital files made from his analogue front ends.
Now Fremer claims that the 'sound' on his high-res digital files captures the complex, ephemeral nuances and differences that he hears directly from the analogue equipment in his room.
That may well be....when he plays it through the rest of his high-end setup 😎
But when I play his files through my humble iMac speakers or even worse.....my iPad speakers.....they sound no more convincing than the YouTube videos produced by Breuninger.
Of course YouTube videos struggle to capture 'soundstage' (side to side and front to back) and obviously can't reproduce the effects of the lowest octaves out of subwoofers.....but.....they can sometimes give a reasonably accurate IMPRESSION of the overall sound of a system.
With that in mind.....see if any of you can distinguish the differences between some of my vintage (and modern) cartridges.
VICTOR X1
This cartridge is the pinnacle of the Victor MM designs and has a Shibata stylus on a beryllium cantilever. Almost impossible to find these days with its original Victor stylus assembly but if you are lucky enough to do so.....be prepared to pay over US$1000.....🤪
VICTOR 4MD-X1
This cartridge is down the ladder from the X1 but still has a Shibata stylus (don't know if the cantilever is beryllium?)
This cartridge was designed for 4-Channel reproduction and so has a wide frequency response 10Hz-60KHz.
Easier to find than the X1 but a lot cheaper (I got this one for US$130).
AUDIO TECHNICA AT ML180 OCC
Top of the line MM cartridge from Audio Technica with Microline Stylus on Gold-Plated Boron Tube cantilever.
Expensive if you can find one....think US$1000.
I will be interested if people can hear any differences in these three vintage MM cartridges....
Then I might post some vintage MMs against vintage and MODERN LOMC cartridges.....🤗
628 responses Add your response
Haha....no no Frogman. All good 😘 I've been busy lately attending to things around the house which seem to pile up till they become almost overwhelming 🥵 The 'end' however is hopefully in sight.... I am a little perplexed though with your opinions on the Shures, as I really can't hear what you describe no matter what genre I throw at them. Particularly the Ultra 500 which, in my listening room....is one of the finest and most enjoyable of all my cartridges. We'll have to agree to differ on this one...🤔 It's interesting to see what are the most viewed cartridges on Youtube... The Victor X-1 and Z1/SAS are the most watched with the Empire 400D/III Gold in hot pursuit. The LDR is racking up views across its many videos as is the Shure V15/III/SAS. The FR-7fz is surprisingly heavily viewed....probably because of its reputation and rarity? I'm thinking about the next 'shoot-out'..... Any suggestions? Regards |
For me it always comes back to something very simple: they can’t all be equally good while sounding so different. My comments are about the differences, as I hear them, in direct comparison (same setup, same music). As I commented, the Shure sounds impressive at first and would probably continue to sound impressive. Additionally, if for some strange reason I were ever forced to use a Shure, I would not feel the urge to run out of the room or to cut back on music listening time. It is a very good and enjoyable cartridge. However, in direct comparison to the Decca the differences are pretty obvious. So, what to make of this? Again, they can’t both be equally good at replicating the sound of music if they each sound so different from the other. **** I really can't hear what you describe no matter what genre I throw at them. **** So, in what ways does the Ultra sound different from the Decca to you? Or, are you saying that to you the Shure sounds just like, or is the equal of the Decca? Thanks for the comments. |
Again, they can’t both be equally good at replicating the sound of music if they each sound so different from the other.But ALL my cartridges sound different to each other....👅 That's the beauty (to me) of having these two different turntables, six arms and 50+ cartridges 🥳 If you were right (in the absolute sense).....I would keep the LDR and the Palladian and sell all my other cartridges..🧐 The LDR is not the favourite cartridge of my collection.... Nor is the Palladian.... They are BOTH amongst my favourite 10-12 👍 But I would be devastated if I couldn't listen to my Victors or SPUs or Signets or Graces or Shures or FRs or Sonys or Empires... It's the DIFFERENCES between all these gorgeous creatures that I celebrate 🥳 Of course they all can't be RIGHT..... But they CAN all be wrong....even the LDR. Is the Ultra 500 the equal of the LDR....? I can only say that I can listen to the Ultra 500 for longer (without the itch to change) than I can the LDR... But I really do appreciate your insight and comments..... Now....which two cartridges would you like to hear next? 😀 |
Halcro, its interesting. I have found with multiple turntables and cartridges that ultimately I come down to a strong preference. I find that once I have identified shortcomings in a cartridge then it becomes unistenable, all I hear are the shortcomings. I'm not so hard on the Shures like Frogman, I did manage to listen to a Roksan/Final Audio ET2/Shure V15vxmr for about 10 years whilst having an audio hiatus. On the other hand I simply cannot stand my original mint Victor X1, use to enjoy the Koetsu Black with Zeta, but my latest one sounds stodgy most of the time in my current system. A lot of it comes down to system matching as well, particularly step up/phono characteristics. Would like to hear the Dyanvector XV1S (original ) vs the Decca if you are inclined. I have not had the opportunity to hear the Dynavector XV series in a system I know.. |
Addendum to my Post above: During the month that one of my DM-58 Monoblocks was being repaired......I was forced to listen through headphones (Audeze LCD-2 Magnetic Planars with Schiit Audio Lyr Valve Headphone Amp). Having listened to my cartridges for 40 years solely through speakers...I was unable to recognise or differentiate any of my cartridges through the headphones. The sense of transparency, soundstage, depth of field, bass location, room dynamics etc were all missing and thus my 'knowledge' of the specific cartridge traits had disappeared. This is not to say Frogman, that your method of listening through headphones is flawed.....only that it's far far different from the way I experience my cartridges in my listening room. Could you perhaps try to listen through speakers (or iPad) to see if you can hear some differences in presentation? Regards |
Thanks for the comments, Halcro. Somehow, I feel we are not connecting with what we are each trying to say re our experiences and descriptions. Dover is correct by pointing out that sometimes once a shortcoming or difference is identified it renders the component, if not always unlistenable, then obviously flawed. I understand that you enjoy all the cartridges in your collection. I would too; you have many of the best. However, I still want to understand what about them, in this case the Shure and Decca, you hear as different from each other? I approach this exercise (and the hobby in general) from the standpoint of determining which component gets me closer to the sound of music as I (!) know it. Once that is established then one component necessarily becomes superior to the other and the other inferior. I also don’t particularly enjoy swapping out components. In the case of cartridges I have found that once I find a cartridge that I like, I prefer to live with it for some time and learn how very small adjustments in set up can optimize the sound. Just one of the many reasons that I live the ET2; it makes this possible and easy. I am a bit perplexed as to why I keep getting the feeling that there is resistance to the idea that one cartridge might be superior to the other. Again, they can’t all be equally good. **** But they CAN all be wrong....even the LDR.**** Exactly right! And, once again, proof of just how far removed even the best are from “the absolute sound”. But, some get closer to it than others. And that is what I hear and try to describe. The differences may be very subtle, but they are there. To me, the Decca sounds closer to the sound of music as I know it than the Shure does. So, if that is to be the case, then there have to be differences between the two. I suspect that you are reacting more strongly to what I am describing as the differences (and reason for the preference) than is warranted? Also keep in mind that, as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues. For me that is the most important aspect of it all. **** Could you perhaps try to listen through speakers (or iPad) to see if you can hear some differences in presentation? **** I have! And not just for comparing cartridges. I have been doing so for many years. Not only do I not think the method is flawed, I have found that for determining differences in timbre and things like musical phrasing my Stax/tube driver setup is superior to speaker listening. Keep in mind that my speakers are also electrostatics (Stax F81) or transmission line (Paragon Regent). As good as the Paragons are they are no match for the Stax as far as faithfulness to tonal issues. I will concede that headphones are inferior to good speakers as far as sound staging issues are concerned. But, those are secondary concerns for me. Btw, about a year ago a friend who owns the Audeze and I did a comparison to my Stax and while the Audeze sounds very good I (and he) felt that the Stax did a better job of revealing tonal differences as well being more rhythmically lithe. The Audeze setup was very good, but to me was overly full sounding. I kept thinking “this reminds me of the sound of better Grado cartridges”. Thanks for the comments and comparisons and keep them coming. |
Thanks for the comments Dover. There have been more than a few cartridges I've had that "I simply cannot stand"......two of them, much-acclaimed LOMCs with $12,000 pricetags 😱 In these cases, I sell them off fairly quickly.... Of the other 50 I still have, they all have "shortcomings" but also they all have 'something' that enlightens me and their "shortcomings" are not significant enough (nor annoying enough) to prevent my enjoyment. Unfortunately....I 'fried' my original XV-1s (don't ask) and sent it to Axel who saved it by rewiring the coils (and replacing the stylus). In doing so, he reduced the output to about 0.12mV but it sounded good 😃 Then one day......the right channel 'burnt out' 🥵 And I haven't decided if I liked it enough (in comparison to some of my other cartridges) to send it to Peter Ledermann.....? |
I thought it might be interesting to hear the differences between the two cheap Fidelity Research MM cartridges the FR-5E and FR-6SE. There are different opinions on which is the better cartridge 🧐 The FR-5E is a low-compliance elliptical stylus on aluminium cantilever obviously designed to suit the heavy Fidelity Research tonearms like the FR-64s and FR-66s. The FR-6SE is a similarly specified elliptical stylus which cost $210 (on release) compared to the $130 of the 5E. What the differences are with the 'motor' I have no idea.....? FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-5E MM Cartridge FIDELITY RESEARCH FR-6SE MM Cartridge |
Listened to them on my headphones. The 6 is in a different league. More snap, air, drums have a reverb against back wall, rim shots audible, clearer diction, more slight sibilance (not necessarily a good thing but at least you can hear it- tracking?), louder. The 5 is muddy and dull. It's not even worth go on about it any further! |
| Post removed |
**** Something I said Frogman? **** Patience, patience! Two days? 😌 Actually, if anything, what kept me from prioritizing a little bit of time for the comparison and response was, in part, what you didn’t say. I haven’t read any specifics re what exactly differentiates the last two cartridges for you. Seems to me that for comments, and certainly for dialogue, to have any real relevance then there should be more than statements of disagreement or comment about NOT hearing what differentiates them for someone else. A little frustrating. No sweat if you don’t want to go there for whatever reason. 😅 Also, I’m a bit mystified by the suggestion that listening on an IPad (!) might be more revealing of differences than on Stax Lambda Pro Sigs/tube amp. No way! Ok, on the FR’s: I agree completely with noromance. In fact it mirrors what I was going to write exactly. With the 5 the drums sound like they have blankets stuffed in them. Overall, a but runny and too covered sounding; pretending to be “smoother/more refined”. Not enough hf extension and too much lower mid. With the 6 there is a strong sense of hearing more deeply into what is on the lp; even if that may not be particularly smooth itself. I would differ with noromance only in that I would not call that level of sibilance “slight”. I don’t know if it is setup issues, but that level would be unacceptable for me. My sense is that at least some of that excessive sibilance is on the recording (peaky vocal mic?) and the 5 is tamping it down. The 6’s far better hf response exposes it. Thanks, as always! |
Agree with you both on the FR-5E and 6SE,,,,,, I have always preferred the 6SE to the 5 and 5E and have been confounded by the preference of some (J Carr and Chakster) for the FR-5E? They are BOTH coloured cartridges in that they emphasise the 'warmth' of presentation (in a good way-like tubes 😀). But whilst the FR-6SE keeps a happy balance in the spectrum between bass to treble....the 5E doesn't, almost descending into 'syrupy'. The beauty of both of them, to me, is the projection into the room of the entire soundstage. It envelopes you and because they are so warm and free of any brittleness....the louder one plays, the better (and more natural) they become. In fact they are the ideal cartridges for turning 'digital' recordings into 'analogue-sounding' recordings 🤩 Despite the 'easy' preference for the FR-6SE....I can still happily listen to the FR-5E.....at least on the Victor DD. On the Raven AC-2, it becomes admittedly annoying 🥴 I will elaborate on the previous discussion about the LDR and the Ultra 500 shortly Frogman....😎 I feel there is some resistance to appreciating my 'in-room' experiences...? 🙉 I started off with the LDR in the FR-64S on the TT-101 Noromance...but the notorious reputation of the Deccas for mistracking, were borne out on all my tonearms other than the FR-66S 🙏🏽 Regards |
@halcro That’s disappointing. Are you certain it wasn’t a setup or record issue? I run all my Deccas on 2 lowly Jelco 850 12" and 9" (and a 12" 750 gimbal on another table) arms with knife-edge bearings (albeit good ones) and have no issues with mistracking. Of course, now I’m second guessing my interpretation of mistracking! |
Are you certain it wasn’t a setup or record issue?Well I'm certain it wasn't a record issue because it occurred on all records. I'm not certain it wasn't a setup issue but it occurred on the three tonearms surrounding the Victor......the knife-edge bearing SAEC, the gimbal-bearing FR-64S and the DV-507/II. By 'mistracking'....I mean it 'jumped' a groove in only two spots (perhaps the nulls?) on each record. Not too annoying, but nada with the FR-66S 🤗 |
But, some get closer to it than others. And that is what I hear and try to describe. The differences may be very subtle, but they are there. To me, the Decca sounds closer to the sound of music as I know it than the Shure does. So, if that is to be the case, then there have to be differences between the two. I suspect that you are reacting more strongly to what I am describing as the differences (and reason for the preference) than is warranted? Also keep in mind that, as should be obvious, that for me the most important aspect of all this is to all issues. For me that is the most important aspect of it all.I get it Frogman....🤗 And I appreciate how as a musician....this is surely the most important thing for you. For me however....there are too many variables in the performance, recording-quality, mastering, editing, cutting and stamping of the vinyl discs that I am not consciously 'comparing' the sound to 'live music'. I've been to so many live concerts (classical, rock, electronic, reggae, jazz) that I know, when the sound is at its best (and particularly with amplified music)......there is no way that a recording can compete with the guttural, body-tingling, stomach-churning, ear-splitting and mind-blowing sound of 'LIVE' music. Conversely.....when the live sound is POORLY produced (at the mixing desk with amplified music or due to the acoustics of the venue or seating position with unamplified music)....I can easily prefer the sound I achieve at home. So despite the fact that the instruments are 'REAL' and their sounds are 'AUTHENTIC'....if the END RESULT is flawed in any way.....I am not moved 🥶 HERE is a concert I attended a few years ago in Ravello (Italy) performed by the Shenzhen Symphony Orchestra on a clifftop overlooking the Amalfi Coast. Despite the presence of 65 live musicians playing REAL instruments in open air.....the 'sound' was abysmal!!!! I firstly sat in the middle, three rows back and could not believe what I was hearing... No oomph, no bass, no dynamics, no 'soundstage', little volume and definitely no MAGIC 😱. I changed my seating on 5 occasions to see if the sound might improve with elevation or positioning....all to no avail. When I listen to a particular cartridge in my system at home....It needs to have the tonal balance from lower bass, mid-bass, midrange to treble reasonably balanced. The midrange to me is fundamental.... If it is not convincing and doesn't reproduce a palpable three dimensionality to my ears....it fails. The important differences I hear between cartridges are in their presentations of 'Soundstage'...side to side, front to back, illusion of depth, separation of instruments and the air around them. As much as I like the LDR.....the Ultra 500 goes slightly down lower with more authority in the bass. The 'highs' on the Ultra 500 have slightly more 'air' and 'transparency'. The LDR is definitely not a 'soundstage' champ 👎 Its 'width' remains inside the two speakers whereas the Ultra 500 extends past the outsides of both. The LDR has little 'back' depth and virtually no forward projection whereas the Ultra 500 fairly 'bulges' in a parabolic manner INTO the listening room so that if I turn the volume really high...I fear it might 'push' against me 😝 These characteristics I believe, may only be apparent from my listening position 'in situ'. We can't expect them to be heard or appreciated over a Youtube video... And that's why I think we are not quite connecting Frogman...🤔 But then I'm surprised you manage to hear ANY of the distinctions you so ably describe via such a limited medium.. I'll keep 'em coming as long as you keep liking and contributing...🥳 Regards |
|
Thanks Frogman..... The reason I showed and commented on the live orchestra in Ravello is that they were all REAL unamplified instruments in 'real' space yet to me.....it didn't matter 😴 It left me cold 🥶 and unmoved 🙉....and I really didn't want to stay till the end. And I DIDN'T......🏃🏻♂️ My point is, that despite this being 'The Absolute Sound' by HP's definition......it wasn't 'The Holy Grail' and if my system sounded anything like this, the Classifieds on A'Gon would be full of my components 🤣 And no..........it really wasn't easily recognisable as 'live' instruments to me 👎 and I've had previous similar experiences. I understand completely how important the 'live' experience is to you....but to me, I want 'theatre' ⚡️💥🎉 I want to be immersed, astounded, moved and left shaking my head in disbelief at what I am hearing in my own room..... That's what keeps me turning it on almost every day (as I have for 40 years). But I suspect that most in this enigmatic hobby of ours....have slightly different personal priorities. And that's also why I simply 'hang' on your descriptions of my cartridges.....most of the time I don't know what you're talking about until I go back and listen to what you have pointed out...🤔 Vive les differences....🙃 Regards and thanks again. |
This should be an interesting comparison....🤗 Five years ago, at the start of the mono-cartridge ’fad’.......I bought the AUDIO-TECHNICA AT-33 MONO LOMC Cartridge to see if there was an improvement over using my stereo cartridges with my Phonostage MONO switch engaged. The AT-33 MONO has a 0.65 ml conical stylus on a Duralumin pipe cantilever with a reasonably high static compliance of 20×10-6cm/dyne and a low dynamic compliance of 6×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz). It has a reasonably healthy output for a LOMC of 0.35mV (1kHz and 5cm/sec. horizontal signal). AUDIO-TECHNICA AT-33 MONO LOMC Cartridge LONDON DECCA REFERENCE MI Cartridge (Mono Switch) |
Hahaha...... Coming from you Eckart, that is high praise 😇 I know how much you love mono, and I also know how much you love jazz 🎹🥁🎷🎺 You should get this Ray Charles boxset from Discogs. It contains 5 discs (10 sides) of his wonderful music mostly recorded before he hit the big time of international success. I may have more MM cartridges than you my friend......but you have the greatest collection of vintage and modern LOMCs that I know of. Some of them never seen nor heard by the majority of true analogue-lovers. You should make some Youtube videos of them for posterity....🎼 Incidentally......which cartridge do you prefer in mono? Regards |
Thanks, Halcro. I think you may have missed the point I tried to make re the live concert you posted. I have to assume that you have attended live music performances in a first rate concert hall and not just in awful spaces like the one you posted. THAT is what is HP and many have referred to as “the absolute sound”; and the sound in a venue like that is unmatched by any audio system. Unless, of course: **** I want ’theatre’ ⚡️💥🎉 **** That makes it all clear. https://youtu.be/VRkZYdWCe7w ☺️ |
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. |
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! |
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 |
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 🥳 |
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 |
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 . |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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. |
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. |