Krc, I can't comment on the PC1, but I believe you will find the mid-range of the Magic Diamond to match your requirements very well -- neutral but not analytical, timbre is spot on, rendering of harmonic overtone shadings is excellent, resolution is among of the best I've heard -- for me it's an ideal transducer for vocals and for acoustic instruments because it reproduces the nuances so well. The Magic Diamond won't "prettify" anything, so it won't make a vocalist's voice more beautiful than real -- it simply delivers everything straight up without editorializing.
Raul has heard both (but not in the same system, as I understand), so perhaps he will be able to elaborate on any contrasts he observes.
. |
Dear Krc: I think that these ( MD/Allaerts ) cartridges are more a music lover ones that an audiophile kind ones.
Both have the best midrange reproduction that I ever heard, like Rushton posted the female vocals reproduction are second to none: right on spot. Frequency extremes not only have extensión but great definition and a " see through " quality that is almost unique, I like a bit more the low bass resolution on the Allaerts.
None of these cartridges are analytical in any way: far from that: they are neutral, natural and with great tonal balance, they don't take your attention to a special frequency range.
When you are hearing through these cartridges you are listening music and are enjoying what you are hearing with out take in count for that " inner detail/deep soundstage/high frequency detail/ etc /" , audiophile parameters.
I prefer the Allaerts overall performance but like Rushton posted I heard it in different systems, the only constant was the Phonolinepreamp.
The MD was mounted in the Walker rig, the Allaerts in my system along Acoustic Signature TT and GST 801 and Ikeda tonearms.
Now, the MD is more user friendly ( about output level ) than the Allaerts that it is a very low output cartridge where you need a very good Phonolinepreamp with a clean very high gain design.
IMHO, I think that with both cartridges you need the very best about Phonolinepreamp to really achieve what these cartridges can do.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I am waiting on the FedEx man to deliver a PC-1 this afternoon, currently using a Dynavector XV1-S and Goldfinger, though I much prefer the XV1-S. I should have it setup in a couple of hours and will report back. |
Hemisferick,
I'd also be curious about a comparison between the Dynavector and the Goldfinger. |
Hemisferik, I am anxious to hear you view on the PC1 vs the other cartridges you have. Thanks. |
PC-1 is now setup in the Rockport, tracking @ 1.9g (Roclport always tracks lighter by .2/3g) loaded at 240 ohms, tried 475 too bright & 100 too dark. Phono is Aesthetix IO & Callisto.
PC-1 has only 8 hours on it so please bear in mind my comments are all initial impressions!
Goldfinger - very dynamic, can be aggressive, needs at least 2 hours to warm up and then softens a touch. I spent 6 months with it, finally became fed up with its aggression/hardness as it tended to make everything sound the same. Tracked @ 3.15g loaded @ 800 ohms, likes 1/2 degress of VTA up at the back.
XV-1S - softer, less resolute than the Goldfinger or PC-1. Easy to live with, quite musical but missing the dynamic drive of the other two. Tracked @ 1.81g loaded @ 100 ohms, level VTA.
PC-1 - High output .6mv, certainly has some drive, very dynamic and resolute without the hardness of the Goldfinger. Out of the box very impressed overall with its ability to combine excellent resolution/dynamics and musicality. THrows a huge soundstage. Can only improve with time so I will report back in a couple of weeks. Combines the strenghts of the Goldfinger with the XV-1S.
Hopes this helps.
|
Henisferik,
.
Thanks for taking the time to share your initial impressions of the PC-1.
.
Please do keep us updated as it breaks in.
.
Thanks/Rgds,
Larry
. |
Thanks for sending me the link Simon, I'm happy you like the Air Tight PC-1 so much. I may buy one for my new table based on our conversation.
Jim promised to ship the cables tomorrow, let me know how the rest of the testing goes. |
After 10 weeks with the PC-1 I feel it is the best cartridge I have had in my system. Has all the advantages of the others with seemingly fewer drawbacks. Loading at 200 ohms tracking at 1.8g |
Any Audiogon members have more data to contribute to this debate? It's been several months since the last post.
I have only four hours on my new Air Tight PC1 and wonder what to expect as it breaks in.
Wonder too, what arms are other Air Tight owners using. |
Albert, how do you feel about the PC-1 now it is run in? Can you share your findings on VTF and VTA? |
I now have two identical Air Tight cartridges. One my Technics SP10 - SME 312S combo and another on my Walker Proscenium Black Diamond.
The Air Tight on the Walker was only installed a few days ago and not fully broken in. There is perhaps 20 hours on it and unfortunately it's not getting played much because of family activity and Christmas.
So far the loading works for me 240 ohms and tracking about 2.05 with VTA pretty much level. I plan on experimenting more as hours accumulate but it's a fabulous cartridge.
How is your's doing Hemisferik? |
I am loading at resister position 6 on the IO, I think that is same as you 240 ohms, (I have lost my user manual) tracking @ 1.95, vta is level. I agree fantastic cartridge. |
I completely missed this thread as $2500 cartridges are not my thing but just read up on this cartridge over at the vinyl asylum.
Has anyone here compared the Zu 103 at $399 to the Magic Diamond? Seems to me that would be a very interesting comparison as they appear to me to be pretty much the same thing. Or you can slot your 103 or 103R into a custom wood body by Uwe and quite probably save yourself about $2K that way as well.
Seriously, anyone considering this cartridge should take a look at some of the photos of nuded 103's and 103R's at the vinyl asylum before buying one of these. |
Hdm, I agree. It is apparent that the Magikdiamond is in fact a modded 103, which probably sounds very nice. But beware of guys like Raul who adamantly tell you otherwise. Beware the big mouth.
It looks like the MagicDiamond is executed very nicely and with all that weight and damping it must close the book on resolve and focus. It looks like the Zu does the same thing. I have done the same thing only with a Uwe wood body.
http://home.comcast.net/~omaille/audio/DL103/DL-103.html
Anyone can do it, all you need is a 103 to start with.
... |
Is it true the MD uses a spherical stylus? I read an article somewhere on its very eccentric designer (who also designs some very unusual amp) and just wondered if anyone has more background on him? |
..
spherical = conical.
same thing.
that is the DL-103 standard stylus/cantilever.
No design change there ...
.. |
Gadfly, OK, so are/were you able to tell what mods if any (other than the body and epoxy potting) have been done to the 103 by Blue Electric? |
What's your point? Do you know what they are? If so, tell us. But even so my only point is that the original piece is a DL-103, that can not be denied.
I know that the Zu does a few mods and I am curious to know what kinds of mods would incur 5k, 10, 20k, 30k. That seems to be a bit inflated.
But tell us, convince us, that the mods are worth the money. I am willing to hear you out. Materials cost can't be over $20 so the design work must be unfathomable.
BTW, the 'sound' of the cartridge can not be your argument because I already have that for less than $400.
.. |
Yikes! I thought when I originally posted the MD cost $2,500! Looks like I was out by 3K! My apologies. |
..
I quote for the site: http://www.dietiker-humbel.ch/magicdia.htm
"There are also some Signature models in the Magic Diamond cartridge lineup, selling for $15,000 to $30,000. But the waiting list for these Signature models is over a year long, which tells you how high this cartridge's reputation is among those cognoscenti of the international audiophile community who can afford to buy any cartridge they want."
.. |
Gadfly, I wasn't challenging you, I wondered the same thing: I am curious to know what kinds of mods would incur 5k, 10, 20k, 30k. That seems to be a bit inflated.
So I thought maybe you knew what else the MD incorporated (if anything) beyond what's obvious to the eye. Reminds me of the Shelter rebadging fiasco and now the EAT tube scam. |
..
It looks like the back plate where the connectors are has change but i can only see that from the bottom. I do not know if that actaull goes as far as replacing the entire back plane.
It does not look like he braced the generator other than epoxying it.
It looks like a basic rebody and epoxy which is what the Zu is. I am at a loss to see where the $????k went.
I wasn't sure if you were challening me or not so I too the opportunity. ;-)
.. |
From what I've seen in the thread, the only 'evidence' to prove it's not a modded dl-103 (or, to give the benefit of the doubt, a 103r) is one guy who says that's "rubbish", a supposed 'letter' from a supposed 'friend of the manufacturer' claiming otherwise, and a link to the manufacturers website. As opposed to the evidence of the two carts looking exactly alike, down to the spherical/conical stylus and aluminum cantilever.
I guess we're to believe that the manufacturer is building his own custom, handbuilt carts that, coincidentally (or perhaps ironically), look exactly like a dl-103, and cost thousands more.
There are some old sayings leaping to mind here-'....fool and his money.....', '....one born every minute....'. Etc. |
We can determine that it is not a 103R as the yoke and generator are gold in color on that cartridge. |
Not only do they look the same, they essentially spec the same except for the slightly lower recommended range of tracking force (2.2 to 2.8 grams for the 103). On top of that, the manufacturer was apparently a huge fan of the 103 many years before marketing this cartridge, extolling its virtues and ridiculing other moving coils as being inferior in design and overpriced! http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/vinyl/messages/73/736555.htmlThis one really does look like a duck and walk like a duck. |
.
That small bit of fudge factor is trivial. The 103 can play over it's 2.5vtf; the suspension is tuff enough to take it. And the 42ohms? Close enough as many of us know.
To make some overhead in this field is common. To charge what looks like $5 all the way to 30K?!?! shame shame shame. It is the most egregious case of this kind of sham.
And what about the customer? What of him? I am sure he will defend his embarassment to the end.
. |
Do you think he'll 'Rush' to it's defense?
har |
He may just want this whole thing to blow away. Don't you feel a responsibility to keep the issue afloat?
I don't hear any of the other posters chiming in anymore in defense either.
ps: Raul did not like the 103 but loves the MD. Does that not invalidate the cat, or what?
.. |
Dear Gadfly: I don't know for sure if the MD is a heavy modified 103 ( maybe it is ) but what I'm totally sure is that this MD has a very high quality performance that the 103 can't approach in any way: both are different and in a different quality grade level.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Interesting amount of hyperbole and hand wringing going on in this thread since I last looked at it. (Sorry, just haven't had the time recently.) As an owner of the Magic Diamond, and a big fan of what it delivers, my view is the same as Raul's. This is a superb cartridge, easily one of the top several currently available. I added it in my system after hearing it many times in Lloyd Walker's system. Raul has listened to this cartridge in Slipknot's system, as have I. Dave Robinson, Positive Feedback Online, keeps it in his reference system. If it is a modified 103, it performs at an entirely different level and it continues to be one of the most timrally accurate and most resolving cartridges I've listened to. If you can match what this cartridge does in some other way at a lower cost, my best wishes are with you.
Cheers, |
.
I am preeety sure that the MD is a modded 103. I can tell you that a modded 103 is pure sweetness. So what you are saying is that it might be a 103 that is far superior to a 103?
Don't let the logic get in the way.
I am here to tell you pointedly that the modded 103 that you have heard via the MD is the same modded 103 that 'we' hear. I agree with you that it is far superior to other thousand dollar cartridges.
Of course if you were never able to recognize the value of the 103 previously then maybe you can't 'really' recognize it now sans it price tag. Which, for me at least, puts your evaluations in the sink.
Of course, I am an American and this may explain all for you. Alternately, I think I have you tagged now as well.
|
.
Mr Rushton: The brute point is that I or anyone can gain that sound and better at much lower cost. The reason is that the cartridge in question costs ~$150. A wood body is about ~$125.
I can do you better. I will get a SS retip soon for about ~$250 and it will be far far superior to the cartridge you now enjoy.
So for ~$550 my cartridge will actually beat your "MagicDiamond" and not just by a little bit.
Enjoy your cartridge. You paid enough for it.
. |
Where is the 'hyperbole' and 'hand wringing'? All I see is a correction of previous hyperbole-for instance, calling into question the birth of the 'magic diamond' as a 150.00 cart as "rubbish", with no evidence to the contrary (except a huge price tag). But now, Rushton is apparently willing to accept that truth, but needs to use a third party's 'reference' setup as validation for his waste of money.
Now, that's what I call 'hyperbole'. |
Gadfly,
your conclusions are assumptions, however true they MIGHT be, and as such, you have "tagged" yourself. Let us know if and when you speak from experience as these others you so handily insult have done. |
Gadfly, in which case you will be enjoying a cartridge superior to many of the best cartridges on the market. This will be a remarkable accomplishment well worth the effort. Good luck.
. |
