Downunder: Thanks. You too have good a nice one, especially those Sonus Fabers look like a stunning Italian beauty. I guess you are located downunder? Which city?
My phonstage is a modest musical fidelity but I am building my own based on the same principle that was used my X-2 pre-amp (see the review of that preamp in product review section, if you curious).
Has anyone compared the A-90 with the ZYX Universe? |
Hi Diva, great system - plenty of luvely tubes!!
let us know how it sounds on the might Micro. Should sound sweet as.
BTW, what phono stage do you have - tube research?
cheers |
Mine just arrived. Have not installed it yet. I have Micro Seiki RX-1500 with SME3009R. |
Shane,
Great ears hear alike. Great minds think alike too. You are spot-on with your opinion of the Millenium mat.
I was using the Millenium mat until about 9 months ago. I removed the mat and heard the same type of observations you noted.
The mat obscures microdynamics and slows the speed and tempo.
The soundstage is much clearer and larger without the mat. One can "hear into" the recording better without the mat. The mat flattens the soundstage height/depth.
Just about everything improves with the copper top only compared to the Mellenium.
By the way, I had tried different mats and trying the copper top only about 1.5 year ago when I had my Triplanar. The triplanar was not able to detect the differences between the mats like the Phantom 2 does.
I don't use a mat any longer. Let me know if you come up with something better than the copper top only.
Andrew |
Hi Andrew
Any further thoughts, Yes, that the millenium mat is now an obvious weakness.
When I put the A90 back onto the Raven (I had not really played it for two mnths when the A90 was on the P3), I felt that the raven was just too reserved and big easy smooth. It could not compete with the P3 on speed, drive and tempo.
Took it off and just used no mat - copper top. WOW big difference. A lot better drive in the bass and music sounds better with great tempo. copper top might be a bit too much in the upper frequencies
The millenium mat is a little laid back tempo wise and soft in the leading edge and bass a little rounded.
playing around with a few mat options at the moment, however the raven is a lot closer to the P3 with the millenium mat gone.
The A90 lets you hear it all :-)
What mat do you use?
cheers |
Shane,
Any further thoughts on the A90 and/or the Raven AC now that you moved the A90 from the P3 to the Raven AC/Phantom?
Andrew |
Paul
I set the A90 on the Phantom / Raven on Sunday when the family was out.
You are right, the A90 sounds great regardless. I am sure with my back slightly up it sounds better than it did several mnths back with the Phantom.
Obviously with the Phantom you can easily experiment over time.
I don't have any Craig, but I think I might have some kontact around somewhere.
Anyway, try the A90 with the arm slightly up at the back and see if you feel it is an improvement. |
Shane, I have my A90 pretty close to horizontal...perhaps just a touch up at the rear going by the Phantom's mircopoise bubble level (but well within the centre guide lines).
The cartridge still sounds good if VTA is a bit off, but you don't get that same image 'pop' and presence - nor the bass snap - that you get when it's right.
If you do mount the A90 in your Phantom (on the Raven) I have a tip. Try some Caig Pro-gold on the Phantoms cartridge clips, arm wand pins, DIN and RCA connections. I hadn't done this since purchasing the Phantom and I was amazed at the obvious improvement in both image palpability and fine textural detail - leading to even greater musical involvement and flow.
I don't recall ever hearing such an obvious improvement when treating with Pro-Gold on previous occasions. These are no doubt critical connections, but I think the A90's great clarity and performance potential makes the treatment very worthwhile. |
Not sure what VTA the other A90 folks are using, however I thought I would share.
Sometimes it is hard to teach old dogs new tricks. In all the years of listening to MC's and the last 8 with the dyna XV-1, I have always set the VTA around level or back down - you know the audiophile rules - back down = less treble/bright - back up - more treble or brighter.
I slightly raised the back up and the improvement in sound is quite startling. Clearer, more transparent yet also more pure/organic, better drive and bass impact. A very nice improvement to what was all ready wonderful.
I do change from 50 ohms to 100ohm loading and 50ohms may sound a little more pure and 100ohm sounds a little more vibrant. In my system setup I mostly prefer 100ohms - probably more to do with the slightly laid back presentation my system has.
Now that I re-read this thread I see Mike L was using his A90 slightly back up as well.
What setup paramaters do others use?
I have had the A90 on my vintage Exclusive P3 for a couple of mnths now. I planned to move it back to my Raven AC-3 as the Raven is getting about as much play as Tiger is with his wife.
Trouble is, I am loath to re-set up the A90 on the Raven, as it is sounding so sweet on the P3. Still saving for that 2nd A90. My XV-1 after many years service will be retired with dignity and grace.
cheers |
Thanks for the details and comparisons against other, pricier cartridges. But I have to ask (because I own one) ... has anyone compared this to a Transfiguration cartridge? |
It's nice to see some vinyl enthusiasts still believe in pricier MC carts of really good designs. I haven't heard A90 but a Per Windfeld. If wisely matched and correctly used, it's believed Per Windfeld is as capable as much pricier carts on the market. I wish I could hear A90 in my system later...
Dan |
I now have 30 hours on an A90 / Reed 2A, having previously owned a Dynavector XV1s / 507 Mk.II arm. Alot of superlatives have been thrown around about the A90, here's my 2 cents-
Improvements over Dynavector combo: Literally EVERYTHING
- More transparent- much less veiled
- More dynamic- WAY more dynamic
- More detailed- am hearing MORE INFORMATION retrieved from grooves
- Better soundstage depth & width
- Better image focus
- Better looking- this is not at all important, but this is one COOL CART.
- Less noisy- lower noise floor- like it has a higher signal to noise ratio
- Less expensive- About $1k cheaper
This is a very HONEST cartridge which avoids the MORTAL SIN of being ruthless and aggressive in it's delivery of the truth. This is probably the most important characteristic of this cart. It has a way of being forgiving to modestly noisy and/or mediocre recordings, allowing you to listen and enjoy them-rather then being driven away. I've really wracked my brain to come up with some characteristic I don't like and I and I can only nit pick and say I with the cantilever wasn't 2 inches long, but if you're careful- not to worry. If you're coming from an XV1s- you know the drill.
I wish I had tried the A90 on the 507MK.II arm before installing the Reed to better understand the qualities the Reed is bringing to the equation. That's impossible, at this point, but I will say that I DO prefer the Reed to the Dynavector. One BIG THING is the Reed has a very high quality dedicated tonearm cable so that there are no connection between the cart. pins and the phono stage RCA input. Considering how tiny the output is from the A90, or any other low output MC cart., connectors are your enemy. The fewer the better and you can't have fewer than this, without soldering your cart. to the tonearm cable- don't try this at home!! I also prefer the VTA adjustability and cueing mechanism of the Reed. The cedar armwand has an, obviously, more organic feel to it than the INDUSTRIAL DESIGN of the Dynavector.
To date I have not heard my analog rig ( EMT 948 DIRECT DRIVE w/ custom oversized homebrew plinth) sound anywhere near this good. It's WAY BETTER, 30% -40% better than the Dyna combo- which was pretty damn good. How much better is possible- cost no object- I don't know, but I do think you're looking at $10k +++ carts- the most expensive in the world to better the A90. There certainly are few, if any other, cart. manufacturers with longevity and history of Ortofon. It's probable that their almost one century of cart. manufacturing experience, and depth of R&D is evident in the A90. An interesting side note- My 1st moving coil cartridge back in about 1980 was an Ortofon MC-20 with their little "PRE PRE-AMP". I think the combo cost me $200 and I played one particular Pat Benetar vocal track over and over
( Mercifully I no longer own that album ) to dial the cart. in.
Maybe I'm just an Ortofon man, at heart..... |
beyond the review of the A90 in Stereophile, i did speak to Fremer at RMAF about the A90.....which was early October. the November Stereophile had not yet been mailed which contained the review, but it was being given away at RMAF (although i had not yet read it). i had had my A90 for about 30 days and mentioned to Mikey how much i liked it.
first; he was surprised i had one and thought it had not yet been offered for sale.
he said that what was unique and 'game-changing' about the A90 was that it offered such a superior neutrality to anything else he had listened to at a relatively moderate price, but even more than that the process of manufacturing the body was an application of technology way beyond anything any cartridge manufacturer had done. it allowed the specific characteristics in the body to be 'built-into' the stainless steel structure.....and these characteristics could be 'tuned' easily by altering the process of construction. he felt that other cartridge manufacturers would have to follow this lead to compete.....thus it 'changed the game'. |
Vettorone/MikeL,
I think the cartridge comparison that you are proposing will be invaluable for most audiophiles out here. If you could throw a Dynavector DRT XV-1s into the mix, it could even answer some of my most pressing questions concerning cartridge performance and selection.
I eagerly await your kind feedback |
Today's game changers are tomorrow's flavor of the month and yesterday's news.
Besides, the purchase price and bordeaux were undoubtedly excellent. |
Hi Guys,
For those of you who have & heard several high-end carts. Why do you think M.Fremer said it was a 'Game Changer'?
In what way did it change the game of sound, music, groove extractions etc or cartridge market?
Happy New Year. Seldom we see Audio Company celebrating 90th Anniversary. |
Lew, the 12 inches of wood (cedar) in the Reed 'L' can only help the tonality. what i'm hearing reminds me of the Schroeder Ref SQ i had on the SP-10 Mk2, but with better dynamics. the Schroeder was probably a bit more lush (at the expense of some articulation) but the inner detail in the mids is similar.
as far as Reed/A90 interaction; i think that the Triplaner also works well with the A90; but the Triplaner is just not as exciting and involving an arm as the Reed. the Reed has more to say. from reading other feedback on the A90 i've not yet heard about a 'bad' A90 arm.
as far as the Technics SP-10 Mk2 being 'sterile'; my opinion is that comment says more ablout the context of the listener and their experience than anything objective about the tt. in my experience; the most involving gear reveals the most information correctly. my Dobbins/Terchnics SP-10 Mk2 with the Schroeder Ref SQ arm was anything but sterile. i really do not have any experience with any Lenco's so i can't comment on that. |
Dear Mike, Do you really think that the differences you hear are mostly due to the tonearm/turntable interaction (consistent with your statement that mounting the Reed on your Garrard might give you the best of both worlds). I am kind of biased toward the view that the tonearm/cartridge interaction is dominant, so it may be that the Reed is just a better ride for the A90. Probably the lower noise floor you perceive with the Mk3 vs the Garrard IS due to the inherently more quiet operation of the Mk3, however.
At a lower level, I am trying to figure out words to describe the differences between my own SP10 MK2A in a natural slate plinth of my design and my Lenco remounted on a PTP in its own natural slate plinth. The Lenco is really dead quiet, so I cannot say I hear much difference in terms of noise. I need to swap the tonearms back and forth to get a better bead on what is happening. In my case, I do not have the same cartridge mounted on both tables, either. What is remarkable is how much the two tables sound alike (in a very good way), once mounted in slate. I have heard people say that the Mk2 is "sterile" sounding, especially lovers of idler-drive turntables, like Jean Nantais. I know what Jean meant by that remark, but in slate that quality disappears and the sound opens up and gets bigger and more lush. I can't wait to hear the Mk3. |
further impressions of the Technics SP-10 Mk3--Reed 'L' 12" with the A90......as compared to the Garrard--Triplaner--A90. about 6-7 hours. dialed in more, running 2.27 grams and slightly up in the rear.
the Technics/Reed has a wonderful tonality, energy and spaciousness that the Garrard cannot match (although the Garrard-Triplaner is no slouch in these areas). as i mentioned, the music has a tension and sense of live-ness that leaps from the grooves. unlike the Garrard-Triplaner, there is no 'added' rounded pulse to the bass, but the bass is quite a bit more impactful and has more 'pop' and 'jump'. the noise floor is lower and so there is more detail and ambient retreival.
the Garrard still has it's own sexiness which is different; but i think the Garrard with a Reed/A90 might be quite the deal.....adding the greater tonality and spaciousness of the Reed (or is that the Technics?) to the Garrard attributes.
i wonder how much difference Steve Dobbin's new platter for the Garrard might make in this comparison?
not to be missed; the growl of a cello on the Technics-Reed-A90. i'm listening to a DG Mozart string quartet as i type and the tonality is wonderful. sweet, vibrant, and almost glowing. the cello really resonates and decays like it's in the room. |
Montepilot,quod erat demonstrandum: the 'series' 2A and 2P
have different 'headshell' with Azimuth adjustment (= more
weight). Besides there are 6 different wood-kinds for the
Armwand implicating diff. mass. I emailed to Vidmantas from
'turntables.lt' to revise the 'futures' because this info is very important for the choice of the 'armkind' as well as the woodkind.
Ldvalve,Glad to hear that you are happy with your combo. I
assume that your answer is implicated 'in' your cart. I.e.
Reed L and not 2A or 2P. BTW I prefer my combo Reed 2A +
Phase Tech P-3G above my other combo: Trplanar VII + Benz
Ruby 3s.
Regards, |
http://www.turntables.lt/features.html#Tonearm_Reed2A
According to this website the Reed 2A (12") has an effective mass of 16 gr. |
Dear Nandric.
I use the Reed with ZYX airy3 . this combo sound great .
Cheers
ldvalve |
Mike&Ldvale, There are 3 Reed 'series': Reed L, Reed L 2A
and Reed L 2P. I owned Reed L but bought also Reed L 2 A (12"). A perfect combo with my Phase Tech P-3G. BTW one very underrated cart. Despite the producer description I think that they have different eff. mass. I.e. my Reed L was 17 gr.; the Reed 2A is 29 gr.
Are you using 'the' Reed L or some of the other 'versions'?
Regards, |
"the Technics/Reed is really a lively combination. the music leaps from the grooves "
Thanks Mike for your promise on following up the test .
i will try the reed arm on my SP10 mk2 soon.
Cheers
LD |
OK, just mounted the 2nd Ortofon MC A90 cartridge (ser# 079) on the Dobbins Technics SP-10 Mk3 with Reed 'L' arm playing thru the Allnic H3000. previously i had briefly mounted my first A90 (ser# 008) so it's not the first time on the Technics. right out of the box it's pretty nice. i'm listening to 'For Duke', which can be a bit 'bright' and forward when things are not right. it's behaving and the cymbles are 'right', the Trumpet 'blat' is alive but not edgy. more info and energy than from the Garrard/Triplaner on first impressions, with a larger soundstage. 12" arm?
a bit closed in but i'm excited to finally, after 2 years, have three tt's set-up with similar level cartridges at the same time. i've been listening to many hours of vinyl recently on the Rockport and Garrard.....so my reference is pretty good. the Technics/Reed is really a lively combination. the music leaps from the grooves.
more later. |
12-24-09: Lewm
Do you guys think that the 47-ohm load would also be optimal for the MC7500, given the familial relationship among the MC7500, Windfield, and MCA90 cartridges? I like the MC7500 at 100 ohms very much. If I would critique it I would say that it is slightly "dry" sounding, gives lots of inner detail but maybe not so much in the way of "goosebumps". On the other hand, I came to it from years of listening to my Koetsu Urushi, so you could say I had been conditioned to a different sound that is anything but "dry". Anything is possible but, going by the specifications, the MC7500 doesn't appear that similar to the Windfield/A90. The MC7500 has very low output of 0.13mv and a 6ohm DCR (compared to 0.3mV and 4ohms). Clearly it has different electrical properties. However since phono input loading *may* have more to do with damping the ultrasonic resonance peak (per Jcarr) - and how the phono amp deals (or doesn't) with this peak - it may be worth a try. FWIW, there seems to be no consensus on loading for the Windfeld. A search here on Audiogon shows some people swear by 500-1Kohms - others say load below 100ohms. Unfortunately there appears to be no specific 'right' value that can be applied across all systems - but I think we already covered that above. |
Axel, good news that you are getting better performance out of your Winfeld.
Lewm, not sure buy try the lower setting - you can always go back.
I have been using 100 ohms, so I may try my 50ohm setting now on my phono :-)
cheers |
Do you guys think that the 47-ohm load would also be optimal for the MC7500, given the familial relationship among the MC7500, Windfield, and MCA90 cartridges? I like the MC7500 at 100 ohms very much. If I would critique it I would say that it is slightly "dry" sounding, gives lots of inner detail but maybe not so much in the way of "goosebumps". On the other hand, I came to it from years of listening to my Koetsu Urushi, so you could say I had been conditioned to a different sound that is anything but "dry". In comparison, the Colibri gives the best bit of both worlds, but it is finicky. I don't know how I ever lived without 3 turntables. (Meant as self-deprecation) |
Downunder, Phaser,
this does not strictly belong here as already mentioned. Yet as the Windfeld has the same motor as the A90 and 47ohm loading was mentioned as very good with the A90, I now gave that a try with Windfeld.
Voila! it happens to be THE best setting, and as things go --- the ONE I actually had not tried.
So thank you, and have a merry Xmas.
Axel |
Hi,
This Ortofon A90 is a beautiful cartridge and perhaps the best so far that I have experienced. I don't own one, a long time audio dealer friend of mine likes it very much so.
Pardon me this is off the main topic. Downunder I have fond memories of the Pioneer Exclusive P3 along with the entire Exclusive line of other components.
Japanese HiFi back in the day was certainly cutting edge technology especially with their best turn tables.
I would like to finish off with I'm happy to see a resurgence of some of these vintage turn tables, tone arms and mm cartridges. Back to the future of HiFi? |
Steve, I will be visiting Mike Lavigne next month to try out a few new tricks for the 301. i'm really looking forward to another visit and further Garrard tweaks. i'll try to get the 2nd A90 broken in prior to the visit so we can really compare things (like maybe an A90 on both the Triplaner and Reed and both mounted on the Garrard.....or both mounted on the Technics). Since there seems to be a lot of interest in how the A90/Olympos compares to some of the MM/MI carts, I will bring a MP-50, Andante P-76 and M20FL Super and if Mike has the time and desire, we can do a comparison and share the results. My kind of fun. i'm game for comparing all three if you want to (and if we are still having fun after the 1st and 2nd). the great part is that i get to watch you do multiple set-ups and continue my apprenticeship of "pivoted arm set-up 101". btw, for those not aware Vetterone is Steve Dobbins who built wonderful plinths for both my Garrard 301 and my Technics SP-10 Mk3. |
Hi Vetterone
Nice to hear from another who has heard the A90 in their own rig. That it competes evenly with its more expensive peers says a lot.
If you were only to compare one MM at Mike's place - make it the MP-50 - selfish reasons for that choice as I am familar with the sound.
BTW - fantastic selection of vintage tables!!
I have been equally impressed with the build quality and performance of my newish 30 year old Exclusive P3 & P10.
cheers and enjoy. |
Phaser,
1. this is a *new cart* a replacement for a defective one.
Well, maybe it again is defective?!
I sounds ~"MC wise" OK and not *bad* at all, but ultimately is not as good as some other NOS carts I mentioned. In the most simple of terms is does not track as good as the "others".
2. Again as I stated, I have tried just about EVERYTHING in the book, with every loading conceivable, including SUT usage also with no loading, primary-, and secondary- loading of MANY, many different values.
Now go try and explain to me what else is missing, if I use those NOS carts mentioned and I get superior results?
It can not be my phono-pre I say, since if it's not up to scratch it's like that all the way, and not just with MCs only, right? (I'm using the exact same gain settings for both 60dB)
Also you will find in more then one thread tracking issues discussed *no end*, and ALL are related to MCs!
So I think my case is not an exception here.
I am also REALLY very glad that something like the A90 seems to have finally sorted some / all of this, and therefore my interest.
Yet I am sceptical by now, and it will take a lot more for me just go out and buy this one. The last item was my Windfeld purchase based on all this *beautiful* hype ("worlds best cartrige" BS) so some stupid NOS cart sounds better?!
It is disappointing, and having taken that last *marvel* out of production just after ~ 1 year! is not going to make me go run for the next one right now, for sure.
Greetings,
Axel |
First off, I will put my two cents in on the A90. I have made a genuine run at listening to most of the better carts out there including a few MI/MM. In my opinion, the A90 is one of the three best carts I have heard in my rig and of the three, the most honest AND best value. IMHO of course. The other two carts in my top three are the Lyra Olympos and Koetsu Coralstone.
I will be visiting Mike Lavigne next month to try out a few new tricks for the 301. Since there seems to be a lot of interest in how the A90/Olympos compares to some of the MM/MI carts, I will bring a MP-50, Andante P-76 and M20FL Super and if Mike has the time and desire, we can do a comparison and share the results. My kind of fun. |
Axel, the differences between the Windfeld and MCA90 may indeed be significant but your preference for the MP50 over the Windfeld and indeed other MM's over the Windfeld which you have repeatedly stated in other threads leads me to conclude that rather than all these MM's actually being innately superior to MC's it may well be that:
1. Your Windfeld in defective or
2. You are not realizing its or any other MC's full potential in your system.
Could either of these not be a possibility rather than just repeatedly stating the cartridge's imperfections vis a vis good MM's?
Apologies to Downunder going down the MM/MC path but at least I mentioned the MCA90. By the way I own neither the Windfeld nor the MC
A90 but would like an MCA90 when finances permit. |
Downunder,
y.s: >> the A90 is clearly in a different musical and sonic league compared to the Windfeld for only a little price premium.<< and
>> The A90 however is comfortable better than the MP50 in my system.<<
Very good feedback thank you, as the MP-50 sounds clearly better then my Windfeld by some notable margin ---- yet the difference between the former STAR of their product line and the A90 must therefore be APPRECIABLY more the I have understood this to be the case. (In fact it well might rubbish that *former star*, obviously the case since now being discontinued, hm)
Having the same "motor" and only a different housing truly makes a case for how much the housing seems to contribute the sound! (JCarr had a lot to say on that subject and how right he seems to be)
Food for thought in deed, and thank you for suffering me mentioning any other name than A90 only.
Axel |
"The production capacity for A 90 is limited as the Single Laser Mould is a very special process. The structures for A90 are produced by a Danish research Insitute, Teknologisk Institut Aarhus, their capacity is limited at the machine is one of 3 in all Europe.
They use it mostly for research purposes but we are a partner for them in their research for using this process for manufacturing " I wonder how high the A90 would have been priced if it was being marketed by one of the more 'esoteric' cartridge manufacturers? This cartridge was still a stretch for me, but it sounds stellar and uniquely transparent IME. Thank goodness Ortofon didn't decide to put an inflated 'exclusive' sticker price on the A90 - otherwise I would have been denied access to this type of performance. |
Raul,
to avoid further cluttering this thread with non-A90 advice, please e-mail me (or post on my system page) MM/MI recommendations which are currently "reasonably" purchasable which might represent this superior performance you are touting.
thanks, |
Axel & co
This thread is for anyone who has heard or bought a A90 or anyone who has interest in an A90
- not for MM lovers who have never heard the A90 and try to make this about MM vs MC. You 3 or 4 guys have your own 27 page MM lovers guide thread to discuss that.
Axel, that your ML phono/setup can only sound reasonable at 47k says more about your current setup than anything, as you are definately in the absolute minority favouring 47k.
If you read Fremer's review or Robm1 comments, who have actually heard both - the A90 is clearly in a different musical and sonic league compared to the Windfeld for only a little price premium.
perhaps Robm1 can elaborate on what differences he has heard - not for your benefit but for anyone interested in an A90.
A90 vs Nagaoka MP 50 - the MP 50 is a great cartridge and is well and truely as you say a giant killer - maybe up to 3k compared to some MC's - It certainly is better in every respect than a Miyabe Shilabe cart at $2800 which I have heard in my system.
In time I will also listen to the ortofon M20FL super and report.
The A90 however is comfortable better than the MP50 in my system.
Why only Ortofon sell limited Edition of 400. Frankly 400 top of the line cartridges are a LOT of cartridges for any top of line model and probably several years or more supply for other cartridge makers. Ortofon are back ordered by 6- 8 weeks, so clearly at the moment demand is outstripping their ability to manufacture and supply.
Quote from Ortofon -
"The production capacity for A 90 is limited as the Single Laser Mould is a very special process. The structures for A90 are produced by a Danish research Insitute, Teknologisk Institut Aarhus, their capacity is limited at the machine is one of 3 in all Europe.
They use it mostly for research purposes but we are a partner for them in their research for using this process for manufacturing "
Compared to other manufacturers top of the line cartridges Ortofon is actually cheap, so Ortofon should be praised for that alone.
cheers |
Dear Mike: Yes you are right and agree: " in my personal experience ". No it is not a universal perception but only with some of the ones that already own/heard the MM/MI alternative.
I like the Olympos ( I heard it twice ) unfortunatelly I don't heard it yet in my system but I have a very clear idea about its quality performance. Well many of the Olympos characteristics and especially the " easy and natural flow " of the music is shared by the top MM/MIs where almost no other LOMC have.
I think that can/could be very interesting that you take the opportunity to hear one-two of those " humble and vintage " MM/MIs in your system.
This technology is better than what we can think before we hear it, it is a " new "/different analog source alternative and IMHO worth to try it, it is so ridiculous inexpensive .
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Raul, when you say..... IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.
This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance cant achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it. " ....i think it is very important that you add in bold type...."in my personal experience". do better MC cartridges truely 'bounce' along the groove typically? huummmmm. i guess one needs an open mind. i do not question that this is what you have experienced; only that that experience might not be the universal perception. i have a hard time taking your perceptions as the final truth in this matter; although i respect your opinions and they cause me to be curious. i admit to never listening to high compliance MM cartridges.....and have no opinion about them. ultimately; listeners must discover the truth for themselves. i'd love to see a MM take a run at the Lyra Olympos (or any of the top level MC's) on the Rockport sometime. flat record, perfect speed, no arm tracking errors, any outside resonance effectively eliminated. just two cartridges and a groove. |
Dear Axelwhal: Yes a " tracking issue " could be. I posted ( two years ago in that long MM/MI thread. ) this:
+++++ " IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.
This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance cant achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it. " +++++
IMHO this along each cartridge suspension design are important factors on the tracking issue.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Lewm,
sorry I have no A90, only the Windfeld and the M20FL-super sounds more natural, has more detail yet, and also is a better tracker! (It's why it sounds better also, my take)
It's why I said, this A90 as it's assessed above is the next important step for Orto, no?
Windfeld compared to MP-50 -- the Windfeld sounds OLD (good way of putting it, thanks for the expression Robm1)
Axel
PS: To me there's no way to give these LOMCs the credit of "unsuitable" phono-pre performance if it can deliver the good stuff with all those MM / MI carts. Again, I think it is clearly a tracking issue, -- at least with my SME V arm. |
Hey Tobes.
I use an Ortofon Windfeld and have recently purchased the A90 which is an absolute KILLER cartridge. I found using the Windfeld below 100ohms sort of killed the music and so far the A90 below 100ohms pretty much does the same.
I use a solid state based phono stage. Above 100ohms both cartridges 'warm up' slightly but I prefer the 100ohms setting IN MY SYSTEM!.
Just as a comparison for anyone wanting to know:
So far nothing compares to the A90 in my system.
Windfeld vs Airy 3 = Windfeld wins outright in all departments.
Windfeld vs Shelter 901 = 901 sounds livelier but 'false'
Shelter 901 vs Airy 3 = I prefer the 901 as is has far better weight and realism. 3D portrayal is far better with the 901.
901 vs Ortofon Rondo Bronze = 901 wins outright which goes to show a good cartridge is and will always be a good cartridge.
Koetsu Red Signature vs A90 = Koetsu sounds OLD!
Koetsu RS vs Windfeld = Koetsu sounds OLD!
I have all of the above cartridges and all these were compared in my system using my standard setup.
VPI HRX/ Kuzma 4 point Whest Audio MC REF V phonostage/ LAMM L2/ ATC 150 Active.
|
Axel, A90 vs M20FL Super? Any comments? |
Tobes & All,
I do agree in every respect with what you're saying, yet let me throw out one more curve ball.
The Windfeld I'm referring to is a new replacement of an earlier one that had issues also acknowledged by Ortofon (who replaced it for no charge), having "a VTA problem".
It was "riding" VERY low from the start and the body was not build / assembled up to scratch either.
So it could be explained that the two would've behaved quite differently.
The new item is now riding a lot higher and this *may* just be the way the first would have meant to be? (In fact I'm not so sure at all!)
A similar story with slightly different faults I had with a Jubilee, which also was replaced eventually after 2 attempts to correct the initial problems (body gapping and more and more skewing cantilever).
I mention these so as to explain why I think (by now), that there are rather more variations in these carts then one could wish for.
The MP-50 I mentioned by comparison is CLEARLY! a better tracker (then the Jubilees, or Windfelds in my system) and those two Ortos are *supposed* to be GREAT tracking carts!
There have been some very long threads on explaining mis-tracking, of difficult vinyl bands and not just IGD i.e. the inner bands only, and none of those Ortos did too well for me ever.
In fact, it seems this form of mild to more sever mis-tracking that makes these carts lack in ultimate "clarity" and I can no more easily explain it in terms of a lesser phono-pre performance. By now more then one MM or MI cart seems to disprove these ideas of insufficient rise time and the like.
It looks now that the A90 has finally got this sorted, reading the above reports about *superior clarity* --- very GOOD!
Now why only build 400!? Marketing? More then 400 ought be sold by now in any case...!
Using those carts mentioned in an SME V arm should NOT be the limiting factor AT ALL.
Just food for thought, and possibly an opportunity for some more learning.
Axel |
Hi Axel, yes it does seem that 'correct' loading is a very system dependent thing.
I know what you are saying regarding the 'sat on, compressed or over-tight' type sound. The Jubilee tended that way when loaded at 47ohms - though in some ways it sounded more correct. The A90 is a totally different animal and sounds very dynamic and alive at 47ohms (in my system). In fact after listening for a while at 47ohms it's hard to go back to the 100 ohm setting that I was very much enjoying previously.
There is nothing obnoxious going on at higher loadings, the Plinius phono is quite refined on top and my Harbeth speakers tend to the 'polite' side - so you'd think the extra 'air' at the higher loadings would be my preference. However with 47ohms the superior solidity and shape to performers and instruments, the transiernt certitude and greater soundspace awareness makes this an obvious winner for me. It sounds more natural and less overblown 'Hi-Fi'.
Clearly cartridge loading is something that can't be translated from system to system. If nothing else, this little discourse should encourage both A90 and Windfeld users to experiment with their loading.
Cheers, Tobes |
Hi Tobes,
just let me chip in on these loading findings. The Windfeld and A90 having the same generator it might give *some* perspective, and *mostly* with regard to the phono-pre-amp in use.
Mine are ML 326S phono-modules (inside the 326S).
Now loading the Windfeld (same motor as A90, yes) in my system sounds best with 47k!!!
I have tried with any thing from 13ohm to 1kohm (13 ohm because it is my dealer's preferred setting!!!!)
Can you see already what is going on here?!
Anything in my system other then 47k sound either plain sat-on (13ohm to 460ohm), or un-natural ~compressed or ~over-tight" 1k ohm to 18kohm.
So in my case 47k ohm produces the most "natural" result!
When using my 30dB XF-1 SUT (with its 47ohm "natural" primary impedance) all sounds better yet, this is your setting --- are you sure do not have an internal SUT in that phono-pre of yours?
Long story short, I then switch to a MP-50 Nagaoka ($500, an "MI" cart) and sorry for me, it yet out-classes the Windfeld!
Good thing Ortofon came out with that A90, since in my system there are better alternatives to the Windfeld (M.F. praised...) for less money, and thanks to Raul I found some :-)
Greetings,
Axel |
" the Reed is the real deal....and i can't wait to be able to compare the Technics/Reed to the Garrard/Triplaner head to head both with A90's next week "
this will be very interesting , please keep us posted on this battle .also like other said if you don't mind trying the A90 on the Reed arm and see how it does.
Thanks |
You are correct Raul, I was not adjusting the volume - but like I said this is a very slight volume change.
The details of the sound that I noted above remain consistent at the 47ohm setting - regardless of level - and are not available, to the same extent, at the 100ohm setting (regardless of level).
I do believe my system (phono amp?) may have some preference for lower phono loading of MC's - though the manufacturer of my phono, Plinius, suggest 47Kohms(!) as "a suitable all-round setting" for the M14. I used the Jubilee at 47ohms for a while, though with that cartridge it was less successful and sounded a bit too 'closed in' - so I reverted back to a more conventional 100ohms or even 470ohms.
I may be remembering this incorrectly, but I think it was Jonathan Carr who said some phono amps may prefer lower loading due to noise pickup at the phono input (Jonathan's own phono amp has a fixed high input resistance).
Who knows, it may be taming the HF peak, generator damping or noise pickup....or something else...in the end it's what works best to the individuals ears I suppose. |
