Problem matching Benz LP S w/ SME V or IV.Vi arm ?

I have been following this thread because I have a 1-year old LP and I am curious what types of improvements the S might provide. Audioquest4life, I appreciate your taking the time to share your preliminary reactions to the LP-S. From what you said in your most recent post, I do have to wonder if some of your reactions may change with further breakin. Here's why I raise that point: when I first tried my LP, it had a lively and extended treble range, not at all soft or rolled off as I had feared. After using it for a few weeks, the high frequencies changed and it is now more like you describe---a bit subdued and closed in. I suspect that I might react much the same way as you described if I compared my LP to another brand new LP. So I will be more interested in how your reactions to the LP-S hold up after a few more weeks and months.

I certainly agree with you that the LP (and I'm sure the LP-S) sounds great. I say that as a loyal Benz customer having started with a Glider M2 about 10 uears ago and moving to the Woodbody L2 before making the jump to the LP.

Dave

Dave,

I am glad to be able to provide some real world information about the new Benz LP S to others. I agree that some of the newness of the new LP S is probably aiding in some of that Benz magic I am describing. I do remember distinctly from owning the LP when it was new and getting it retipped once, that the soundstage was not as wide and not as holographic as the new LP S, however. In addition, one of the musical factors that has wowed me since installing the LP S is in the way that it is able to convey a sense of space and hold instruments in that space. That has captured my emotional psyche several times. I already have about 10 hours and another 30 to go before the official Benz 40 hour break in period.

What started me in the Benz line was when I was at one of the European audio shows in Germany, it was part of the Analog Audio Association and we heard the Benz LP versus the Koetsu Onyx and a Clearaudio. I had also heard many others that day, but the Benz was closer to portraying what the Onyx conveyed, and that is a fine cartridge. For us folks not willing to fork up the cash or spend that kind of money, the Benz LP is a real value in regards to competing with a cartridge costing two times more. I really think that Benz manufactured into the new LP S some of the things that some people complained about, too syrupy, too slow or laid back, but I thought it was just playing beautiful music and I never seemed to miss anything. The LP S is just better at capturing all of the fine details that make music listening more enjoyable.

The sound of the Benz series is great to me and thus compared to other moving coils I have heard, even other Koestu series, I will remain with the LP series. Who can go wrong with the upgrade path and retip options.

I will keep posting more updates as soon as I have reached the 40 hour mark. Lets see, there are 48 hours in this weekend, and about 3 more until midnight, hmm.
Ciao,
Audioquest4life

I have improved my Resonance Calculator by allowing three decimal resolution to your results -- please take a look...

Regards,

Charles

When I traded my LP for the LPS, I was prepared for an upgrade but not to this extent. The LPS does everything the LP did, but much better. The things that really get to me is how fast the LPS is. Percussion has a start and stop that the LP didn't come near. This quickness also reveals what's going on in the background that warrants relistening to the record again to hear what never came out with the LP. There is also a dramatic increase in dynamics...both macro and micro. Also, there is nothing this cartridge can't track. SSSSS's and TTTT's are crystal clear. Enjoy your new S.

Cport: Please correct the typo below ("waring"). Also, you indicate "Figures of C coming from Japan usually are measured at 100 Hz, so they should be multiplied by 1.5-2." Does this mean, for example, that the compliance quote of 10 that is given for the Dynavector XV-1S is misleading, and that the more accurate figure should be between 15 and 20? or that the quote given of 7 for the Miyajima Kansui should more accurately be in a range from 10.5 to 14? Also, the difference in resonance frequency one gets as a result of multiplying anything between 1.5 and 2 could indicate a pretty significant variation, so what rf figure should the layman accept ?


A Wally Malewicz inspired "three-way" tonearm/cartridge resonance calculator

###########################
Wally has suggested that this "waring" may be bogus -- stand by
###########################

Warning!
Assumes that the quoted cartridge compliance references 10Hz.
[Often (sadly) not published by manufacturers]
Read this following statement, then read here.

"There is one snag about it. The manufacturers of cartridges do not always state a useful value for C(ompliance). (It should be started at 10 Hz). Figures of C coming from Japan usually are measured at 100 Hz, so they should be multiplied by 1.5-2. Figures of C coming from USA often are static values, so they should be halved. Most figures of C coming from Europe are OK (stated at 10 Hz)"