Replicant 100 stylus

needlestein, thanks to keep my thread alive. Your contribution to

intellectual property is less interesting than to Decca's dimensions.

 I own Ikeda's 9 series REX which is MC ''opposite'' to Decca. 

Its diamond also looks larger than ''usual exotic kinds''. Except

of course ''micro ridge'' which ''explains itself'' , so to speak.

What I am wondering about based on my own experience with

''Expert stylus'' is : ''how such small company'' can produce

Gyger kinds of styli + retip works? My only guess is that exclusive

contracts make this possible. My correspondence was either with

Julia or Mr. Hodgson. 

 

 

 

i

 

“Well Gyger is also an trademark so this explains why ’’Paratrace’’ is

different name . Patents are not relevant because expired”

 

This statement is just confusing because you are comparing a company name, Gyger, and a product name, “Paratrace.”

 

A company name distinguishes one company from other companies. A brand name distinguishes the products of one company from the products of another company.

 

It would be very odd indeed for Expert Stylus to market a diamond called the Gyger. I suppose they could, but I assume that Gyger keeps the trademark up to date on its brand. Expert is the only company we are talking about that doesn’t actually bear the name of the company founder. Both Gyger and van den Hul are both eponymously named. Gyger could probably produce a diamond called the “Paratrace” is they wanted to and it might not even cause an issue. After all, people are confused already as to what’s what. MicroLine is often used generically to describe any line contact. But it’s actually a trademarked name, although I notice now that in the latest Audio-Technica materials, the name MicroLine has a large circled “R” for copyright. Legally, I don’t understand how MicroLine is protected by copyright.

Copyright laws do not protect names, titles, or short phrases. Trademark law, by contrast, protects distinctive words, phrases, logos, symbols, slogans, and any other devices used to identify and distinguish products or services in the marketplace

Maybe they lapsed the trademark and are still trying to scare people away from using the name????

 

I could give you the address of a retipper who installs Gyger diamonds, but that would constitute self-advertising here on Audiogon. I don’t think that’s allowed. You’ll just have to find me on your own.

 

There is more to the story of the Decca diamond that makes it unique. It’s 0.25mm square. Most manufacturers only go up to 0.20 mm square. The only manufacturer who makes a diamond that large is: you guessed it, Expert Stylus. That’s proof enough for me that Expert makes it. However, I have old FFSS from which I have removed round shank diamonds. So, even though the receiver is a certain size, Decca clearly used smaller diamonds and made up the difference with cement. John Wright prefers to use the largest size diamond he can fit into the receiver but I have retipped Decca with 0.20 mm square diamonds without any problem.

 

''names and reference'' again.

The dominant sentence form consist of ''subject connective (is) and

predicate'' . The name say nothing about its bearer that is why

we need predicates to ''describe'' the bearer. 

This however is different in trade relations. Among intellectual properties

there also trademark. As example we can name the case of ''Audio

note Japan'' and ''Audio note uk''. Kondo san designer and owner

of Audio Note Japan was cheated by Audio note UK. Audio note was

trademark in UK and as such protected  by British law. This made

stealing of Audio note Japan products possible.

ASR from Germany known as ''Basis Exclusive phono-pre'' and

''Emitter II amp '' has as trademark in Germany ''HIFI Exclusive'' but

this does not apply abroad. So for their export ASR needed some

other tradename.

Well Gyger is also an trademark  so this explains why ''Paratrace'' is

different name . Patents are not relevant because expired while

trademarks can be prolonged.

 

 

 

 

 

As is the case by all ''collective valuations'' the members of our

forum which participate in this and the other connected thread

should decide which contribution is more clear. 

If any of the Styli mentioned in this thread that are produced are appearing to have evolved from a similar origin and are close mimics of the Styli form that is the origin.

Is it not a belief by many that such a Styli is able to be used as an upgrade part to be exchanged with Styli selected to be used on another Brands Model.

The question 'is' and one that has already been loosely addressed in previous posts, as a report on how subjective assessments have been made on the impact of a Styli on a Cart' , how much does such a Styli Form impact on the overall performance for the better.

The subjective assessments referred to earlier, seems to suggest the 'for the better' is achieved when the whole of the assembly is considered as being responsible for the improvements detected.

I can purchase a  (Ska) SKYANALOG Cart' that is a Companies own Brand, and from a Company that has become an established Manufacturer , which has been producing Cart's for Brands most with a enthusiasm for Vinyl will have come across.

With the (Ska), I can get latest technology materials used and from reports on offer from growing users, have access to a Cart' that has put known and admired  Branded Cart's on the Sub's Bench.

Will taking such model from the (Ska) range and putting a Gyger 'S' or a variant on to it, now produce a Cart' that will be a cut above all (Ska) models without the Tip Exchange ?

 Will taking such model from the (Ska) range with latest technologies on board and putting a Gyger 'S' or a variant on to it, produce a Cart' that will hold its own and perform at a level that much more expensive Cart's are able to deliver ?

pindac, Sorry my intention was to tease dover. I need to rephrase 

the problem.  If we think in the context of ''wear and tear'' reg. parts

in an (MC) cartridge we can ''deduce'' that styli are the first candidate.

So after, say, 1000 hour of use, one is forced to think about stylus

replacement in order to protect his records. There is not much ''wear

and tear'' by other parts (original or not) except by very old carts

by dampers. Because Replicant is used only (?) by Ortofon one can

ask Ortofon about Replicant  replacement. But Ortofon does not

offer ''stylus only'' replacement but the ''whole rebuild'' which is,alas,

not clear at all. Rebuild what? We have hiding names, curious vocabulary,

styli in disguise (Decca & Paratrace) and different names for Gyger.

If : ''Gyger=Replicant=  Paratrace'' than ordering stylus only replacement

(aka ''my retip'') is clear and obvious choice. This was btw our assertion

by introduction of this thread. Members who compared those 3 with

microscope and were convince that they are equal but not ''identical''

(grin). So conclusion ''in short'': ordering replacement by Expert stylus.

 

 

@nandric Thank You for offering a description on my behalf, there is a difference between us on Two Accounts.

I have not been influenced by a forum member/members and expressed a careful use of a term to dilute my meaning.

If I were to use the term 'rebuild' it would be from my interpretation, an attempt to produce an item that was a close mimic or best match to a item that was previously in place, and attempt to reproduce something that had been valued.

When I refer to a Hybrid Cart' I am referring to a Cart' that will be assembled using elements that are valued in other designs, but all the parts used in the assembly will not be seen usually as a production from a particular Brand.

To achieve this the assembly will be undertaken by a Technician who is trusted in their field of work and quite capable of producing a Cart' that offers a very good performance.

I own Cart's produced from such methods of production and at present have a Cart' awaiting a treatment to produce another variation of a Hybrid Cart.

To date I have shared in being a member of an audience at demonstrations where  a few models produced from this method have been used.

In certain cases, it has been possible to have been able to compare a Hybrid model to a model that has remained as per the manufacturers production.

I am yet to be introduced to a Bespoke Built, Hybrid Model that does not excel  during a demonstration and when used in a comparison to other models using the same core elements, I am not yet to to discover a Hybrid Model that has been outperformed during the demonstration and assessed to be an incorrect choice made for the Cartridge.

I have shared in dialogue with services that offer the use of variations of elements to produce a Bespoke Built Cart' and it is quite interesting the differences that certain technicians are able to communicate on.  There are technicians who really do hear your preferences and suggest a method of assembly to get close to a product that reflects the requests being made.  

At the same time, I do believe there are experiences to be had where a Bespoke Built - Hybrid Cart, can be a let down as a finished item. My suspicion/concern is that a service selected to complete the works that does not fully understand the requirements of the end user can be a large proportion of the reasons why the end product failed to impress.   

 

pindac, If I understand you well you mean ''REBUILD '' Ortofon but because

of  dover you avoid this expression? 

 

As said before does the reference made from Ortofon about their Replicant, that is supplied in a form where Ultra Fine with Extra Polishing are the distinguished merits.

Does such a Treatment of the Styli, produce enough of a Variant for Ortofon to claim their own particular form for the Styli ? 

Either way if I want one I will need to go direct to a Ortofon Cartridge as New Model, Used Model or Donor Model for a Hybrid Cart'.  

pindac, Thanks for your ''conclusion'' for MY THREAD (grin).

It does not count as ''intellectual property'' but we all have some

idea about what belongs to whom. Now my conclusion is that 

needlestein deed not ''exactly'' grasped my invitation to provide

''address'' of Gyger (alias Geiger). What I meant with ''address''

is the address were our members can get  Gyger retip. So

reference to Switzerland will not do, We can also explain the

''Decca mystery''. John wright and Mr. Hodgson from ''Expert 

stylus'' are close friends. So those ''Decca styli'' are produced

by Expert stylus but not necessarily glued in Decca's by Hodgson.

However this would make  John's work more easy.

 

I've been included in the contributions to the Thread, and J Carr and needlestein have both contributed information that is quite valuable to a Thread that evolved into covering certain Styli / Cantilevers.

needlestein has made the overall Thread Discussion clearer, and as he has a very hands on experience, is most likely quite familiar with the range of styli and their forms under discussion.

For myself, I have drawn this conclusion.

If I want a Styli, referred to as a Replicant 100, I go to Ortofon and purchase a Cart' Solely from their range .

If I want a Paratrace I discuss this with ESC do learn my options.

If I want a Gyger 'S' I purchase a Cart' with this attached, or I discuss my options with a service competent and skilled in carrying out the attaching of this styli.

Any other quest for trivia information beyond this seems to not bear the fruit of knowing how to acquire the parts in question.

Decca styli does not seem to catch the attention and is overlooked in nearly all contributions, so I will pass on learning how to acquire such a styli.

www.fgyger.ch

needlestein the expression is ''burying the hatchet'' but , curiously,

we actually fight for the same cause: the third styli source. I am still

not sure about Gyger but am very glad for Expert stylus. I also like

Mr.Hodgson very much. There can my beloved ''retip'' be done.

You should provide the address for ,uh, ''Geiger'' (grin).

 

Perhaps AJ uses both old Gyger and new Paratrace. One doesn’t necessarily mean exclusivity. Wyndham Hodgson told me himself over the phone that he makes van den Hul’s diamonds for him. I don’t have any reason to doubt. Perhaps van den Hul sources from both manufacturers. Anything is possible. Under the microscope, van den Hul diamonds that I have seen and Paratrace look identical, but Gyger still look different, even if the scanning edges and tracing edges are cut and polished to the same formula. Van den Hul (that I have viewed) and Paratrace share diamond block that has a distinct silhouette that Gyger does not. If this were a forum that easily allowed for uploading photos, I’d be happy to share.

Albert Lukaschek supposedly quit using Gyger diamonds according to an article that I read somewhere on the internet because Gyger could not keep up with his volume requirements/demands. I cannot comment on this because I am not an insider, but there is a lot to be suspicious of. At least, there are likely more details that would flesh out the entire picture. The article was mainly there to explain why we still have the “S” name on the LP but no Gyger “S” diamond on the cartridge anymore. I don’t have any idea what Benz’s cartridge output is, but given that Goldring, who delivers many more cartridges and also replacement styli featuring Gyger diamonds, doesn’t have a problem with Gyger’s production volume capacity, I am free to assume that other issues were at play behind Lukaschek’s decision to drop Gyger (if the decision was indeed Lukaschek’s).

 

I’m not sure what you are telling me about Jonathan Carr.  Are you saying he provides Ogura with the boron rods used to manufacture boron/Ogura 3/70 Vital line contact cantilever assemblies for Lyra?  That may be.  But I don’t see any difference in boron cantilevers on Lyra and boron cantilevers that Ogura sends me. There was some company that provided Lyra with the Ceralloy cantilever on its old cartridges.  I don’t know who that was, but Lyra doesn’t equip their cartridges with these anymore either.

I can’t imagine that there is any confusion over who produces the Replicant diamond.  The ones I have seen are Gyger all the way.  But I haven’t seen them all.  Perhaps Ortofon used a variety of sources.  I know that Ortofon also uses Namiki for their nude Shibata on the Quintet and 2M Black.  It’s very distinctive and unmistakeable.  But they use an Ogura “Fine Line” 8/40 Vital line contact on the 2M and Quintet Bronze and Vital elliptical on the 2M and Quintet Black.  
If Ortofon is not using Gyger for the Replicant, than the only other choice is Expert Stylus.  Why?  Because the Gyger S formula is the only one with such a long scanning edge.  The other formulas all top out at 80 microns.  
But, have you noticed that Here Lukaschek doesn’t always update his specs?  I have seen many of his cartridges that are equipped with Micro Ridge still offer the old Gyger S 5/120 spec.  The longest scanning edge offered by Namiki is 80 microns.  
I can’t say this about every player in the cartridge world, but unlike Benz and van den Hul, and even Ortofon, Gyger has never played “smoke and mirrors.”  They are very clear that they make two diamonds and two diamonds only.  The price is what it is.  They don’t hide facts and they deliver their product quickly.  If it weren’t for the shared patent, I would not be able to buy such nice diamonds, because I am sure van den Hul would not just sell diamonds to just anybody.  They are truly no nonsense.

I can’t speak to EMT.  Every EMT I have seen has had a Gyger diamond on it unless it was conical.  I don’t know who makes their conical but I suspect Ogura.  Could be Namiki too.  Could even be Nagaoka or some source local to Switzerland or Germany (or wherever EMT is these days) who can produce a simple pocket watch bearing, which is what a conical is.  I have a U.S. source for conical if I ever need them, which is not that often).

 

 

I own Benz LP with micro ridge stylus which is about 7 years old. Benz

which used Gyger styli for years obviously changed to Namiki. The same

is the case with my EMT which used Gyger for years but not anymore.

Van den Hul own explanation is that his ''stock'' is full of old Gyger

styli. As I explained already trademark is different than patent . The

patent duration is 20 years but the owner must produce and trade

the product to get patent protection. This is obvious in case of VDH

because he deed not produce any styli. So, obviously, he stipulated

by Gyger his right to sell Gyger styli which he designed under his

own trade name.  BTW he sold many more then Gyger. As I also

mentioned trade mark can be easy prolonged. Cost about 600 euro.

If you have read contribution of our ''Professor'' JCarr who is even 

at higher level of knowledge than Raul HIMSELF deed no mention

Gyger at all. He agreed with my general statement about Namiki

and Ogura but explained his (aka Lyra's) exception in the sense that

they provide Ogura with boron and order special styli for their

cartridges. This thread was started with intention to find ''third

party'' because Replicant and other styli can't be from Mars but

produced by someone. The candidate are Gyger and Expert stylus.

I have different retips by Expert stylus since my friend Axel Schurholz

passed away. BTW Experts stylus is one of few who does ''stylus

only'' retip for an modest price. I was in the same position as this

French trader who hired an teacher French in order to be ''allowed''

to the French high society. He said to his teacher: ''My Gosh I speak

prose my own life without knowing that. I am very thankful to you

Professor.'' . I had also no idea that ''Paratrace'' is ''Gyger x'' despite

the fact that I own 3 of those.  

 

 

 

Nandric,

 

Ich spreche auch ziemlich Deutsch. Ich weiss gut die Unterschied zwischen “Wien” und Vienna. But it has nothing to do with the difference between Gyger, van den Hul and Paratrace. You just don’t seem to grasp what I am saying so I am giving up.

If we are now arguing whether or not a Swiss person can spell his name differently than a German person, I quit! There’s no “Geiger” in the phonograph diamond business to differentiate himself from as a matter of trademark. The only reason I brought up the spelling is because you couldn’t find info on the Geiger company and concluded that Gyger was out of business or perhaps existed in name only to support a theory of brand obfuscation by van den Hul? Paratrace? I can’t follow your logic and neither can you. You just keep changing your story and for what reason? I don’t know.
If I were in Austria or anywhere in Teutonic Europe, I would call Vienna by its native Teutonic Austrian name:  “Wien.” But if I were in Switzerland or Germany or America or England or Timbuktu, I would not call a Gyger diamond a Paratrace or vice versa because they are NOT THE SAME!

I quit.

 

needlestein, If you (re) read my introduction to this thread you will

see that I used the name GYGER. The case with names I explained

elsewhere. The logical rule is so old that it is expressed in Latin . It

is called ''substitutio salva veritate''. This apply for names with the same

reference . Aka whatever is true about Wien is also true about

Vienna. In German language the sing "Y" is never used instead

of ''eI''. The reason is probably ''trade mark'' for international use.

I see you got help from the person who think to be authority which

can grant ''levels of knowledge'' to others while I can bet that he has

never heard about just mentioned logical rule. So your ''argument''

about the ''right name'' should imply that Americans should never

use the name ''Vienna'' but the ''REAL NAME'' of the capital city

of Austria which is WIEN. 

Nandric,

I its very interesting that the ’’small production by GYGER ’’

I never said this. I said they are a small company with a healthy niche. HEALTHY.
Gyger supplies diamonds to EMT, Ortofon, ClearAudio (“Trigon”), Allaerts, Goldring, Benz Micro, and even the Chinese manufacturer whose name escapes me at the moment and, I’m sure, others. You can buy them as well. Just send them an email and be ready to purchase a minimum order amount, which drives most Sunday hobbyists away.

You seem to think that because I said “anyone” can order their diamonds that that means they can and must be able to supply the world’s entire output of phonograph cartridges. I’m not sure what your point is or how this rabbit hole assumption is even relevant. Just a few days ago you had convinced yourself that Gyger was out of business.  Now, to prove they exist they must supply the entire industry?  At some point, I’m just going to stop responding to you because there doesn’t seem to be a purpose to continuing to argue over easily verifiable facts such as the existence of Gyger AG.

The whole reason I came in here was simply to clear up what the issues were about the identity of similar but different diamonds that are found on the market right now and to neutralize some outlandish conclusions. That’s it. If you don’t want to believe me, that’s fine. You seem to have taken offense to being corrected although that was not my intent. My intent was simply to explain the difference between Gyger, van den Hul and Paratrace diamonds. The differences between Gyger and van den Hul/Paratrace are legal and physical. The differences between van den Hul and Paratrace are purely legal and, perhaps, maybe marketing semantics.

As for the rest, you can argue with yourself. You’re good at it.

I’ve said all I can say in this thread on this topic now. There’s nothing to add.

Hi Raul,

All I can say about Mr. Allaerts’ claims is that he must use the same diamonds from the few diamond manufacturers that everyone else uses. Without any explanation as to why his diamonds last 20x longer than anyone else’s diamonds there is not the barest evidence to support a claim of 10,000 hours. I have removed worn diamonds from Allaerts cartridges and they appear to be the same diamonds others use and they seem to wear at the same rate based entirely on customer estimates of usage hours. It’s kind of disappointing as I would love to be able to ask Gyger, Namiki or Ogura to produce for me a diamond that lasts 20x longer than anyone else’s. I would pay at least 4x for a diamond that durable. My college physics professor says this is not possible though so who should I believe?

I can tell you that if Mr Allaerts was capable of preparing a diamond to last that long compared to all other diamonds, he wouldn’t be in the cartridge business. He would be working in aerospace selling diamond ball bearings that never wear down.

The stylus manufacturers don’t make any such claims and there certainly isn’t anywhere in their sales materials where longer or shorter lasting diamonds are offered. As far as I know, Mr Allaerts sources diamonds from the very same manufacturers I do. Perhaps they have special diamonds that they make just for him. It’s possible, I suppose. There are many exclusive arrangements. Where does Audio-Technica get that beautiful gold-plated extremely fine tapered boron cantilever that no one else has? I assume Namiki because the MicroLine version of the Micro Ridge is found on it. But I cannot get these cantilevers from Namiki and they do not appear as an option.

Dear @needlestein : Really thank’s for your knowledge and wide explanation. Your posts really enrich the knowledge level of any analog audiophile in that important subject.

 

Btw, Allaerts states the use of FG-S stylus tip. I owned the MC2 and Formula One and he states that the " rounded radius " is different for both models: 5 micron and 4 micron, respectively. Both are the top of the Allaerts line and in a two steps down the MC1 has 2.5 micron. Allaerts states that the rounded radius 2.5 micron has a tracing capacity of " 300um " against " 400um " for the 5 micron that in both cases looks excesive but depends how Allaerts measured the tracing capacities for his cartridges.

In the other side in the past Allaerts stated 10K play hours for the top models that seems to me more a marketing tool that a reality. For whatever reason we can’t read it that spec any more in his site. Do you have an opinion on that playing way high 10K hours?

 

R.

 

neeedlestein,   the logical explanation is that ''names have no predicative

function'' . That is to say that names tell nothing about they bearers. 

That is why we need predicates which describe properties and

qualities which apply to the bearers of the names. Now you mentioned

''hiding names'' which would make no sense if they were easy to discover

their real names. Consider tax authorities confronted with hiding names.

of tax payer. Even with all kinds of taxes states would go bankrupt with

added borrowing on capital market . Many have no idea how those loans

will be paid back. But with hiding names of tax payer the  bankruptcy

would take place direct . Gyger or Geiger is similar to Vienna, Wenen,

Bec and Wien . Aka ''many names'' which refer to the same ,uh, object. 

Different languages use different  names for the same object but

the objects them self  are assumed to be bearer of the names. 

I its very interesting that the ''small production by GYGER '' seems

to can produce huge amount of styli available to all of us in addition

to all cartridge manufacturer as well retipers. Not to mention its

judicial limitation to  to Switzerland. For you the task to explain your

difference between small and huge.

I’m not going to argue with you.  But I will point out a few errors.  

First of all, if you are going to search the internet for Fritz Gyger AG, you may try spelling his name correctly.  
 

www.fgyger.ch

Secondly, Gyger is small by revenue standards (something like $7 million/yr) and by number of employees (6, I think) but I imagine that their capacity to produce diamonds is rather high.  They have never told me that they were out of stock of anything I have ordered and there is zero lead time.  In fact, I like to order from them for a number of reasons, mostly because I love their product, but also because they ship quicker than anyone else in the industry.  My orders from Japan takes three or four months lead time now.  Gyger gets me product within one week.  Every time.  AMAZING!!!

Thirdly, it seems you enjoy arguing and raising provocative but nonsensical questions loaded with assumptions that are just ludicrous and paranoid.  No one is “hiding” anything about these diamonds any more than is usual in this industry where half the cartridges are made by Audio Technica even though they are sold as Goldring, MoFi, ClearAudio, Roksan, Stanton, Sony, Rega etc.  I think you get the picture.  If I can find out what the story is with the history of these diamonds by searching the internet, so can you, just like if you decided that you wanted to actually find Fritz GYGER and order diamonds, you could.

GYGER

 

GYGER

 

 

GYGER

 

 

 

G-Y-G-E-R

 

 

addendum.

needlestein, we already have an BIG EGO in our forum with

high level of knowledge and (very) low level of education. Can

you explain to us how Geiger with ''low level of production'' can

deliver styli not only to you but to all of us? This may be called

contradiction in logical sense. The logic is other way round. From

general statements to singular kinds. You obviously overlooked

this ''small difficulty''. Yikes.

needlestein, ''I order Geiger'' so everyone can order Geiger will not

do. This is called ''induction from one case to all cases''. You are

not, i hope, assuming that neither of participants in this thread is

not able to search on internet ?  There is nowhere F.Geiger to find,

Yikes. Besides VDH patent from +/-1970 is expired because the

patent duration is 20 years. He deed not produce styli so which product

of his needed protection ? Geiger as producer needed protection

so they made some agreement . But as stated there is no

patent anymore so everyone is entitled to produce VDH styli.

The  trademark is different. Usually granted for 7-10 years but

it can be prolonged . It also an cheap procedure. 

Can you provide  search info regarding both F. Geiger and

''Expert stylus'' by which their styli production is mentioned?

Yikes! 

 

Hi nandric,

The last line of my post says that I buy from Gyger all the time and so can you. They are easily found with a Google search. That’s how I found them.
Not sure where the confusion is. Yikes.

They aren’t hiding. AJ van den Hul is certainly not going to peddle a diamond called a Gyger when he can sell it as his own. Besides, Gyger doesn’t make van den Hul’s diamonds. I think calling them all the same would be confusing for the consumer. I know my Gygers come from Gwatt (Thun) Switzerland.
You’d have to ask AJ why he keeps it a secret that Expert produces his van den Hul diamonds, but Wyndham would be glad to tell you that his Paratrace are the same. You’re dealing with very successful people with business ideas that surround brand identity. Even they are built to the same formula, it’s really only Paratrace and van den Hul who are “hiding” if anyone should be accused of hiding. Gyger makes his diamonds and is up front about it and he doesn’t seem to care that van den Hul has diamonds made to the same formula in England. Why should he? He has no obligation to. The patent is his as much as it is van den Hul’s for all practical purposes.

Ortofon I guess can be maybe accused of hiding, but it’s marketing and they are probably at worst simply developing a tier system. It makes sense to grade diamonds and then charge a little more for the better ones. Most manufacturers do this in audio. Grados color schemes come to mind right away. I can think of others.
The drawback to their approach is that people who rely on Gyger’s nominal specifications can always sell the same 5/120 diamond as an upgrade to the Replicant 100 since if I don’t grade mine, I can assume all mine are 120. But that’s just an ironic detail.

The only mystery I see is who makes the Decca diamond. I would guess that it’s Expert because Expert can make that r/R and put it on larger diamonds that they already make. And they are in England, so I assume there’s a relationship there. John Wright probably knows Wyndham Hodgson professionally. Plus, Gyger only uses one size diamond blank for the two diamonds they make. So I’m my book, it’s less likely that they make the Decca diamond.

I understand your point about different languages having different names to indicate the same geographical place.  That would sort of apply maybe to van den Hul and Paratrace since they come from the same source.  But Gyger is separate.  It’s not the same diamond even if it’s made from the same formula.  One could say it’s sort of like the difference between a Fiat 128, Zantave Koral and a Yugo GV.  Same frame, same philosophy, same parts, different factories and different locations with some modifications.  But here, in this case, this is a clearly defined license agreement between Zastava and Fiat, and a marketing decision between Zastava and Yugo.  

I wrote about different names with the same reference. As example

I mentioned Vienna, Wenen, Bec and Wien. According to logic

whatever is true about Vienna is also true about Wenen (Dutch) and

Bec (Serbo -Croatian )etc,  ''salva veritate''.

But with trademarks the situation is different. It looks more as deceiving.

We have had this problem with Glanz cartridges which were different

animals than Astatic according to our MM authority. Till the members

them self discovered ''the same animal'' produced by Japanese company

Mitachi.

Now we learn that not only Geiger but also ''Expert stylus'' produce

''the same animal'' but by different names: Geiger x,y. and Paratrace I. II.

But why should they hide behind different names? 

 

 

 

needlestein, As you can see in the introduction of this thread the

intention was to possible correct general statement that only

Ogura and  Namiki produce styli. Replicant 100 as well Decca and

''Expert stylus'' were the reason to assume that some ''third party''

also produce styli but we were not able to find WHO. If this ''third

party'' produce styli which are available to everyone that would be

impossible to hide. So I think that you are not correct with you

accusation or qualification ''Yikes'' against  participants in this

thread. You also avoid to answer the relevant question if ''your''

Geiger styli are available to everyone or only to  Ortofon, Expert

stylus and Decca. If those are the only and exclusive receivers

of Geiger styli than this does not contradict the general statement

about Ogura and Namiki. For any customer not availability of

whatever item is not meaningful . One can't order what is not

available.. 

 

Yikes. There is so much crazy misinformation in this thread that it is scary. A little information is truly dangerous. First of all, Gyger is not out of business. They are a small company that has healthy sales and a niche that will keep them healthy for years. Phonograph diamonds are a tiny (no pun intended) sideline for them.

As to which diamond is what, the following is my distillation of what is found on the net and including a phone call to Mr. Wyndham Hodgson who told me he made the van den Hul diamond. Also AJ van den Hul’s own words in various interviews easily Googled.

1. AJ designed the vdH1 and vdH2 diamonds on the computer. But he still needs a partner to actually make the diamond;

2. He approaches Fritz Gyger (who else, anyway?) whose production equipment made from a “Meccano Set” according to AJ had a flaw in that it could not produce round phono diamonds. It made ovals, but AJ took advantage of this “flaw;”

3. Together Gyger and AJ developed the final version of the two diamonds, one radical asymmetrical and the other a conventional symmetrical design until it was ready for market;

4. Gyger beats van den Hul to the patent office and wins global patents for the Gyger 1 and Gyger 2;

5. AJ sues in Swiss court;

6. AJ in a compromise decision wins patent protection for all the globe except Switzerland. Gyger wins patent protection in Switzerland. Thus, the patent is SHARED. Gyger and van den Hul both may claim the design and use it as they like;

7. AJ needs someone to make his diamond. He finds Wyndham Hodgson who agrees. But Hodgson knows AJ can turn to no one else so gets a license agreement to produce the same two designs as the “Paratrace 1” and “Paratrace 2;”

8. Gyger diamonds are the one “real” versions as they are made as originally designed on the original equipment;

9. Van den Hul and Paratrace are made to the same design but are not quite “identical” to Gyger as anyone who views them under a microscope can see. They are not quite laterally symmetrical like a Gyger is, but they work and the tracing edges are where they should be;

10. Decca diamond looks like a Gyger 2, but it is a different size diamond block. It’s pretty huge in comparison to a Gyger 2, but otherwise appears to be made to the Gyger 2 formula. Could be made by Expert Stylus. Could be made by Gyger. The person to ask is John Wright if he would tell you.

11. Replicant 100 and all Ortofon Gyger diamonds are made by Fritz Gyger AG in Switzerland. Replicant 100, 110, 120 etc is all marketing bluster from Ortofon as is “FG70,” and “FG80,” etc. Gyger makes 2 diamonds with nominal dimensions. The S is 5/120 and the 2 is 5/75. As with any diamond, there are tolerances. Namiki’s dimensions for the Micro Ridge are given as r/R 2-3/70-80 microns. Gyger is likely truly the same way. Despite the specs, customers receive an assortment of sizes all compliant to a range. I suggest that all Ortofon might do is sort and grade what they get. They put the S with the 100 micron scanning edge in one pile and the 110 in another and so on. If you really believe they go through the time and expense. So a Replicant 100 is really a Gyger S with a measured scanning edge of 100 microns.

Gyger AG is not out of business. I order from them regularly.

 

I hope I have put some rumors to bed.

Needlestein

 

Wishful thinking is , say, general feeling. We all have some. My guess

is that Van den Hul confused patent duration with ''authors kind''. 

The later are about 70 years after authors dead. The former only

+/- 20 years. The lowest duration have trademarks ; 10 years, But

the cheapest. For +/- $700 one can get one. But who would not

long for royalties from such big company as Namiki? Only, say, 3%

and one can  compete with the new rich from Russia and Chine.

So why not try? 

The ''sense of difference'' of rights duration make no sense but this 

this is different issue. 

 

identity conundrum

There are two criteria:

1. leibniz  indiscernibilis based on properties 

2. Frege's based on meaning or sense

What we can discriminate or not is not easy to say ,say one egg and the

other.

The evening star and the morning star 

Those say, names , are obviously different but both refer to the same,

uh, planet Venus. However before discovery that both stars are

the same people had the right to give them different names. Aka

geocentric world view,

Well we think that Geiger refers to something else than VDH. 

But Van den Hul invented ,uh, Geiger stylus , but with his own

patent . He even claimed that Namiki has  stolen his invention.

Aka not paid royalties. 

So it seems that our Replicant , Paratrace and Decca are

copies of Van den Hul. But which one ? Geiger I , II or S?

edgewear I am really sorry but I could not resist .

No mercy no wine? Oh well, life is hard and than you die!
But life’s too short for the sort of stylus naval gazing as witnessed by pindac’s link. Jeez.

 

 

In my experience with dozens of cartridges over the years, Shibata styli tend to pickup every bit of surface noise from the grooves. The Replicant 100 as used by Ortofon on their Cadenza Bronze (which btw uses a tapered aluminum cantilever) on the other hand is somehow able to avoid such surface noise to an amazing degree. On several records where I was used to hearing the surface noise with all other carts had the background become virtually silent when I switched to the Cadenza Bronze. Several friends who have also switched to the CB have had the same experience as far as how eerily quiet it is in the groove.

dear pinda, I checked your reference . I theached civil law and intellectual

ownership. According to me one can't speak about Gyger styli in general.

As i mentioned elsewhere Van den Hula designed Gyger I, II and S.

So those are different animals in the sens of patent law. ''Symilar '' will

not do, The reason is that ''all are similar to Shibata''. Anyway Gyger I,

Ii and S have different  dimension  and imply different patents for

Van den Hul. So Replicant may look as but can't be ''identical'' with

any Gyger kind.

 

dear pinda, as you already know there not only '' levels of styli'', but also

''levels  of knowledge'' involved in our ''discussions'' . Alas I am forced

to add ''the level of humour'' in order to react to your contribution. I must

also confess that my ''associative thinking'' was not capable to connect 

Replicant with copy. I had to many variables  to think about.

Anyway personal psychology is not an accuse, Thanks for your

contribution and I am glad that you deed not start your own thread.

I would like to think the Link will supply @nandric a fuel coals for the fire that is set on this matter.

The idea that the word Replicant can misused and used to mean Replica, might be instrumental in why there is an assumption the Styli is a Copy.

The Link has a little further information of the similarity and uniqueness of the Form produced, as well as a reference to a Patent. 

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-ortofon-replicant-100-geometry.5909/

edgewear, No mercy whatever  for the proponents of 'rebuild''  and

''refreshment'' ideology whatever! Who of them would believe that

one can get whatever stylus one wants by an RETIPER and not

by the manufacturer? How could you be so cruel  to our co-members? 

Not even an half glass of wine for you in (Dutch) N. Zealand. 

There’s an eBay seller in the US that provides retipping service for any cartridge you can imagine. Beside Namiki micro ridge and Ogura Vital this seller also offers Gyger FG tips, with either boron or ruby cantilevers. While not using the word Replicant 100, it does suggest other sources. Does this sufficiently refute your ‘general statement’?

edgewear, We started with the fact that Ortofon uses Replicant stylus.

In addition there were suggestions that ''Expert stylus'' ( Paratrace) and

Decca London stylus look ''the same'' ( aka ''identical'') as Replicant.

But we were not able to discover who produces those as well if those

styli are available to other manufacturer as well ''retipers''. So we

can't conclude that there are more styli providers than the two

mentioned. So my first ''general statement'' that there are only

two producers in relevant sense of availability is not refuted. 

To refute this general statement was intention of the thread about

Replicant. 

 

Ortofon is still able to deliver cartridges with Replicant 100 stylus, both with boron and diamond cantilevers. Perhaps this comes from their own supply of Gyger parts,  which will eventually dry up. Or there’s another jewel company who has bought Gyger’s copyrights and is now supplying these styli themselves, either from Ireland as has been suggested or someplace else. 

Our question was if Replicant can be added to Ogura and Namiki as

supplier of styli in the sense of availability to manufacturer as well

''retipers'' ( aka repair services) .The context was  the assumed 

difference between  ''original parts'' by manufacturer and ''retipers''

as the reason to do, say, either ''refurbishing or rebuilding''  by the

manufacturer or retipers. We got answers about the ''sound'' of

Replicant but not about its availabillity. BTW Benz LP ( the 16 g )

moved from Gyger to micro ridge. The reason being that Gyger

is no more. We can conclude that the mentioned Japanese Jewel

companies  have monopoly position. As Axel told me: ''they

increased the price with 100% without any consultation''.

Then we also have JCarr's   ''levels of styli'' which can be

get by special order in order to charge prices of + 10 K.

I don't believe   that this is  ''our problem''. Also ''the kinds

of diamonds'' are not relevant for our investigation despite

they ''natural'', ''industrial'' or ''artificial nature''.

@edgewear The Copy and Paste below from a previous Post within this thread would seem to offer similar content to your own findings when comparing Styli within an assembly, even though only two of the four styli types were the same design, the general assessment was that the overall Build of the Cartridge was the most contributing factor to the differences in presentation being detected.  

 

'As there were Two of the same Brands Styli Model and One other Styli from the same Brand of the former, the effect of the Styli on a replay was suggested to be a consideration to be assessed when listening, i.e surface noise, and whether any comparatively noticeable changes to the information retrieval was being detected. 

As said previously, not one attendee was able to say with conviction that they felt the Styli was solely responsible for the noticeable differences in the SQ and Performance on offer from a Cart'.

The discussions concluded with an agreement that leaned toward,  the known differences about the methods used for the assembly of the Cart's, was most likely the reason why the Model used in the Standard Form, which was also the Model with most hours of usage of approx 200 Hrs, was the one showing the least attractors and the model with the rebuild to the New High Spec' Parts and approx' 100 Hrs of usage was showing the most attractors.'

I’ve never done a comparison specifically aimed at the Replicant 100, but I do have 4 different cartridges equipped with that stylus. These are Benz LP, Ortofon SPU Gold Reference, A90 and A95. Is there a sonic imprint that they share and that could be attributed to the Replicant 100?

I might need to refresh my memory, but I’m inclined to say no. The Benz LP and the SPU both sound warm and lush, while Ortofon A90 and A95 are very neutral, open and transparent. Totally different characteristics and yet they all use the same stylus/cantilever assembly. Just goes to show that you probably shouldn’t make to much of these parts of the equation. The choice of body, coil and magnet materials, damping, compliance, output level, etc. all play their ‘part’.

To try and take it back to the subject, has anyone done a vertical comparison of cartridges equipped with a Replicant 100?

I have the SPU on my Schröder, I’ve heard a Cadenza Bronze on a Naim Aro fitted to a Linn LP12 and an Anna boron on an SME V fitted to a Technics 1200G but there were too many variables and too much time between them to draw any conclusion about the cartridges.

Intellectual property, justice and cheating. The older among us

know who Kondo-san was. His company ''Audio note'' produced

very expensive component. In UK however was a company  

with trademark ''Audio note'' which copied Kondo's inventions.

This is obvious stealing. Kondo-san was not able to do anything

against UK law.  Consider (general) patent duration of +/- 20 years.

Compare this with the discrepancy with copyright . Duration is 70

years after passing  of  the ''author'' . ''Original'' (sic) this right was

meant for, say, writers, Check at present what singers  heir get for

their ''copyright''. American are complaining about

 hinese accusing them of stealing but are not able to get the

idea to increase duration of patent law. We have seen  Raul's

''argument'' that Glanz and Astatic got ''licence'' for production

of ''MF'' technology invented by Mitachi in Japan. He obviously

have no idea what ''licence'' means. ''Glanz'' is an German

expression meaning ''shining'' . So it suggest German company.

But as dgob mentioned in his Glanz thread  this company is

Japanese, So according to Raul an Japanese company  sold

''licence'' to other Japanese company. But the sense of an licence

is to sell permission to some other country because establishing

own company abroad is very expensive, So as one can conclude

intellectual property is pretty complex for even the professionals

not to mention an nitwit from Mexico. 

 

 

 

 

 

I try to explain function of names in my other thread . Raul

missed my point by Glanz and Astatic because of lack of education.

Those names are used not to refer but to hide reference by

suggesting different ''animals'' while being ''the same'' product

of Mitachi company in Japan. Aka ''misleading  names'' . The

Glanz thread is illustration of name confusion and our own

discovery that both names refer to the same products.

The same is/was the case by Gyger versus Van de Hul styli as well

by ''Van den Hul'' cartridges them self. Those are not made by

Van den Hul.. The explanation of terms, use of words , kind of sentences

or statement or propositions is not possible without knowledge of logic,

linguistic and philosophy of language. Those are ''subjects'' about

which Raul has never heard because of his very low level of knowledge.

''The other person'' ( Don Griffith)  left the forum because of Raul.

Also ''very low level of knowledge'' , He is aircraft engineer. 

Prove first documents about you education!

Yes, Astatic builded its own cartridges under the Mitachi design. Same as Glanz.

 

Btw, in all internet audio forum exist some persons that are " dedicated " to often posts very low knowledge issue/audio levels boarding in the stupidity.

Agos is no exception and in this forum and for years there were two of that kind of persons fortunatelly looks like one of them just gone because does not post any more but unfortunatelly other person already took his place.

 

Is really stupid to have a " decent " audio dialogue with any of these persons.

R.

 

 

pimda, sorry my humour must be  '' low level'' kind.

In an ideal world, if only one side of the Tip was seen to be with excessive wear, a 'retip' service would not be required, turning the Cart' 180 Degrees on the Headshell mounting would be a simple fix requiring a much lesser skill set.