Maybe a system synergy thing? On a 750D on my Gyrodec I experienced pretty much the exact opposite that you did-almost a complete 180. Would never go back to the stock Jelco headshell. My comments here: http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=44048 Just bought a 2nd one for a new 2nd Jelco arm on my table as well-would have bought that one from you at a discount if I'd known you weren't going to like it! With a totally new arm, headshell and leads there was definitely a break-in thing going on. A couple of hours with the Cardas Sweep Record did do a world of good in that situation. But with well used arm and a new Yamamoto HS4 I certainly didn't hear much of that, if any, when I bought my first one. |
@hdm I did read your review recently. I have no idea! Maybe it's a Decca thing with its high energy feeding into the shell and arm (despite being in a Decapod).
The difference was not subtle. Fine detail was missing on the Yamamoto. Most likely being absorbed by damping in much the same way a cork mat softens the sound. Which is why I do not use one. I do not damp. Everything is rigid as possible with the 3" maple the only consession to softness.
I'm listening to Van Morrison - Beautiful Vision (WEA 1982) and the percussion is superb. Vivid and open, incredibly fast and detailed. With the HS-4, it is definitely veiled somewhat. Back to the original, it is like a Cleaned Window (get it?!)
One could speculate that the magnesium shell is reflecting energy back into the system giving the impression if detail. However, I do not feel that is happening as the purity of tone is so tangible. In other words, mouth sounds on a female singer and brushing cymbals, harp string plucking and the reverberation along the strings, the fine control of sibilance, and most of all, the emotional quotient of the performance, all indicate a lack of distortion. The natural, you are there rendition of the performance has an absolute sound of rightness missing with the carbon fiber shell that I could not lose forces me to stay with the Jelco for the moment.
Most odd that we are hearing things the way we do or that the systems gel differently. |
noromance, Was it you and I who had a sharp disagreement about the Boston Audio Mat2? If so, seems like your impression of the Yamamoto CF headshell and my own are equally at odds. I've liked mine so much, I now own two of them, like hdm. But obviously, we hear differently on different systems. My systems are inherently highly detailed and seem to benefit from the very same treatments that you don't like so much. I am also wondering whether the "sound" of the Yamamoto will be partly dependent upon the tonearm. I am using mine on a FR64S with B60 base and on a Dynavector DV505, respectively.
|
@lewm Yes, Lew! The Boston Mat2 robbed the music of all life and drive. I am finding the reactions of you and @hdm somewhat disconcerting. The decrease in detail is completely apparent. I cannot imagine how anyone could like either the BM2 mat or the YHS4 headshell. Most interesting. |
I sent the Yamamoto headshell back to Amazon. There was no letting it break in or testing with other cartridges. It just didn’t work for me. I wish you could have heard the difference. I once sat in on a show demo of a dull and overly bassy system and spoke to Ken Kessler afterwards. I found his reaction disquieting when he said it was excellent. Maybe it's me!
|
There are, say, two different categories: 1. who knows better and
2. who hears better.
If I would dear to say this, considering edgewear warning , I
would say ''don't mention the M...'' but I don't because of the
moderators.
The ''other category'' is more complex because there are more candidates for the title. As an democrat I would say : choose your own from the ''Aussie list'' in his thread ''hear my Cartridges''.
|
I bought the latest incarnation of Boston Audio mat made in collaboration with 47 Labs (Sakura Systems). This model called The Mat. It is perfect for Luxman PD-444 platter. I am comparing it to my SAEC SS-300, but need time for comparison. I do not agree with noromance catigorical statement. Regarding carbon headshells i know many, i like this one from Grace, it's carbon-fiber. Nothing new here, it's from the 80's. I like this design much better than any Yamamoto. |
I had a very similar experience. My turntable is a Technics SL1200GAE, headshells compared are the one sold by LP Gear as the Zupreme (which I believe is the Jelco headshell) and the Yamamoto HS-4S carbon fiber. You have done a much better job than I could of describing the difference in sound in favor of the metal headshell. At least to my ears, with my arm, and the cartridges that I have experience with (Cadenza Black, Winfeld, Experion). It is certainly believable, however, that with different arms/cartridges etc. that the results could be reversed. The lesson to be learned here is that it is not possible to draw universal conclusions about the many variables in our hobby.
|
@nandric I've been listening to, and participating in, @halcro cartridges comparisons. One of the most valuable outcomes of that wonderful thread is that we all pretty much agree on the results. If that is true, then, why are we hearing such differences with these components? |
|
I've been wanted to try the HS-4, and I'm glad I found this thread. I'm currently using a Yamamota
HS-2HS-2 (Asada Cherry Wood) on my Technics 1200GR - Dynavector DV20xL.
I like the HS-2HS very much, and the other headshell that's in my rotation is an Ortofon LH-9000. The Ortofon, used with the same cart, pulls more detail, but not quite as smooth sounding as the Yamamoto.
Hoping to find something that's in between the two. |
Dear Noromance, By no means am I implying that you or your judgement are "wrong" or that I am "right". Your Garrard set-up is very analogous to my own modified Lenco set-up (idler-drive, slate plinth, massive after-market bearing). On the Lenco, I use a DV505 tonearm and on that tonearm I most often mount MM or MI cartridges. Those types do not put so much energy back into the headshell/arm wand, because of higher compliance. The Lenco also runs with a Boston Audio platter mat. (Your worst nightmare, apparently.) This set-up feeds the MM inputs of a Manley Steelhead, modified a bit, and the Manley drives the built-in direct-drive amplifiers of my Beveridge speakers plus an outboard woofer separately driven by a Threshold amplifier. I’ve also used the CF headshell on my Victor TT101 with SAECSS300 platter mat and a FR64S/B60 tonearm, also feeding usually the MC inputs of the Steelhead. It was Halcro who originally suggested to me the possible merits of the Yamamoto, and I am happy that he did. But I wouldn’t say the Yam "blows away" all other headshells; I would say that it is "good", at least a little better than the various metal headshells I have used on these systems and affords a certain solidity to the music, for want of a better word. I do think that the headshell needs to work well with the cartridge. Cartridges on the Lenco have included the Acutex LPM320, B&O MMC1, and Astatic MF2500, but also the MC type Audio Technica ART7. On the FR64S, it only recently got a second Yam headshell and right now I have the Dynavector 17D3 on that one. I think the 17D3 is the only cartridge I’ve used on the FR64S since installing the Yam headshell, but I also have run the AT ART7 and the Acutex on that tonearm. The FR64S has an inherently high enough effective mass that you can get away with a light-ish headshell, like the Yam and still be in the right range for resonant frequency with low compliance MCs. (But surprisingly, it sounded great also with the high compliance Acutex.) Like Chakster, I cannot hear much difference between the BA mats and the SAECSS300, except that both are better than anything else I’ve tried by a fair amount. Or to put it another way, there is a qualitative difference between these mats, but I like both. I don’t think or expect that one headshell would be best for all occasions; I use an Ortofon LH9000 (18g) on my Kenwood L07D with Koetsu Urushi, because I think the Urushi really sounds best with high effective mass, and the OEM L07D headshell is only about 10g. I hear a big improvement with the Ortofon. Oh yes, and the L07D sports a custom-made pure copper platter mat.
Could it be that you are liking a certain resonance in your system that the BA mat and/or the CF headshell is taking away or dulling? It could equally be that my own systems generate a certain resonance that needs squashing. Such is life.
|
@noromance, As I assumed some hear better than the other.
But because I am accused to be racist I would be crazy to name
anyone in particular.
|
Serbians are particularly acute, I hear.
|
Dear lew, hearing and thinking are different mental activities.
So I think that you think but don't hear that I am acute.
|
Nandric, I know that we both think clearly, at least.
|
Thanks @lewm for all that! Of course I know you were not being judgmental. It's great to hear alternative opinions and insights.
I wonder if it's the Deccas. I know my three Deccas trounce my Audio Technica AT750SH which I bought out of curiosity and a control, Deccas being somewhat out there as far as normal cartridges go.
I hear folks saying they prefer a smooth sound or a controlled sound. I don't. I love high levels of insight and detail. When I detect a reduction of that detail, the guilty party, if you will, has to be removed. |
''Truth by satisfaction''. This ''truth theory'' is ascribed to Tarski and
obviously ''constructed'' from quantification theory. One can ''see''
this theory also as ''predication''. The formula is : ''for all x Fx&Gx''.
As such this formula is suitable for objects descriptions but, alas,
not for relations.
In headshell case the question is ''which conditions need to be
satisfy?'' Is this an ''objective'' or ''subjective'' question?
Aka ''what satisfy Lew's condition does not necessary satisfy
Nandric conditions''. Well this questions ''ask'' for the reasons
by Lew and reasons by Nandric. I own more than 50 carts 20
of which are in regular use. In order to switch between them in
a ''reasonable time'' as many pre-adjusted carts in their own
headshells are needed. For those who are not members of
Rockefeller family the price become one of those conditions.
As suggested the number of used carts is also involved. This
means that Lew with his 3 carts can afford to buy ''exotic kinds''
while Nandric as former ''poor immigrant'' need to be pragmatic.
So the most of my headshells are those ''Jelco'' kinds which
one can buy under different names and prices despite the fact
that they are ''identical''. Regarding ''rigidity'' they are made from
magnesium , have rectangular form, azimuth possibility and
included wire. To put this otherwise; this object satisfy all the
needed conditions for easy adjustment. However for my favourite
samples I bought 4 ''exclusive kinds'' . As a kind of present for
them.
|
more software and fewer accessories.
|
@best-groove I hear you. I've more software than time to listen to it all. I'd rather listen to quality over quantity. Cheap tweaks help.
|
@nandric What's your point? Are the 4 specials better, more satisfying, to your ears?
|
@noromance , I am sorry but I was obviously not sufficient explicit .
Those 4 are my darlings and that is way they got presents.
As your name suggest you are not romantic so you are difficult to
satisfy with arguments involving passion.
|
My secret is that I buy headshells in Tokyo where the prices are about 33% lower than eBay.
|
@nandric Thanks for the laugh. |
Dear Lew, Does your son or Japanese government pay for your
travel to and from Japan?
|
@noromance , Also thanks for your sportsmanship. I expected
accusation of discrimination of not romantic kind of peoples.
|
Coming late to this Thread..... I'm disturbed Noromance.....that you have experienced this with the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber headshell....🤔 This is my 'Headshell-of-Choice' and I must have over a dozen of my CARTRIDGES mounted in them....including the LDR!!! Not a single cartridge sounded other than 'superb' in this shell....be it MM or LOMC. I cannot even begin to suggest a reason for your alternative experience....? The 'synergy' thing doesn't convince 🤥 Is it at all possible that the cartridge leads were attached to the wrong pins (out-of-phase)? I don't even know if it would play like that....? |
@halcro I was hoping you'd stop by. I'm baffled. It's not the first time I've had well-reviewed items sound worse than what I already have. I'm certain the leads were correct. I took a photo in case I forgot the orientation. As you know, the Boston Mat2 was one and some $250 acclaimed phono cables utterly failed to match my standard Jelco 501 cable. However, other goodies like idlers, bearings, tubes have all been consistent with other users' feedback. Maybe the Decapod metal created an unstable junction between the carbon fiber...
|
@halcro I wonder if that's why your LDR doesn't sound as good as I think it should. I know I suggested trying it on the DD table instead. Perhaps you could try a before and after clip with the LDR in the Yamo or a metal (Mg) shell.
|
"I'm disturbed Noromance.....that you have experienced this with the Yamamoto HS-4 Carbon Fiber headshell...." @halcro With two of these expensive things and having the same result as noromance, if you think you're disturbed, you ought to take my pulse. I can't return mine so it is a dead loss. |
I want to make it clear, you guys are talking about different materials ... Carbon-Fiber, Pure Carbon, Carbon-Graphite, Graphite etc ... I remember headshells from OMA (Graphite) and from Thomas Schick (also Graphite) and they are different. Not to mention Graphite plinth. I’ve seen some new carbon-fiber mat and the structure is way different that Boston Audio Graphite mat. The designers of Boston Audio Mat explained many things here (see below), also BA mat has been upgraded 2 times since it’s first release, the latest is The Mat. "It’s also important to understand that true carbon-graphite is not "graphite" as in carbon fiber golf clubs, tennis rackets, etc. While such products are often mistakenly called graphite, carbon fiber is a composite material with totally different mechanical properties than pure carbon-graphite. The Mat - the last component in the record support system and the only part of the turntable capable of dealing with stylus-induced oscillation. The stylus oscillates while reading the millions of bumps and ridges within the groove, it consequently releases a portion of that vibration back into the vinyl itself (the opposite reaction). These vibrations saturate the vinyl and bounce off the platter and back to the stylus. Even in the most rigorously setup and isolated turntables, stylus oscillation is a source of distortion that is hard to avoid. Felt mats do dampen some of the vibrations generated by the stylus and help to insulate the record from the platter because of its low mass. But precisely because of felt’s extremely low mass, its effectiveness is limited. Our search ultimately led us to a rather exotic material for a turntable mat - pure carbon in the form of graphite. Graphite also offers one of the lowest mechanical impedance of any material in existence. Simply put, mechanical impedance is a material’s resistance to energy. Graphite’s low mechanical impedance means that energy may freely enter the material, but its loosely bound molecular layers are very efficient in absorbing and dissipating energy - be it neutrons generated by a nuclear reaction or micro-vibrations from a stylus. In addition to absorbing and dissipating stylus oscillation, graphite is excellent at absorbing turntable-produced contamination including bearing and pulley imperfections, motor noise, platter ring and even noise generated by the belt turning the platter."
Here is a manufacturing tour.
|
Now let me compare: 1) Yamamoto Carbon-Fiber headshell Carbon-Fiber turntable mat Another Oyaide Carbon-Fiber headshell Looking at all those pictures do you see some similarities ? The structure of Carbon-Fiber is the same, just like this sheet. 2) Now look at the Graphite mat, here is mine, but you can also look here. This is OMA Graphite headshell and OMA Graphite Mat. Thomas Schick Graphite headshell. And let me remind you about rare Grace Carbon-Fiber headshell. And let me summarize: The material used for products in chapter 1 is completely different from the material used for products chapter 2. Even if the Yamamoto headshell and Grace headshell advertised as Carbon-Fiber it is obvious that they are completely different and therefore have different properties. Same about Carbon-Fiber mat from chapter 1 and Boston Audio & Sakura Systems Graphite mat from chapter 2. I've been told that OMA Graphite headshell is also different from the Schick Graphite headshell. In other words saying something about Yamamoto Carbon-Fiber headshell you can't project it to the Boston Audio Graphite mat. They are made of the different material. |
Chakster, I am not sure I get your point. Who is it that confused the graphite Boston Audio record mat for the carbon fiber Yamamoto (or Oyaide, or etc) headshell? In addition to my two Yamamoto CF headshells, I also own the Oyaide one, just to see for myself if there is any qualitative difference in their sound(s). So far, no. But Noromance does not like either the graphite mat nor the CF headshell, and he knows the difference. Bill Stevenson doesn't like the CF headshell either. You, Halcro, and I do like the CF headshell. Yet we all (Nandric and Bill included) own very different audio equipment. Go figure.
Nandric, Don't worry. I pay for our travel to Tokyo. About once a year, for the past 3 years, we have been renting an apartment via Airbnb, for 2-3 weeks each time. Before that, I used to stop in Tokyo on my way to and from scientific meetings in Thailand or Vietnam, to see our son for a day or two.
|
Thanks @chakster and @lewm
Yes, I'm aware of the differences. |
Dear Lew, My worry was that 30% discount for the headshells you
bought in Japan would not cover the ''other costs'' . That is why
I assumed that either your son or Japanese government paid the
''other costs''.
|
First of all: here is a shop in Japan, it’s official Yamamoto distributor, not only for his beautiful tube amps, but also for the headshells that international buyers can purchase without tax (VAT) directly from Japan. |
@lewm I am not sure I get your point. Who is it that confused the graphite Boston Audio record mat for the carbon fiber Yamamoto (or Oyaide, or etc) headshell? "Pure carbon in the form of graphite. True carbon-graphite is not "graphite" as in carbon fiber golf clubs, tennis rackets, etc. While such products are often mistakenly called graphite, carbon fiber is a composite material with totally different mechanical properties than pure carbon-graphite. Commonly used in industrial applications including nuclear power plants and steel mills because of its high thermal conductivity, graphite is made from carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal, honeycomb pattern that are tightly bound in ultra-thin sheets. These sheets are themselves very loosely bound to one another - which is why powdered graphite is one of the best industrial lubricants in existence - and one of the reasons graphite is so effective at absorbing energy." In addition to my two Yamamoto CF headshells, I also own the Oyaide one, just to see for myself if there is any qualitative difference in their sound(s). So far, no. Both your your headshells called Carbon-Fiber and both share the same structure with a typical (for everything called CF nowadays) cubic surface. You can see same surface even on cars. It’s funny, but i can see even CF hats. But Noromance does not like either the graphite mat nor the CF headshell, and he knows the difference. Bill Stevenson doesn’t like the CF headshell either. You, Halcro, and I do like the CF headshell. I like my vintage Grace Carbon-Fiber headshell from the 80’s, but it has nothing to do with modern Yamamoto or Oyaide. The Grace CF headshell looks like my Graphite Mat or those new Graphite headshells from OMA and Schick. All those products does not have that cubic structure (you have on yamamoto) and probably made of the different material, different formula, different properties as explained by Boston Audio. The sticker on the Original Grace box says "Carbon-Fiber Headshell", but again this is not the same material as the Yamamoto or Oyaide. This is why i think we’re talking about different things here and what i like is not what you like because the CF is different too. The BA mat and OMA mats made from a slice of Graphite, here is the manufacturing process. They call it Carbon-Graphite. But the Carbon-Fiber mat is completely different, just like the CF headshell you guys have. The Grace shell i like officially called CF, but does not looks like any new CF products. I can’t say anything bad about The Mat (which is BA mk3), but even this mat is not what some of you guys owned, because it is not BA-1 or BA-2, it is "BA-3" under SakuraSystems brand now. |
Thanks again @chakster .
There are two questions raised in this whole quandary.
1. What is the quality of the sound produced in a system where the damping is such that the music appears to be either bright, lively, detailed, and transparent or sound dark, muted, flatter, and less dynamic?
2. Why would one prefer one type of rendition of the music over the other?
|
Either the extralinguistic objects have ''inherent'' properties
or properties are ascribed to them by humans. Say ''a sheep is an useful animal because we like its meat''. To the sheep however
it may look strange to be ''useful'' because humans like its
meat.
From the fact that different persons value the involved ''materials'' different one can conclude that some ''contradictions'' are involved.
It is obviously not about ''inherent'' properties of the materials
because those can't contradict each other. As far as we know the
external objects don't have language capabilities and consequently
can't contradict each other.
|
De gustibus non est disputandum!
But not really.
There have to be other phenomena at work here. I do not believe the disparity of human physiology can be so diverse that we hear so differently.
But not really.
Maybe neural density of the brain accounts for the alternative psycho-acoustic interpretations of the auditory transmission from system to mind.
|
Dear noromance, Deed you forget ''nature versus nurture''?
To put this otherwise is music not cultural determined. I ever
mentioned Chinese opera as example. I can't imagine anyone
from the West who likes those operas. We in the West have an
enorme cultural riches of music. Can you imagine any education
by us without music?
|
Addition, ''degustibus non est disputandum''. That is the point.
Value statements are not ''truth-functional''. This means they
are not ''true or false''. The truth criterions does not apply to
them. But despite of your , say, title, you try to find some scientific
base for your opinion.
|
@nandric Not sure what cultural and musical preferences have to do with sound perception especially in relation to others on this thread.
Truth and value statements may seem at odds with each other but what is the truth here? Is the headshell truly better than I hear it? The only way to ascertain an agreed-upon outcome is to have a listening session and discussion. We could speculate and theorize indefinitely.
|
@noromance , I can only react on what you write not on what you
think. You quoted this Roman phrase ''de gustibus non est disputandum''
but added ''not really''. What does ''not really''
mean. Not true? I asked about ''nature -nurture'' question but
you avoided the issue. To me your fixation is on ''nature'' with
scientific inclination. But music is ''social thing'' inscrutable
otherwise. I mentioned Chines opera in this context. Then we
all (?) know that, say, Japanese prefer other geir than we in the
West do. Japanese them self make other cartridges for their own
market than for the ''West market''. Those differences can't be
explained with ''nature'' but only with ''nurture''.
BTW ''better than...'' imply comparisons or ''relational sentences''
which imply valuation statements which are involved in this
Roman phrase.
|
’Not really’ means that taste and cultural preferences are not relevant to the actual sound quality. I am rejecting that as a factor in the equation. My hypothesis is thus: Unless there are physiological and/or psycho-acoustic reasons, the quality of reproduced sound should be consistent for all users. If it is not, other physical factors are at play in the reproduction chain.
|
''Not really'' means.. ''What do you mean'' ? ''This make no sense'',
etc. are obviously about ''meaning''. Not about ''truth or falsity''.
We need to first understand statement made to be able to react.
There was in the past so called ''theory of meaning'' next to
''theory of reference'' or ''referential theory'' which won the contest.
Aka ''ýour physical theory of truth'' . But Frege's work ''About
Sense and Reference'' included obviously both and is still the
most important work in phylosophy of language. We agreed on
the fact (?) that ''value statements'' are not ''thruth functionall'' .
Aka the question of ''truth and falsity'' don't apply to them.
This is also implicit in the quoted Roman saying. However logic
apply to all kinds of sentences because contradictory sentences,
say, ''make no sense'' in the sense of consistency. We can't grasp
what is ''really meant'' by contradictory statements. That is why
people ask ''what do you (really) mean''. With your
''physical approach'' you can't answer such questions. There are different and contradictory statement made about the same
physical object ; the headshell in casu. Well the question
than is how the same object can ''have'' and ''not have'' the
same proporties?
BTW this is the usual outcome in our discussions so it is not
clear why you participate in them?
,
|
Well the question than is how the same object can ''have'' and ''not have'' the same proporties?
Schrödinger's headshell?
|
Dear noromance, Whom are you addressing? To put this
otherwise how many members in our forum you think have
ever heard about Schrodinger? You should join some scientific
forum instead of ''hobby forum'' like A'gon.
BTW all societies have their own ''social rules'' by which or in
the context of which ''values'' make sense. That is to say for
the members of the same society. Those rules have nothing in
common with your physics.
|
My older post from 2019. Interestingly, I have had the opportunity to test out a very well made 12" Well Tempered clone with a carbon fiber tube. (See Virtual Systems profile) And it has the same characteristics of slightly slower and duller sound. A grayish veiling, reduction of dynamics. (Note that the arm builder has improved this by changing a part). Is this "plastic" coloration endemic in carbon fiber?
|
Noromance, I don't know why I did not bring it up earlier in this 2-year thread, but I completely agree with you on the "sound" of carbon fiber when it is used structurally in audio components, except for headshells. I have not at all liked the Well Tempered tonearms, for the same reasons (and others) that you mention. I heard the same dull, sluggish SQ from the Sonus Faber speakers that first came out with CF cabinetry. Likewise, I do not much like the Black Diamond racing CF shelves or cones. With the headshells, as I have said repeatedly, I think it has a lot to do with the compliance of the cartridge. Low compliance cartridges put a lot more energy into the headshell than do high compliance ones. Since two years ago, I now run my Koetsu Urushi in my FR64S tonearm/B60 base, using an Ortofon LH9000 headshell. Formerly, I had the Urushi in my Kenwood L07J tonearm, which has much lighter effective mass, but also using the LH9000 headshell. The Urushi is sounding better than I ever thought it could, in its current livery, which is to say better than in a CF headshell. The LH9000 is a metal layered composite and weighs 18g by itself. Anyway, for other than headshell construction, I hear what you hear with CF.
|
