A Subjective Assessment is found in the Link, of the 'NOS' Sonus Blue, being used on a couple of different drive TT's using the same TA.
https://www.audioasylum.com/reviews/Phono-Cartridge/Sonic-Research/Sonus-Blue/vinyl/108/1086507.html
The Shure V15 V with a Jico SAS/B stylus VS The Soundsmith Hyperion MR and Lyra Atlas SL
On a sentimental lark I purchased two Shure V15 V bodies and one SAS/B stylus. I was always a realistic about the Shure's potential. Was comparing it to $10k+ cartridges fair? Absolutely. The Shure was considered to be one of the best cartridges of the day. Why not compare it to a few of the best we have today?
The Shure has always been considered to be unfailingly neutral. Famous recording engineers have said it sounded most like their master tapes. I do not have an original stylus for the Shure and I can not say that the Jico performs as well.
My initial evaluation was quite positive. It worked wonderfully well in the Shroder CB. With a light mounting plate and small counterbalance weight a resonance point of 8 hz was easily achieved. There was nothing blatantly wrong with the sound. There was no mistracking at 1.2 grams. You can see pictures of all these styluses here https://imgur.com/gallery/stylus-photomicrographs-51n5VF9
After listening to a bunch of favorite evaluation records my impression was that the Shure sounded on the thin side, lacking in the utmost dynamic impact with just a touch of harshness. I listened to the Shure only for four weeks as my MC phono stage had taken a trip back to the factory. I was using the MM phono stage in the DEQX Pre 8, designed by Dynavector. I have used it with a step up transformer and know it performs well. I got my MC stage back last week and cycled through my other cartridges then back to the Shure. The Soundsmith and Lyra are much more alike than different. I could easily not be able to tell which one was playing. The Lyra is the slightest touch darker. The Shure is a great value....for $480 in today's money, but it can not hold a candle to the other cartridges. They are more dynamic, smoother and quieter. They are more like my high resolution digital files. Whether or not they are $10,000 better is a personal issue. Did the DEQX's phono stage contribute to this lopsided result? Only to a small degree if any. I do have two Shure bodies and they both sound exactly the same. The Shure may have done better with a stock stylus. I do not think the age of the bodies contributes to this result at all.
Showing 12 responses by pindac
@richardbrand In relation to the Quad ESL Speakers, I am a user of Stacked 57's that are completely refurbished and are also incorporating a replacement Treble Panel that creates + 3dB lift to the Upper Frequency. Within my Local Audio Group there are Fully Original 57's, Fully Original Stacked 57's, there have been 63's, both very early production models and later models, 2812 and 2912's. My experiences had within the Audio Group, is that out of all the listening experiences had, there is only the Later production ESL 63's that did not impress in the same capacity that the other models have. This same experience of the 63 model has extended to my hearing it in use outside of the Audio Group, when the 63 is heard and not enjoyed the likely hood is a Later Production Model is in use. There are a Group of individuals in the UK who carry out modifications to the 63, there are suggestions a structural change was made to the later produced models production techniques. Maybe the changes by the Group of individuals is to create the sonic that is capable of being created. Which has much closer similarities to the one that has been discovered in the earliest run of the production models.
|
My First Experience of 57's in use was in the 90's probably early 90's when Tim De Paravicini demonstrated Valve Direst Driven Quads at a Audio Event I was attending at, from recollection be music being used was Pink Floyd - Pulse - Master Tape. Being Blown Away was an understatement. I also heard them in use by another enthusiast when I was a user of both Single and Stacked array's, (I've never really prejudiced against the Single Array). The enthusiast was a Quad Obsessed Type with experiences acquired for 57's and also had good electronic skills. Panels were Overhauled and the used panels were matched to 0.5dB from recollection. The Stacked Quad enthusiast visited was owning a Pair produced to their design, completely stripped down and rebuilt using only one set of Electronics to Drive the Speaker Design. Thus single electronics design, was built into a extremely rigid structure, using Black Walnut as the Framing, these really shone as a Speaker. The Source and Amplification was poor for what a Quad ESL 57 really deserves, but this speaker design really shone for its capability. My Gut Instinct is that the Typical Stacked Array will have been noticeably bettered by the new design for the Stacked Array heard. Especially with a improved Source and Amplification. This is also a design I would really enjoy putting together as a retirement project, where I would be reliant on a EE friend who renovates 57's. Getting the Panels matched to 0.5dB will for me not be something achieved unless having luck with me. As for the Super Tweeter, I have heard the Super Tweeter from Townsend in use with 57's, but can not recall anything really memorable and requiring to be wanted to be reproduced, but maybe that is because I never heard them coupled as a A/B demo with them cut out and on use, as I have had demo's with quite few Subwoofers I have heard coupled to the Speakers. As for the High Frequency / Low Frequency Driver Designs to be attached to the Quad ESL 57. My own intention is to one day have a Audax Gold Dome Piezo HD-3P Tweeter coupled to the 57's. This Driver is one which I and friend have collected samples and devised methods for refurbing the and re-charging the reservoir. This is then enabling the Driver to become very usable for long periods of time, longer that the design from the Manufacturer. My take and my friends take, is that these might be one of the best Upper Frequency Drivers ever produced for the end sonic they are able to deliver. The Driver produces sound by stretching the Gold Coated Diaphragm, which is very much a design to be coupled with a Film that produces an energy to be converted to sound. The Subwoofer choice is a Ripole Design, just to see how a figure of eight radiation will blend with the 57's figure of eight radiation pattern. My friend who refurb's the ESL 57's has chosen their own was of assembling an array when they take their 57's out to be publicly demonstrated, the Speakers are reorientated to have the Panels Treble and Bass Panels longest sides placed on the Horizontal. The Speakers are usually Spread across an are of approx' 16 feet. My Amp's had Tranx's specifically wound with the 845 Valve to be used to Drive the Quad ESL 57. When out at shows doing Public Demo's of my Audio System, the most common asked Question is about the Subwoofer I have selected to be used with the Subwoofer. Quite strange facial expressions are seen when informing there is not a Subwoofer. On one occasion, a Show was local to one of the UK's most renowned overhaulers of the ESL 57. A show attendee who new the Company owner personally contacted the owner, encouraging them to attend and listen to my Quads. I was told this during the latter part of the show on Day 2. The Company owner did attend, but did not introduce themselves, so I didn't get the chance to inquire about their own impression of the set up. Quads with the correct approach can present Bass Just Fine, I learnt that in the room with TDP and the Valve Direct Driven Design. For my purposes, my own design for them produces and end sound and Bass very similar to what TDP had achieved, my recollections used many many years ago reassured myself of this. In the modern day, when I introduce my owned Three Way Floor Standing Cabinet Speakers into the System, the only Bass Issue is the Cabinet Bass and Panel Bass are noticeable for their differences, but not the extension differences that might be different for each Speaker Type. Recently I have heard a Cabinet Speaker in a friends system, that I believe would easily trounce the ESL 57, I could even buy into the Design as it is a Troels Gravesen design for a Speaker. Interesting one this one, as I recently learnt that Troels has seemingly used Quad ESL's and EAR Amp's designed by TDP to learn about how a Speaker can be Voiced.
|
@lewm stated "Hearing is believing ". I stopped taking description of Audio Equipment's end sound as a guidance many many years past. I have been much more interested in being able to encounter sound and form my assessments, as a result of the impression that had been made. Isolated / Insular Listening experiences leaves an individual quite limited in their experiences of sound being produced from recorded music replays. My friend who tinkers with the 57's will be informed of the design for Quad 57 mentioned by @lewm, maybe I can hear one, especially as I donored 2 x 57's to support their own array method used. |
My Limited Experiences of having been able to hear Quad ESL Speakers in use with a Subwoofer, is that the carefully matched ESL>Subwoofer is is a set up that had a addition of Bass that is detectable, but certainly not an improvement, the Bass being noticeable does not augment the ESL as a Speaker it merely produces a unique type of Bass presentation in conjunction with another Speakers unique Bass presentation. Remove the Bass from the Subwoofer as a influence on the ESL Bass and what is left is a Speaker functioning with a Bass that is satisfying and not effected by a Bass that is seemingly an anomaly. It is because of this sensing that the Subwoofer is an anomaly, that has drawn my attention to a Ripole Bass and the Figure of Eight Radiation the Ripole produces. The design seems to lend itself to be much less detectable as a Separate Source for a Bass Driver coupled with the Bass from the ESL. |
@mijostyn Assumption ? Please Clarify I usually am doing my best to share only my experiences had and an very subjective assessment will be attached, if I feel it is worth the mention. As always, I don't expect anybody within the Current Thread to endorse my input, it is quite obvious the common posters are not able to cojoin. My Input is directed to the onlookers of the thread or future thread visitors, who might get some value from the content added. I was once a Visitor, then a Regular Onlooker and developed into a valuable contributor. |
The most important point for me as a result of the recent Posts, is that a Speaker that is not fat off 70 Years being entered into the Market Place has serious support for it's Capabilities. I often find 57's for sale in the UK, where a Pair can range between £300 - £1000 Most will be offered to be listened to under the guise they are quiet when charged. The Last Pair I bought was not the prettiest, but were quiet and cost £120. There were the Donor Models referred to. In my own home the Family call them the Wash Boards, fortunately I have my own Laundry Room
|
It looks like my Prompts over the past year+ to a friend, encouraging them to revisit experiencing their owned Audax HD-3P Gold Dome Piezo Tweeter, has paid off, as when I went to the friends today to Drop off my Technics SP10 MK II Kaneta Design TT as a Long Term Loan. I was informed in advance there was a little surprise experience for myself to encounter. It wasn't the Multi Tonearm Mountable P'holz Plinth for the SP10 MK II, which I am eagerly awaiting to experience, which will have enabled the experience using all the TA's that have been lined up to compare to each other, to be pencilled in as a date to occur. What was in use as the surprise, is the individuals Speaker Design using the Audax HD-3P Gold Dome Piezo Tweeter. After about an Hour of Listening to a selection of known to me tracks and a few new encounter tracks, I can say the HD-P3 is as impressive in this system as it has proven to be in my own. For a reason I care not to try and understand, I'm just very happy to be present. The Speaker using this Tweeter has the ability to immerse a listener into the music, the sound being produced has the capability to captivate ones full attention for the music being produced. I remain content with my assessment this Tweeter might be one the Best Produced Tweeters and it is a shame the design issue it developed was not sorted and it was kept in production. The owner of the Speakers listened to today has made it known modern Parts used on the electronics will enable a much more expansive Soundstage, and the Xover is to be modified to a up to date design, using PC Triple C Wire within the Cabinet. It is hard to believe more is suspected to be able to be extracted in relation to the sound already being so impressive. I have learnt today the intent of the friend as a result of their impression oof the HD-3P, is to produce a OB with a Driver Array that will fully compliment the HD-3P, it has also been voiced that as there is a collection of the HD-3P Tweeters, a Dipole Array could be used for these. The friend has also made it known that they are now seeing the time to take on the Kaneta Design SP10 MK II, with a much more dedicated commitment. Hopefully something might happen with the TA Comparisons across the Xmas Hol's, where a Kaneta Design TT is the TT design selected for the comparisons? |
@lewm There was a Branded Speaker back in the day using the HD-3P Tweeter. The Cabinet Volume and Matching Drivers even though Audax as well did not get the best from the set up. A Build Your Own design become available as a Kit using a similar array of Audax Drivers The more savvy builders of Speakers who adopted this design, were quick to produce much improved Xovers not constrained by a Commercial entities budget. The next substantial changes for the Standard Kiit and more importantly the Commercial Design was the designs selected for the Casing/cabinets and External Xovers. Housing Cabinets for the Build Your Own designs, were known to be produced from Board Material of a Thickness between 11/2 inch to 2 Inch. with all internal edges Chamferred. Substantial Bracing with Chamferred Edges was adopted and independent chambers produced for all drivers. These types of designs for a Cabinet were not known of in Commercial Speakers at a certain pricing, I suggest Speaker Cabinets were not produced to this Substance full stop. My Speakers are With ext Xovers and a Cabinet using Board Material as sides up to a Thickness of 2 Inches, they are 5 Sided Cabinets with Chamferring Internally - Substantial Bracing and Chambers for the Drivers. My Friends are Four Sided Cabinet produced from 11/2 Inch Board with ext’ Xovers in their own substantial housing. The correction method adopted for the HD-3P Tweeter is a long term correction. It is now proven to have remained usable for a much longer extended period than the Audax Design. As a Speaker it is another Bespoke Design, not typically encountered and not usually heard in use, which makes it one Speaker that is needed to be experienced to form an assessment. I have recently been introduced to Troel Gravesend Design Speakers where Drivers and Xovers are approx’ £4K. The Cabinets and Speaker assembly were produced by Troel’s and exported to a UK Customer. It is strongly suggested this design from Troel’s will be in the realm of £20K - £30K Commercial Speakers if a Speaker was to be searched out as a fair comparison. . My gut feels, my friends or my own Speakers with carefully selected Upto date Electronics used on the Xover and PC Triple C Wire used as Internal / External Speaker Wire, will be a very very interesting Comparison, especially in the Upper Frequencies, where Troel’s is happy to allocate a £1000+ for Tweeters. My own speakers were bought from an estate sale where the Widow told me her Husband’s System which was sold to a dealer was approx £100 K in total purchase value. The Speakers weren’t Branded and not taken by the Dealer. When picking up the Speakers, I gave the Seller very valuable advice on learning the Value of the Substantial Vinyl Album collection, where much of the collection was Classical. She was now with new info to use and was to delegate the Grandchildren to getting an initial value using the Albums EAN No.. Classical Albums can acquire quite a sum as a purchase price, I hope some Gems were extracted for selling on.
|
@mijostyn The HD - 3P is not a Super Tweeter in the usual description. To me from my experiences had of a large range of Cabinet Speakers that can be models that extend toward the £20K+ purchase area and a handful of £40Kish Speakers. The HD-3P used in the way I am quite familiar with is a Tweeter that produces Mid - Upper Frequency that is extremely attractive and wanted to be readily available to experience. That is more than enough for my needs. |
I made reference to the HD-3P Tweeter when being in discussion about the ESL 57, and my intention to attempt to tidy up one of it's obvious shortcomings with the Tweeter. Under the guise of "Hearing is Believing", I made more known about my experiences with Speakers using this Tweeter. Referencing the Driver was not a prompt to encourage the use of it, even though that is a consideration I do recommend. To see that the Tweeters Data is now sought out and added as a further information was not expected to be seen within this Thread. Maybe in a Thread dedicated to the Tweeter as can be discovered on other forums. To the on-looker who has an interest in Self Produced Speakers, the added info might be enough to convince the Tweeter is worth a further investigation and worthy of such contemplation.
|
