ct0517
You could neither handle the air nor the water in Mexico City! But you might see the sun through the red haze in the air.
Regards, |
ct0517,
Yes my 30+ years of employment was in the field you have mentioned, but I fail to remember where you dug this information up from? I guess I will just have to blame that lack of recall on 'old age'! (grin)
One thing I also failed to mention. Mexico City also had one of the 'dirtiest' electrical grids on the planet (population 21 million), with constant failures/breakdowns. Not my idea of what would contribute to a happy listening sessions! I can only assume that Raul must use some kind of 'power regulation' in his system.
If not. ?????
Regards, |
Flieb,
A few months back, I had my Lustre 801 arm re-wired by Discovery Cable.
Excellent results BTW, but that is besides my point. He asked if I wanted to eliminate the arm plug-in for cables by hard wiring the RCA's into this arm. Because I had a custom made 20 inch phono cable available for this arm, I said no. I have often thought since then, that perhaps I was to quick in making that decision. Lewm seems to concur with my very thoughts at the time!
Regards, |
Flieb,
To answer your question as to how the arm re-wired by Discovery Cable is working out. I honestly could not be happier. It was discovered (no pun intended), that the Lustre had been re-wired by a home DIY'er with poor soldering skills. Big improvement in soundstage depth and 'air'. Removed the Silver wire and went with his ofc wire. Biggest surprise of all was that it was done in a 1 week turnaround. Also made a few small changes that I requested and did it for no charge. Highly recommenced!
Regards, |
Flieb,
I have settled on the Lustre 801 for my JVC TT-81 over the JVC 7045. This is not because one is better than the other. But because the JVC 7545 has no advantage over my other arm. the Graham 2.2. The Lustre 801 does. The Graham by the way is mounted on my VPI Aries. The Lustre is able to correctly handle higher compliance cartridges. It is considered a heavier arm than either the JVC 7045 or the Graham 2.2. The Graham and the JVC are considered light/medium to medium arms. In actual use, I prefer the ease of set-up and adjustment of the JVC over the Lustre.
The Lustre's original internal wiring is silver. Same as the Graham's. There were discussions between Joseph De Phillip of Discovery Cable and Bob Graham as to whether Bob should use ofc copper wire or silver when he was designing the original 1.5t which became the 2.0 and then the 2.2.. Bob preferred silver. Joseph preferred ofc. Now that I have heard both types of wire in the Lustre, I also prefer the ofc copper over the silver version. There is more 'air' around the indivual instruments and the sound stage seems to have more depth. But this choice only is in regards to the Lustre. I wish I was able to hear my Graham wired with ofc. None was ever offered to the Public wired in this way. Why does the thought 'tone control' come to mind! (grin)
You ask me to state my favorite of the three arms. I wish I could or wish there were enough differences to be able to actually prefer the performance of one over the other. I do have my favorite but my preferences of one over the other have more to do with ease of use or amount of easy range of adjustment.
The Graham easily is the #1 of my three in this regard. But performance wise, I could live life 'happily ever after' with any of the three! Flieb, I do not mean that to be some kind of 'cop out answer'. It is truly how I feel.
Regards, |
Flieb,
To use the Lustre, the operator is not aware of it being regarded as a heavy arm. It does not look like a heavy arm but the arm tube 'is' Stainless Steel where as the Grahams are Aluminum or Ceramic and the JVC's are also of Aluminum mix. The Lustre also has some priority designed wire damping done inside of the arm tube and a unique bearing pivot design also. There are many things in regards to the Lustre that was not the norm for a tone arm so too state that "
the magnetic/dynamic application of tracking force - dynamic VTF w/o mechanical liability" as being 'the' cause and effect would be just conjecture on my part. As you are aware, the arms performance is the combination of many different aspects of its design.
I do not in any way want to 'short change' the JVC 7045. But my high compliance cartridges seem to have better bass control when they were mounted on the Lustre. I only own a few of those but one of them is a favorite. It is the Ikeda 9C III (no cantilever). I also have a couple of the high compliant FR-7's, one being the 'fz' (another favorite). The difference between the arms is suttle but once you know that they sound better on a certain arm, it is hard to enjoy them when you do not have that arm installed.
I have a spare (rebuilt) TT-81 that I did my best to come up with a place that I could place a 3rd turntable so that I could leave the JVC 7045 in place, but short of knocking down and re-configuring a wall, I am at a lost as how to get it in a position to actually use. I'm sure you are aware of space constraints with all those turntables/arms that you own! (grin)
Regards, |
Hi Dover,
To call the FR’s or my Ikeda a ’high compliance’ cartridge will depend upon where you draw the line between what you consider ’high’ and what you consider ’low’. If you throw in the mix ’medium compliance’ everything changes again. My problem with cartridges manufactured in Japan in this regard is the not knowing at what Hz the published spec’s. were done at. Many of the Japanese publishes their dynamic compliance specifications relative to 100Hz and not at 10 Hz which is commonly used in the Western World. This would produce a different outcome in regards to the actual number presented.
VE states the Dynamic Compliance at 7x10-6cu/Dyne. Is that at 100Hz?
10Hz? I have also run 'high compliance cartridges with my unipivot Graham with no issues. It is considered a medium mass arm. The JVC 7045 is considered a light mass arm. The Lustre 801 is considered a heavy mass arm.
My FR’s and the Ikeda preforms better on the heavier Lustre than on the light JVC. I deducted from all this, that the products I own that have been produced by Ikeda-san are of the ’higher compliance types’.
I am not a ’numbers’ kind of guy. I use my ears.
They preformed better on the higher mass arm than they did on the light mass arm so I have mounted the higher mass arm on my TT-81.
I do not consider it a better arm than the JVC 7045. Just better suited for certain cartridges.
I also have very low compliance cartridges. A Sonus Dimension 5 being one of them. It also sound great on the heavy mass Lustre so go figure?
Like I said, I prefer to use my ears that stated numbers!
Regards, |
Flieb,
I would not consider a 30cu as 'pretty high'. That is 'extremely high'! (grin)
Like I said, all depends on where you want to draw the line between what you consider 'high' and what you consider 'low'. To me, under 10 is low. Yes, Dover. If you only look at the numbers, then the FR's would be considered low. But not if they (the Japanese), were using @100 Hz for measurement. It would make those FR's closer to 12cu if they used the 10Hz method.
I am still at a loss as to why the Sonus works so well on the Lustre. I was actually worried about mounting it on the high mass Lustre. It's not like I could easily go out and find a replacement stylus for it if I happened to destroy the suspension by using it on this 'high mass' arm.
I did make an armboard just for the Lustre so I can quite easily swap the Lustre for the JVC 7045. I left the original armboard from the TT-81 attached to the JVC 7045 and I will leave the new armboard attached to the Lustre. Even left the phono cables attached to each (2ft. Signal Cable Silver Resolution). So remove 4 arm board screws, and do the quick swap. Piece of cake! (grin)
This way I can continue to use the JVC 7045 for cartridges like the Sonus.
That is if I can ever pull myself away from those FR's. (grin)
Regards, |
Flieb,
The Lustre has 4 high precision radial bearings which are super grind-finished. There are 2 vertical and 2 horizontal. What makes then really unique is that they are spaced farther apart than usual for a tone arm for better angle accuracy.
Yes, advertiser hype but interesting concept none the less The real proof is in the pudding! In my opinion, the arm does deliver and lives up to its hype!
V/E has the original manual listed for downloading and also an advertising blub/report that goes into more detail. Worth reading if interested.
Regards,
Regards, |
Lewm,
My dear friend and comrade Nandric and I have had running arguments in regards to my love for the JVC 7045. He also has one that he hasn't found time to mount. He's in love with his FR-64. It was actually him that convinced me that perhaps I should at least try a heavier arm with my FR's.
I must admit, I was also surprised at just how good the JVC is. In many regards, it is quite similar to the Lustre. Both have VTF adjustment on the fly. Both, removal head shells. Both have exceptional bearings. The only short coming that they both have is lack of azimuth adjustment. I solved that problem by the exclusive use of the Sumiko/Jelco head shells. LP/tunes also carries the same head shell but calls it the Supreme.
In regards to the use of magnetics for the VTF on the Lustre. I still prefer the old fashion method. Balance the arm, then move the counterweights for VTF using a digital scale for verification. I've been doing it that way for damn near 50 years so I am too old to be changing! (grin) I like the magnetic concept but 'blind trust comes into play with that design and considering the arms age, well, I just don't trust 'trust'! (grin)
As far as effective mass? I wish I knew. I did the typical search but found nothing definitive. Only speculation. Considering how it performed in regards to my 'high compliance/low compliance cartridges, I tend to believe it is on the lighter side. The arm assembly has stainless steel parts, but the arm tube is of an aluminum mix. Mix of 'what' would be an interesting discovery. This would explain the lack of corrosion that you and I expected to see. I also though it was stainless but discovered this aluminum mix statement somewhere in regards to its arm tube.
My TT-81 came without arm. I had a spare Graham 2.2 and had thought about mounting it on the TT-81 but what I really wanted was a arm with a removable head shell. The Graham has removal arm wands. Those wands were $800 a piece new, $400 used when you could find someone willing to sell one. Thanks to the M/M thread, I have more cartridges than I care to admit and to place each of them in their own arm wand would of forced me to sell my house and give the profits to Bob Graham. (grin)
I did a search to determine what others were using with that table and to see what was recommended by JVC. That 7045 was/is JVC's top arm and considering it was 'the' arm during the legendary production run of both the TT-81 and the TT-101, I went looking for one. Just so happens that 'Foxtan' had a good one available so I bought it. I now consider that an even better decision than the actual purchase of the TT-81.
Lewm, you are wondering how much do I really like the JVC 7045. Let me put it to you this way. And I am being quite honest when I state this. I am considering selling my Graham 2.2 and mounting the JVC 7045 in its place on the VPI Aries table. Those two tables (the VPI Aries and the JVC TT-81) would have excellent arms on each of them with removable head shells. This would allow the mounting of low compliant cartridges to high complaint cartridges when ever I wanted. No arm changing required. No 'wondering' if a higher mass or lower mass arm would be a better match. Performance wise, I would loose nothing. All three of the mentioned arms are 5 star arms in my opinion. But I gain in versatility.
The biggest problem in all of this is the selling of the Graham. to do this is to me like selling my beloved dog to a stranger! It is going to be a tough thing to do. I'm the original owner and have had that arm for many years. The selling of the dog I couldn't do. But selling the Graham? I definitely leaning that way!
Regards, |
Lewm,
The thought of receiving a TT-101 with plinth and JVC 7045 for the price the arm alone is either a gift from 'heaven' ( if all is working), or a gift from 'hell' ( if the TT is not). (grin)
Have you been following Halcro thread in regards to the TT-101?
BTW: Don't underestimate the value of that plinth either! They are getting hard to find. The thought 'you scored' with that purchase is a bit of an understatement!
Regards, |
Lewm,
It has been a while since I have visited Halcros thread. You last post sort of flipped on the light bulb sort of to speak! I had honestly forgot that it was you that had that troublesome table that has been the main topic of discussion for the last several months. There’s no price you can put on that nightmare, but if all it cost you in a finanicial sense was $1000 then you still got a good deal.
Ever heard the term ’brain fart’! I think I just experienced one in regards to your input on the ’living dangerously thread’! (grin) Please forgive my lapse of memory! It's hell getting old!
Regards, |
