I believe that a cartridge and a speaker, by far, contribute the most to SQ.
The two transducers in a system.
I bit the bulllet and bought a Lyra Atlas SL for $13K for my Woodsong Garrard 301 with Triplanar SE arm. I use a full function Atma-Sphere MP-1 preamp. My $60K front end. It is certainly, by far, the best I have owned. I read so many comments exclaiming that Lyra as among the best. I had to wait 6 months to get it. But the improvement over my excellent $3K Mayijima Shilabi was spectacular-putting it mildly.
I recently heard a demo of much more pricy system using a $25K cartridge. Seemed to be the most expensive cartridge made. Don’t recall the name.
For sure, the amount of detail was something I never heard. To hear a timpani sound like the real thing was incredible. And so much more!
This got me thinking of what could be possible with a different kind of cartridge than a moving coil. That is, a moving iron.
I have heard so much about the late Decca London Reference. A MI and a very different take from a MC. Could it be better? The World’s Best? No longer made.
However Grado has been making MI cartridges for decades. Even though they hold the patent for the MC. Recently, Grado came out with their assault on “The World’s Best”. At least their best effort. At $12K the Epoch 3. I bought one and have been using it now for about two weeks replacing my Lyra. There is no question that the Atlas SL is a fabulous cartridge. But the Epoch is even better. Overall, it’s SQ is the closest to real I have heard. To begin, putting the stylus down on the run in grove there is dead silence. As well as the groves between cuts. This silence is indicative of the purity of the music content. Everything I have read about it is true. IME, the comment of one reviewer, “The World’s Best”, may be true.
In order to fool the human ear you only need a 0.3 dB difference in volume.
do you have a reference on this? I know the origin of the decibel scale is based on 1dB being the smallest difference in level detectable by the average person. In system I find a overall level change of 1dB to be quite subtle and that is the topic at hand. When dealing with specific frequency ranges (crossovers) smaller changes are audible if you know what to listen for and when it comes to soundstage a 1dB change in one channel (ie balance) also is easy to hear. It has also been argued that the entire concept of level matching and ABX testing is pointless since due to comb filtering, small changes in listening position can dominate the listening experience. (i can't dig up my reference article on this one so a pointer will save a lot of google work)
When someone gets banned twice and still feels it is the forum's fault I believe I might be justified in thinking that is a red flag.
With respect to my comment that feeling the need to turn the volume up is an indication that there is something wrong in the reproduction chain, I confess I heard that repeated many times by the sages at the Canadian UHF Magazine, which is now pretty much defunct. In its day (1982 - originally as Hi-Fi Sound magazine - up to cessation of the print version after issue #97). It was an unusual magazine in that it would not review a product that was not up to snuff, and was honest about those it did. They did not lead me astray.
I use the word symmetrical deliberately rather than the word balanced.
Ahhh... point taken. If the SUT were truly symmetrical as you state then one could reverse the polarity of the primary and net the exact same frequency response at the secondary. Some SUT's behave better than others in this manner but one polarity will always measure 'different' than the other. As for the cartridge we already have the interesting wrinkle that by necessity the L & R coils are out of polarity with each other so this is a much grayer area. In both cases I would expect these to be far easier to observe phenomena than the behavior of a symmetrical vs. asymmetrical cable. It is important to note that jut because phenomena are measurable in the real or theoretical world doesn't equate to them being meaningful.
These occurrences when arranged are purely Social Activities and used to extend a selection of individuals encounters and experiences, it is all done under the guise of Good Company, Good Food and Good Music, note Music is the least of the importance on a day like this, friends catching up is the fundamental goal.
Attendees bring along their own Vinyl LP's as part of having a range of familiar materials being presented during an assessment of items put forward to be experienced where a common interest is shared.
Individuals I know, enjoy the occasional opportunity to measure a choice made for an item in comparison to an alternative item.
Individuals are also keen to hear their donated LP for the occasion at a SPL the are quite familiar with, when not experiencing it at such a level, there can be a settlement period to adapt.
The db metre in use is not a scientific tool, it is basically a tool, to show to all attendees, the presentations are near parity in the SPL during a demonstration.
As said, ' Only when all is done and dusted in the comparisons, will the listeners ask to hear a replay of choice at a level they are accustomed to '.
There will not be any items exchanged for assessment at this stage, but a curiosity might need to be nurtured if an item that is not familiar has impressed and is wanted to be experienced in use that is in keeping with one's usual practices.
If we as a group, were all to agree to add a period to see who could supply the best comedy, I will be the first to suggest that the methodology in use is not fair, and we hook up an oscilloscope, obviously, this will need to be immediately followed by passing the Tissues to assist with the Mopping Up the Eyes Streaming Tears, as a result of the fits of laughter.
If SQ is perceived as poor, increasing SPL makes mediocre SQ less tolerable, in my experience.
Bang on.
And it could be distortions from the system or components, or room itself that is the issue.
In some cases the listeners ears.
If you ask an audiologist you would be surprised at how non linear most folks hearing is, and of course often times people are unaware of hearing damage that may be sensitive to certain frequencies.
This is an instance where the necessary aspects of the AES48 can exist at the source and the load but in order to operate 'properly' the interface cabling must also be done to the standard (twisted pair with a shield) and I have only experienced a few cases where using this interface worked the same or better than the 'conventional' method.
I use the word symmetrical deliberately rather than the word balanced. Mikes phono cables are single ended. I believe through both listening experience and electrical theory that the cable loom between the MC and SUT should be symmetrical in construct.
This is my issue - quote from WBF on the LFD phono cables
The hot and the cold conductors are totally different from each other which is used to enhance the sound quality. This cable can be exclusively voiced to suit various systems RRP £16995.
Why an asymmetrical construct for a symmetrical source and destination. Its like having a highway with 4 lanes going north and a B road going south. What is the science here ? How is there a benefit from loading +ve and -ve legs on the MC differently.
Voiced ? really, 16000 uk pounds for "voiced".
Do we want Freddy Mercury on helium, do we want Beyonce's lower treble whine that gets removed on the mixing desk to be accentuated, who decides what voice to present when manipulating these wires ?
All cables degrade the signal, no exceptions. Best cable is no cable.
Next best is the one that does the least damage to the signal.
Unfortunately in audio the least damaging would be one designed and built specifically for the source and destination components actually used, and backed up by measurement . In fact MIT used to offer this service many years ago - if you provided them the components they could measure them and build the optimum cable loom.
I know I could improve the $16k LFD cables audibly just by removing the plastic shroud for starters, getting rid of the heavy metal connectors and baubles and other jewellery hanging off of these wires.
Anyone out there can prove this easily - if they have speaker cables with plastic/polyproylene shroud - cut the plastic shroud off and listen. Those gaudy multicoloured plastic shrouds do a lot of damage to the signal, as do oversized heavy metal connectors. This is just for starters. Even heat shrink can degrade the signal.
My reference phono cable is around $20k US. It is not the price I have issues with, its the asymmetrical construct of the cable in this application. along with no explanation of the science other than - its a mixed bag of lollies, carefully selected after 30 years of eating lollies. Oh and if you have a favourite lolly I can mix a new bag of lollies with your favourites included.
Compare this LFD scenario to a friend who designed and built his own speakers amps etc.
One day I found he had some new speaker cables that he had constructed - the positive and negative legs were asymmetrical. I asked him what was the science.
He gave me an answer that included 2 points -
The +ve and -ve speaker cables were designed as part of the crossover and built/measured so that each of the speaker drivers saw the precise loads and crossover slopes he intended.
Secondly he explained that relative to the incoming power from the mains the +ve speaker wire was on one side of the mains transformer and the -ve speaker wire was on the other side directly connected to the mains. Ask @atmasphereabout finding the centre point of a mains transformer.
That is what I call science, not I tried some wire and found one that sounds good.
Btw, I posted in this thread these on digital against LP:
""
The deep main reason is that: we are accustomed to those LP sound along its developed distortions.
When appeared the CD as even today we " like it " but do not " like it ", we always have an argument against digital even arguments that are totally false.
We refused and refuse to really think deep down there and ask our self: what are we missing with digital medium? because this is the issue. Here M Lavigne posted that LP is " complete " and obviously and against digital this medium is incomplete.
My take is that all of us are missing through digital medium ALL THE ADDED DISTORTIONS DEVELOPED THROUGH THE RECORDING AND PLAYBACK PROCCESS .
Our brain knows something is " different " down there: way lower distortions with digital.
Dear @intactaudio : " When a system excels I find that the levels can get to the point where you don’t realize how loud it is until you try to have a conversation over the music. Since this is about cartridges, Lets assume we have two level matched cartridges with one showing slightly more tracing distortion than the other. Many people will find the one with more distortion sounds louder and more detailed while the lower distortion one sounds dark and closed in. "
I can’t be more in agreement that with your post where other gentlemans were in agreement by 2018 in these posts:
"" Unfortunately accentuated dynamics and resolution all too often mean a really nasty peak at the HF. ""
""" but be careful not to delude yourself.
Audiophiles .... tend to get seduced by what are essentially deviations from what the real listening experience provides- such as excessive detail, ability to resolve supposed room artifacts etc. etc.
These effects, in my substantial experience of live performances, just do not exist in a live listening environment, """
Just when I started to post in Agon and from there today I posted my first hand experiences through different times in different threads and with different audio item devices but all of those experiences are directly related to what intact audio shared:
the very first time that I remember to was around 30 years ago when I made a change of cables in my tonearm output where the IC was made of cooper and I changed by VDH silver cable. I did it with out any tiny SPL change. My first impressions were " terrible " and a heavy disappointment because with the silver cable suddenly the sound turn out DULL/no life. I make 3-4 times the cable change in the same listening session and at the end I left connected the VDH silver cable.
Next day and with out changing the SPL I listening with that silver cable by 4-5 hours in a row till I understand ( that was my first time I really was aware what in hell were happening down there. ) that what I was listening in reality was not a DULL sound but a way better quality sound level with " huge " lower distortions. That was the first time that I been aware too the benefit of the cable change for achieve too a lower system NOISE FLOOR.
Other experiences in exactly the same way ( with out changing SPL. ) and you can read it in my capacitor thread ( tech talk forum. ) where I posted the thread looking for help by other technical very good audiophiles knowing that my knowledge level about were lower than I imagine and I was a " follower " when talk about the best capacitors: things were that after some time in the thread I found out that the forbidden Wima/Vishay caps are the best caps ever. Obviously that all those gentlemans told me everything you could thing against me but one of those gentlemans took my challenge and he change ( somewhere in his system. ) his Jantzen expensive caps ( fancy caps that I owned too. As a fact I owned almost all fancy caps: Duelund, Jupiter, Mundorf, cooper tefon V-caps, and the like. I tested the Wima/VIshay either in electronics in a way critical place and at my speakers crossovers. ) for a 8.00 dollars Wima caps and after 2 weeks he posted that he did not likes the sound because was a DULL sound with out LIFE. He was missing, with out been aware, the Jantzen developed high distortions. Other gentlemans that already experienced the Wima supported that DULL sound and obviously all of them just do not like the natura/neutral color of live MUSIC but like high colored sound just like many of you including Mike Lavigne.
Is it my system a DULL syatem? no but the other way around and with very very low system noise floor.
Another experience was and is when I changed the SPL attenuators in my Essential SS Phonolinepreamp where those Swiss made attenuators mechanism were builded with true hole resistors where the signal pass through only one of those resistors at each SPL positions. Well, I changed both stereo pots ( my unit is dual mono fully balanced. ) by same mechanism but with SMD resistors and guess what?:
the difference was night and day and was nigth and day inside in a very high resolution system. Here the system noise floor that was truly low gone and goes even lower, just amazing when distortions goes out of each single link in any room/system chain.
Yes, now I can listen my system with higher SPL with out feeling that my ears are damage in any way, of course that I don’t listen to very high SPL.
All those experiences were posted more than once in the forum. So the gentlemans that insist in that I have to listen the Dava I will not because I already know that is full of developed distortions.
My speakers are 95db sensitivity level and attenuators fully opened I can put my ear at 2cm. from the tweeters and I can't listen nothing , no single sound/noise.
All these kind of experiences are the ones that permit me to said @mikelavigne that his Dart meter peacks with the cartridge that were 95db against only 40db with the digital medium were only heavy distortions that he likes a lot against digital in the Dizzy 4 LP.
I agree with Intact as regards the perceived benefit of increasing SPL when the SQ is very high. If SQ is perceived as poor, increasing SPL makes mediocre SQ less tolerable, in my experience.
@dogberry, you are absolutely right that in order to make comparisons in audio, volume levels need to be matched perfectly. The louder signal between sources of almost equal quality is always going to sound better even if you can't tell that it is louder. Where you are off a bit is in magnitude. In order to fool the human ear you only need a 0.3 dB difference in volume. That is far below the resolution of any common measurement device. If comparing electronic gear this can be done with a test signal and an accurate meter or oscilloscope. In comparing program sources like different pressings of an album it gets much tougher. Using a sound pressure meter is really no better than using your ears which can get you within a dB if you are good at it but never under 0.3 db unless you are very lucky. This is one main reason why you see so many varied opinions on comparisons. Overlay the biases we all develop and you have a real mess. We can use our ears to evaluate equipment to a degree if the differences are severe enough. If not then you have to be very careful.
@pindac. As I stated above a dB meter is not near accurate enough to make these comparisons fair. I have one which I use to make sure I am not damaging my ears when I crank it. With cartridge comparisons you can use a test record and a meter or oscilloscope on the output of the phono stage. Comparing program sources is a much more difficult proposition. An oscilloscope with a peak hold function could do it but the set up would be very cumbersome and to prove what? I prefer just listening to the version I like which is precisely what the vast majority of us deplorables do:-)
I expect we all know that volume influences how we perceive sound, and are aware of the warning that a constant desire to turn the volume up indicates there is something inadequate in the sound chain.
That one is new to me and in fact I have found just the opposite to be true. When a system excels I find that the levels can get to the point where you don't realize how loud it is until you try to have a conversation over the music. Since this is about cartridges, Lets assume we have two level matched cartridges with one showing slightly more tracing distortion than the other. Many people will find the one with more distortion sounds louder and more detailed while the lower distortion one sounds dark and closed in. However if you bump the level of the 'murky' cartridge a dB or two then suddenly it excels and reveals the flaws of its higher distortion brethren.
When at my friend's home who has produced my Tonearm, this a system where many of the comparison / demonstrations are carried out between various Cart's brought along to be used. All comparison / demonstrations are undertaken with a db metre monitoring the listening levels to keep an accuracy and control measure for the evaluation.
Only when all is done and dusted in the comparisons, will the listeners ask to hear a replay of choice at a level they are accustomed to.
For myself at times, I have found this measure a bit like using a Headphone as a Speaker, it takes a little time to become accustomed to a level not usually selected, especially when used on an owned and very familiar Cart', but once a few tracks are played, the benefits of controlling the levels between the candidates are soon noticed.
Talking of the proof being in the listening, I just realised I have been making an elementary mistake, and I bet most of you do it too.
This is about getting the volume right when comparing cartridges. I expect we all know that volume influences how we perceive sound, and are aware of the warning that a constant desire to turn the volume up indicates there is something inadequate in the sound chain.
I have been continuing to compare cartridges, and have begun to revisit some that I initially discarded as lacking. After struggling for an hour with some 309 headshells (I would like to have a word with the designer about the stupidity of arranging a nut and bolt that do not line up until they are actually fully engaged...) I replaced the Ortofon Kontrapunkt C with the Grado Statement 3. Not a permanent change, just for fun and comparison. I like the Ortofon, but had been disappointed with the Grado. But since my last try I have changed my phono amp, and it is more obvious now when cartridge outputs vary (the new one can cope with five inputs and remembers their settings). I noticed straight away that once I had set the phono to MM for this MI cartridge, I was having to crank up the pre-amp volume control compared to where it had lived for ages when dealing with the London Reference (output 5mV into an MM input) and the Ortofon (0.47mV into an MC input). The Grado puts out 1mV, so it makes perfect sense it would require a twist of the volume knob compared to the London Decca.
I don't remember there being such an obvious difference when using the Quad 24p last time, and that was probably me rather than the phono stage. To be fair to myself, I have also been coping with now-you-see-them-now-don't Quad 2905s that seem to require frequent repairs (I may have a Heath Robinson fix applied).
So now I have set the volume so that an app that measures SPL on my phone reads between 50-60dB where I sit (it doesn't matter if it isn't very accurate in absolute terms as long as it is consistent I can compare). Now I have to listen to a bunch of albums and compare to the Decca on the other table, with its output set to something similar. Doesn't seem fair to compare without getting this right. Probably should pick a single track to set SPL level whenever I change cartridge so I can be consistent. I am moving forward with a pair of tonearm pods so I can have four tonearms and cartridges on the go at once, and it rather makes sense to have a level playing field for them.
Dear @mikelavigne : Some way or the other @dover is telling you almost the same as me and you still hide behind that " I like it " in exactly the same way the manufacturer/distributor Mick did it. Again, the main issue is not what you or any one else " like it " but what is wrong or rigth ! ! ! !
I already told that Mick says " the proof is in the listening " as an answer to a direct questions to him looking for specs/science but things are as I posted that they not know nothing about and as you they trust in a very well regarded but heavy limited " tool " named EARS that foolished not only you with the Dava terrible FR spec but to all wbf gentlemans excatly as with the LFD.
But you just don’t get or do not understand the main issue because you just posted @mijostyn " you need to hear it with the DaVa sometime.......freaking awesome ", go figure ? ?
Btw, Mick posted there that a change of cables inside the electronics makes a wide change for the better using LFD cables with out think that the best cable inside electronics is NO cable at all. These LFD people are not crazy and they know exactly how to take money from the in good faith audio customers and they do it with huge success because always are gentlemans like the ones in wbf.
Dover posted exactly what I posted at least 3 times to you that’s not the issue under discussion:
" I do not doubt what you have heard in your system " and he continued confirmed what other posted here:
" There is no science discussed. "
and he is rigth when he said that almost all of you in that wbf use the IC cables as TONE CONTROLS. It’s less expensive and way better to have a good designed equalizer and exist several to buy.
Please, I posted you that/your beloved cartridge 6db FR deviation function as an equalizer because any single discrete frequency deviation affects almost two octave including harmonics and these are facts.
Not the manufacturers of those audio items and certainly no one of their owners have any single fact/spec that can explain that what all of you is rigth, no one has any single evidence about and again the ! ears " of all of you just foolished all.
You have very good relationship with Mick and bonzo75, invite both to have a friendly dialogue here . Maybe there is something we are loosing down there.
Please think on these: you are really dedicated and with high commitment with all your room/system choices and very special with analog where your DD and ID TTs are top quality performers, both mounted in vibrations-free plattforms, controled electrical sources, with two top tonearms and along those and several other characteristics you own the Dartzeel phonolinepreamp and I wonder for what that huge commitment for your self with the signal cartridge if just at the output of the tonearm that cartridge signal be destroyed/demolished and in this thread are the evidences of that destruction.
OTOH with short phono cables it’s all execution. whatever sounds best. possibly all things being equal balanced might be superior technically......but......of course.....all things are pretty much never equal. you have to listen to pick the winner. the LFD execution is crazy stuff. if LFD used XLR i suppose it might be even better..
You get the same benefit with short cables as you do long cables. The idea that balanced really only benefits you when the cables are long is a common myth. The advantages are several as I showed above, and these become more important when the signal strength is lower. Of course the LFD cable would work better balanced, as well as any balanced cable if built correctly.
@intactaudiois correct in his post just above. It really sounds to me as if all the balanced gear you've heard doesn't support the balanced standard; if that is the case then the results will be highly variable.
If you really want to do single-ended connections a 50Ohm coax is really the only way to do it properly without cable interactions, but to do so you need appropriate driver and receiver circuitry.
The funny thing is other than the balanced input on the phono preamp, running a proper balanced connection from the cartridge is actually easier than running single-ended. The arm wiring doesn't change; its all about the tonearm cable being built properly. You know that weird ground wire that other single-ended sources don't seem to need? That' s because its a balanced system being run single-ended and you have to do something with the ground, which isn't connected to the cartridge- that's the ground wire. When running balanced that is the shield connection (pin 1 of the XLR), which is a continuation of the shielding the arm tube provides, and its not able to intermodulate noise into the signal since ground is ignored by the receiver (in this case the phono input, which could be an SUT with a balanced connection).
So when running balanced the only tricky bit is that just like any phono cable, its best to keep the cable capacitance low so as to keep the electrical resonance as high as possible. With LOMC cartridges, this resonance is typically in the MHz region.
The hardest part about all this is something called the Veblen Effect. Literally people think that because they are paying more that there is more value. This isn't always the case! Veblen causes people to want to spend more on a cable, thinking that they will get greater performance/SQ. Its important to know that can sometimes be illusory.
..but most of the best phono preamps are not true balanced designs, which is another issue.
This is the key issue. As ralph points out just using an XLR means nothing and in order to take advantage of a balanced interface one must adhere to AES48. Just because a XLR connector has the ability to be wired to that standard does not mean that everything that it is plugged into also adheres to that standard. If one aspect of the standard is not met, the whole concept collapses.
A moving coil cartridge is an inherently symmetrical device ( coil and 2 tails ).
A MC step up transformer provides an inherently symmetrical input ( coil and 2 tails).
Therefore why would you use an asymmetrical cable where the +ve and -ve sides are different in this application. It makes no sense.
This is an instance where the necessary aspects of the AES48 can exist at the source and the load but in order to operate 'properly' the interface cabling must also be done to the standard (twisted pair with a shield) and I have only experienced a few cases where using this interface worked the same or better than the 'conventional' method. In all of the cases that worked, the tonearm was specifically (re)wired for this purpose. With a SUT the RCA cable interface is fine for running the AES standard since the shield can simply be joined externally to the tonearm/table and SUT grounds making sure the primary of the SUT has no ground reference. In fact at no point in the AES48 is an XLR connector called out, it just happens to be the industry accepted connector.
over the years i’ve had multiple phono cables through my system; currently i have three other ’basic’ phono din<->rca’s i have swapped in and out. over the 3 years i’ve tried various versions of the LFD including the Dongle/Raptor recently. the LFD’s have been significant steps up over my other choices per my comments in that thread you read. as well as big steps up over my basic choices. when i did my listening my local friend ’jazdoc’ helped me to listen and judge. he had also been involved in previous phono cable swaps in my system with Durand phono cables and Found Music phono cables of various build choices. so this is something i have done my fair share of.
as i wrote, you have to view LFD cables as components. they take you further. you likely also read other comments from LFD cable users in that thread. my viewpoint is not singular.
so your perspective does not reflect my experience. i do respect that you have an opinion.
LFD electronics are not relevant to the high end hand built LFD cables. if you find info on LFD electronics you will find that they are very modestly priced.......never heard them myself and have no opinion about them. i respect overall skepticism about any high end cables........and know it’s always going to be presumption of guilt. zero benefit of the doubt.
before i separated myself from my money i did my listening tests. not trying to sell LFD cables......they are over a year back ordered and impossible to get.
it's easy to take shots........much harder to acquire and listen and then report. which is all i’m doing. if you ever hear top level LFD phono cables do please tell us about it.
Hi Mike I followed your thread on the phono cable sea on WBF.
Whilst I do not doubt what you have heard in your system ( and I assume no-one here has heard your system, so comments are speculative ), and I have huge respect for your commitment to analogue, I have concerns re the LFD phono cable.
Firstly I am a little jaundiced by the brand since a friend was loaned a pair of LFD Reference mono blocks and quite frankly they were awful. So bad we pulled a pair of unmodified Leak TL12plus monos out of the cupboard and confirmed our fears the LFD had less resolution and information than the old Leaks ( driving some Von Schweikerts ).
I have also heard the LFD phono at length - again underwhelming, not as bad as the mono's but midfi at best.
With regards to the LFD phono cables I note from the WBF thread that the development for the more expensive model from the lower one basically involves playing around with physical construction and attributes and listening. There is no science discussed.
The warning signs that this cable is simply a tone control, is twofold -
1. Adding bundles and combos of wire a la Yamamura is trial and error.
2. More importantly you must ask the question based on the following observation
A moving coil cartridge is an inherently symmetrical device ( coil and 2 tails ).
A MC step up transformer provides an inherently symmetrical input ( coil and 2 tails).
Therefore why would you use an asymmetrical cable where the +ve and -ve sides are different in this application. It makes no sense.
Have you ever tried balancing a wheelbarrow with one side heavier than the other ?
Unfortunately, there are a lot of awful cables out there regardless of price. ( I use to distribute several high end cable brands back in the mid 80's and have tried multitudes including many different constructs and many prototypes from various manufacturers ). Most high end cables are a set of compromises chosen by the designer - hence the endless debates. When one of my pals tries a new megabuck cable out, I usually grab a pair of my old cables from the 80's, take them over, do a blind test, and hey presto the $8k cables usually go back.
In my own system I use 2 phono cables depending on the cartridge - both twisted pair plus shield from 2 different manufacturers.
I have one that is highly capacitive that I use for all MC's ( the best phono cable I have tried ).
I have a different phono cable that has very low capacitance that I use specifically for moving iron and moving magnet cartridges. ( With moving magnet cartridges the electrical parameters of the phono cables and phono input form an electrical circuit that determines the cartridges high frequency linearity and phase response, unlike MC's ).
Similarly with SUT to phono - my reference phono cable is too capacitive and I have a specific lower capacitive cable for this application - in this case it is not twisted pair but a speciffically woven symmetrical litz wire loom that is closest to my reference without the negative impact of capacitance in this application.
Interestingly on WBF there was a thread on what cables do CH Precision owners use. I find it interesting that half a dozen owners use half a dozen different interconnects between the same pre/power. You cant explain this by the system whole, because the pre/power are all the same - ergo, these guys are buying tone controls, not reference cables.
Hope this has given you something to ponder - if I were you I would grab a few pairs of well designed basic cables ( symmetrical construction not asymmetrical or coaxial ) and go back and compare to your LFD - it might be illuminating, and educational - one way or the other.
if you want to learn about the theory behind the ’zeel’ 50 ohm cable interface, here is a paper published in the September 2001 issue of Stereophile by Herve Delatraz (manufacturer/designer of darTZeel), describing ’echo’s in conventional cable interfaces, prior to the introduction of the brand darTZeel. you will need some some math, physics or engineering chops to digest much of it.
i use the proprietary darTZeel 50ohm BNC ’zeel’ interface for my long runs (one 8 meter, the other 11 meter) in my system. properly executed, even better than balanced. a one meter 50 ohm cable sounds the same as a .5 kilometer of 50 ohm cable.....when properly executed. impedance matching rules.
but fully agree that RCA is not up to the task of long runs. XLR is far superior for that. and the pro audio world rightly chooses XLR as a superior interface compared to RCA.
OTOH with short phono cables it’s all execution. whatever sounds best. possibly all things being equal balanced might be superior technically......but......of course.....all things are pretty much never equal. you have to listen to pick the winner. the LFD execution is crazy stuff. if LFD used XLR i suppose it might be even better.....but most of the best phono preamps are not true balanced designs, which is another issue.
btw; i have that Classic Records 45rpm LZ box set. i’m sure you are having some fun with the dubbing. you need to hear it with the DaVa sometime.......freaking awesome. superior to my LZ 15ips 1/4" master dubs.
@dogberry, I never listen to anything else I have to say, worthless drivel.
@rauliruegas, @atmasphere, @mikelavigne I think we can all agree that balanced signal cables are essential for long runs. The benefits in signal to noise ratio and other parameters can not be overlooked. I am beginning to learn that the same is true when dealing with small signal levels. I have recorded Sheffield Lab 17 balanced, unbalanced, with and without digital RIAA correction. I have yet to involve other listeners and I will after I figure out the best way to transfer that much data. Gammaman has the Classic Records 45 rpm crate set of all the Led Zeppelin albums. I’m up there now to Zoso and loving every minute.
@solypsa : Of course you can't maybe because you have not the experience levels or only because you are seller of a different cartridges. Who cares?, not me.
"What is the “World’s Best Cartridge?” - "best" does not exist! :-) There are good carts, fancy ones, to impress, professional-robust, and tuned for specific vinyl, etc.
"cartridge and a speaker, by far, contribute the most to SQ.” SQ starts with Artist, instruments, studio, etc.
Any “bad” or “unmatched” part in TT+Tonearm+head-shell+cart(SUT)+ph-cable+phono-pre+pre+amp+speakers+room analog sound path impacts SQ!
My recent “good-cart” discovery is 1984 made NOS AT-ML170 (MM)
"The Decca London Reference is an awful cartridge. It is a terrible tracker and very unreliable."
Says you. I've had one for eleven years with no reliability issues and no tracking problems, nor does it hum like the Deccas of yesteryear. Put it in a high quality damped tonearm and you'll hear music like no other. Honestly, when you make a statement like that I have to start doubting everything else you write...
@rauliruegasNo problem, I don't expect tracking issues based on the technical match or reputation. I, however, would not proclaim a cartridge to be an excellent tracker based only on 'paper specs' either...
Dear @solypsa : The @reimarc tonearm effective mass is around 9 grs. ( with screws to hold the cartridge. ) and the around 18cu compliance of the ART 1000 along its 11grs. weigth puts the frequency resonance in between rigth on target to the ideal range of 8hz-12hz.
Along that every AT cartridge is a truly good tracker and the ART 1000 design was " inspired " by the Victor MC L100@edgewearnamed and that I owned and both designs are similar with AT higher compliance than the Victor and with almost same cartridge weigth and I never had any tracking issue with the Victor.
Tell me why should be a problem with that carbon tonearm on tracking issues?
If the ART 1000 is well mated with a choosed tonearm and in that specific regards then no problem at all.
your love affair with balanced circuits is legendary. are you wrong about them? no. are balanced circuits the ’main thing’ about how circuits might perform? no.
balanced circuits = one advantage....but not the whole ball game....which is what you are saying. and that cannot be known. we all can have an opinion about it though.
the best performing systems i have heard up till now have not used balanced circuits. which proves nothing either. since that aspect of a system is not dominant in it’s performance....one way....or another.
My comments were about balanced line operation- the use of balanced cables in audio. Not so much about balanced circuits in audio equipment (that is a different conversation which I avoided).
That balanced lines when supported by AES48 are superior than any RCA connection is both measurable and audible. There is more than one advantage. Since I don't know which you were referring to I'll name a few:
* no ground loops since ground is ignored and used for shielding only
(this means if you get a ground loop with balanced lines AES48 isn't being supported)
* prevents coloration caused by the interconnect cable
* lack of colorations (including high frequency roll off) allows for longer cable lengths.
* since the crux of the operation lies with the associated equipment, the cable itself can be quite inexpensive
* Since the associated equipment will have a high Common Mode Rejection Ratio (CMRR) noise impinged on the interconnect cable is rejected at the input of whatever its driving. This isn't possible with a single-ended connection so you get lower noise.
OK I've listed 5 advantages and there are more.
My recommendation as always with this sort of thing is to try it. Phono cartridges are already a balanced source and most tone arms are wired balanced so this is really about the interconnect cable and what is receiving it. SUTs, being transformers, can run as a balanced input quite easily with very high CMRR values. Their output can be single-ended (this is why transformers are good at converting from one to the other). So this would be an easy thing to try.
Modified Cartridges are much more fitting as a Subject within this Thread, than the lengthy 'got of on a tangent' Digital / Vinyl Source discussions and is definitely much more fitting that the Ammunition Cartridge put forward.
@reimarcIs your reference to a Gyger Styli the FGS and was it used to replace the MicroRidge Styli. I know the FGS, when attached to the Thin Boron Rod on the Cadenza Black is found to be a very attractive design by those who have selected the modification during a refurb.
Dear @reimarc : The ART 1000 is an excellent selection. Audio Technica has over 60 years designing and building LOMC and MM cartridges, I own and owned almost all models from the humble AT95 to any top one but the ART 1000.
No one AT cartridge I listened in my system and other systems never sounded bad and the top ones always great.
The ART 1000 is almost a " jewel " and an a design achievement and very good tracker due to its around 18cu in compliance. Good and here what an owner posted somewhere about:
" The best sounding cartridge I have ever had purchased. I like it better then my Air-Tight PC-1 Signature and the Benz LP. Excellent price for a phono cartridge of this sound quality! "
That Air Tigth was manufactured by MSL that @mijostyn recomended. Btw, mijos the AT has 3 ohms impedance and a good candidate for you at a just ridiculous price against your other cartridge selections.
I'm sure that if the AT ART 1000 price tag will says 20K this cartridge will be at any top system but unfortunatelly its price is only 5K and those gentlemans just do not turn their eyes to " see " it, unfortunatelly for all of them.
@reimarc,Great! I was getting worried. The Decca London Reference is an awful cartridge. It is a terrible tracker and very unreliable. With those issues what it sounds like is irrelevant. You have several wonderful cartridges in your price range. The Ortofon Winfeld Ti and the Verismo. The MSL Hyper Eminent EX and the Lyra Kleos. Judging by what you have said so far I think the MSL would suit you best it being the warmest of the group. The Ortofons and the Lyra are very neutral, nothing hangs out at first. For me this is the hallmark of a great cartridge.
@reimarcthere are several different approaches to this ‘direct coupled’ theme of bringing the coils as close to the stylus as possible. I don’t have personal experience with the AT ART1000, but I am very familiar with the Victor MC L1000, which is considered to be the ‘inspiration’ for the design of the ART1000. Another approach was the original cantileverless version of the Ikeda 9 series. These cartridges share a common trait, which can be described - not surprisingly - as a very direct and dynamic presentation of the music. Large dynamic swings in the music are explosive, but also micro dynamics are more prominent than usual. These characteristics make these systems stand out from the crowd, but whether you like this depends on your own priorities as well as the capabilities of your system to handle it. But under the right circumstances these systems certainly have the capacity to become your ‘goosebump machine’.
However, as a species the direct couple designs are now almost extinct. Even the venerable Decca London has recently been discontinued. As far as I’m aware that only leaves the ART1000. I’m not sure the Szar DST is still being made, but based on some reports its construction and quality control should give you some cause for concern.
I just sold my EMIA SUT. Not that I did not like it: it is a great piece, albeit it make my soundstage a bit more forward; and quite frankly, it was also a bit "bombastic", larger-than-life in a way (interacting with Dave Slagle, however was a wonderful experience). Before I had bought the EMIA I had the EMT Auditorium in my system for a test run: that one made the music even more bombastic, or rather, put me in the conductor's position, almost in the middle of the orchestra (Wagner, Das Rheingold). That was simply way too much.
I sold the EMIA because I am about to receive a Supratek Grange any time now, after having placed my order last November. The Grange is a phono/pre-amp in one, and does not come with a 47K Ohm input, in other words, MC only w/o SUT, and no London Reference, unfortunately.
I am looking - like the gentleman who started this thread - for my future cartridge to be paired with the Grange. I currently use a Benz Micro LPS-Ebony with Gyger stylus on a ProJect 10-Carbon TT. It's a great cartridge for all styles of music, but somehow, it does not bring me to tears or gives me goosebumps. So, for a year now, I am looking for an alternative in the same price range (4 - 6K), that would create that elusive gasp, w/o having to discuss next year's finances with my wife. I was intrigued by the Tzar DST cartridges, because of the revival of the old Neumann stylus/coil geometry, i.e. shortest-possible distance between stylus und coils, but the price tag is too high. I placed a wanted ad for the AudioTechnica AT-ART 1000, which has a similar Neumann-based design for half the price, and someone contacted me today with an offer. So, my question to this illustrious forum: has anyone heard this cartridge (the late Art Dudley had, and he loved it), and if so, what are your comments/recommendations? Shall this become my goosebump machine?
Dear @mikelavigne : " fundamentally using an SUT potentially brings a musical touch, inner artistic view and envelopment that high gain phono preamps such as the darTZeel can’t quite do........ the silver wound EMIA phono and SUT is very special in this regard. but hard to make an objective case. "
Well, believe it or not I try in all what I posted to you been " polite " against how I normally am: direct and now I will be just DIRECT to you.
Objective not necesarily means that always needs measurements even if are desired, objective has another characteristic too: COMMON SENSE and additional if we can a decent knowledge levels.
Well your audio objective knowledge levels is to low and you showed in this and other threads in wbf/agon. One gentleman here told me by email that due that you are heavy entilted with your 100% subjective opinion then I just left you that way but I can’t do it because every audio forum is not only for gentlemans as you or several of us but arrive several " new comers " that are looking for advise or looking to learn reading what other audiophiles do or their opinions .
I already told you that in the past the people like me had you as a leader to follow in audio subjects and audio items but from 2-3 years ( maybe more ) now you shifted to be just a follower. I told you that wbf already damaged you and contaminated you in bad ways.
I was banned not only one but twice from that forum ( the owners dislike my comments about tubes because they are tube lovers and elevctronics distributors too. One of them dies for the IO phonolinepreamp that guess what? each time you change the SPL that unit change the FR too: crazy for say the least. Tey told me that I'm a troller, could be. ) and certainly I’m not talking on because of that. WBF is and " stampede " place where people make " things " with out no sense ( like a real stampede. ): Dava is n example, SME 3012 too, Stradivarius VDH too, Lamm, American Sound, etc, etc and the like and same with the LFD that perhaps is the Century Stampede and other like you are proudly because the time delay to get the item is over a year and in the Dava 8 moths ! ! ! go figure. I appreciated Peter A, an ex-Agoner, where there he changed his Magico for a vintage horns, his excellent amp by Lamms, his SME 30 for the terrible RX-8000 and obviously the 3012 plus the 0.7+ mv Stradivarius following the " advise " of the seller that's a way active posting member in that forum, pity.
Common sense says, to all gentlemans but you and your wbf audio friends, that talking of analog rig in specific of the cartridge signal preservation integrity EACH ADDITIONAL JOINT ( that I already explained to you as modulations too. ) IN THAT CARTRIDGE SIGNAL PATH NOT ONLY CAN´T HELP TO IMPROVE THE CARTRIDGE SIGNAL QUALITY PERFORMANCE BUT THE OTHER WAY AROUND IT : D E G R A D E S THE SIGNAL, SO ( everything the same ) AS SHORTEST THE CARTRIDGE SIGNAL PATH THE BETTER. Period.
Obviously that you have not the common sense to understand it or at least is what you showed in your posts after I gave you not one but at least twice wide same explanations.
Mike your approach of Phono Corrector + SUT + " thousands of cables and wires + linepreamp is TOTALLY WRONG, no matter what against the SS active high gain balanced phonolinepreamp your own: Dartzeel.
Because your low knowledge levels on what @atmasphere posted ( I’m in agreement with him about and about SUT too that’s the wrong way to go because I already explained is not a passive item. ) you posted:
"balanced circuits = one advantage....but not the whole ball game... and that cannot be known. we all can have an opinion about it ...........the best performing systems i have heard up till now have not used balanced circuits .. "
Mike the balanced electronics design is not about " opinion " as you said, you just did not know what you are talking about and that’s why your thrid statement : " the best performing systems ". Mike do you already took in count that your system electronics are BALANCED ? so what are you talking about.
The Dartzeel RIAA measured FR deviation is 0.5db and the bandwindth is 1hz- 1 Mhz. noise level 80db with out " a mile " of silver wires and other by cooper and aditional solid metal raptor and the like: Dart needs only one balanced IC cable from the tonearm to the phonolinepreamp and that’s it ( @lewm, is an active high gain design. ). Do it you a favor ( as with the Dava spec FR 6db dviation. ) and ask the EMIA designer the RIAA spec /noise for the PC and FR/noise of the SUT and its bandwindth even if you don't care about.
What you like or what I like it does not matters in absolute with the issues we are talking not even your audio targets or mines that at " random " mates that common sense. I'M NOT TALKING OF WHAT EACH ONE OF US LIKE IT BUT WHAT IS RIGTH OR ITS WROGN, THAT'S IT. Got it?
So, are you in favor of those 158 joints of your approach or in favor of less than 10 joints between the cartridge signal and the Dartzeel amplifier. ? What means your common sense?
An audio wbf friend is active part of that no sense wbf characteristic stampede and this confirmed:
" visit where he preferred DaVa + Thorens 124 to Etsuro + Continuum " and after been with you guess what? he ordered the Dava and others your beloved LFD and dongles.
I think that Mick of LFD ( not Lavigne. ) said that " the proof is the listening " because not even they know where they are " seated " there are no measurements exactly as the undisclosed ones on the Dava till 2 weeks ago.
Btw, you said you can't " understand " ( your words. ) why that black output cable in your phono corrector but I know by first hand experiences that that cable is a wise decision and what I don't " understand " is why the designer of your PC don't by-passed the output connector and soldered directly to the board as a dedicated output. Yes, it's that good enough for that.
As for me, I have no objection to any kind of cartridge, no matter how derived or how modified. My only point was there is little to be learned at a distance from anonymous reports on how cartridges, especially modified ones, sound.
By the way, thanks to Mel Brooks’ movie “Young Frankenstein “, we do know that Frankenstein’s anger apparently was due to his having a brain taken from Abby Normal.
your love affair with balanced circuits is legendary. are you wrong about them? no. are balanced circuits the ’main thing’ about how circuits might perform? no.
balanced circuits = one advantage....but not the whole ball game....which is what you are saying. and that cannot be known. we all can have an opinion about it though.
the best performing systems i have heard up till now have not used balanced circuits. which proves nothing either. since that aspect of a system is not dominant in it’s performance....one way....or another.
You don't need to hear all the single-ended cables to know why balanced is better. You do have to understand something about balanced line operation though, that there is a standard which must be observed to obtain the benefit.
The benefit is neutrality; the cable won't have an artifact. By artifact I mean 'sound'.
As single-ended cables evolve and improve they begin to approach the neutrality of balanced operation. But since there's no standard for single-ended operation, results are all over the map.
Since the advent of hifi, commercial recordings have all embraced balanced operation. Its how Mercury was able to park their recording truck behind Northrup Auditorium in Minneapolis and run 150' mic cables to it and still get high fidelity. EMI hung their mics in Kingsway Hall; I have to assume they were a good 150' too. Single ended semi-pro audio equipment really didn't start showing up until about the mid 1970s so we have a 20 year period of classical, jazz, blues and rock that demonstrates what balanced operation can do. The fact that the better you make your system, the better these recordings sound should tell you something.
Balanced line operation was the first exotic interconnect cable industry/technology. Unlike what has evolved in high end audio where money is often thrown at the problem, the idea behind balanced operation and its standard is that if the proper drive and reception exists in the source and what ever its driving, the interconnect can be inexpensive, whatever length is needed and no artifacts from it.
In high end audio, little of the gear supports the standard, so there is little benefit. That is why audiophiles have such variable results. If its done right though there is no going back.
A LOMC cartridge can drive a balanced line exceptionally well since it is a balanced source with a very low impedance. So the connection can be exceptionally neutral. This is very difficult to do single-ended!
@pindacwhy are you ’wed to Ortofon'? If the following is true ( your statement ) then any cart having a few of the basic ingredients might be fine?
It is no secret; I have been an advocate of the method of using a Third Party rebuild service, I find the method totally satisfactory, and know there are numerous other that are satisfied too
once you start creating Frankenstein cartridges, by changing or modifying cantilevers, styli, coils, suspension, bodies, etc, then opinions regarding the net SQ are even more useless than otherwise, not to say that comparing OEM cartridges without respect to different tonearms, turntables, amplification, speakers, rooms, listeners, is a worthwhile pursuit, beyond expressions of love, meh-ness, or hate.
Note: Frankenstein Cart, is a term used that is usually associated with claiming the end product is usually made from parts not selected by a Manufacturer, which then produces a scenario where a product is unpredictable and unique, with only limited persons able to offer an assessment.
As a Sub Context, Frankenstein is made of multiple unrelated parts and is destructive as the result.
There are numerous Cartridges available that are produced using Trickle-Down Technology from Brands Flagship Models. Each of these Trickle-Down Models would be considered as an inferior model to the Flagship, but offer an essence of it.
It has been seen that a Brand offering a Trickle-Down Technology, where the intent is to produce a derivative version of a of a Flagship Cart', has chosen, not only to reduce the use of the sought-after technologies and design aspects, but also on certain models, include the use an Aluminium Cantilever in place of the more desirable and better performing options that are known off.
I find it hard to look at a Trickle-Down Technology Cartridge produced from this approach, as anything but a Frankenstein Cart'. The uniqueness of such a product in comparison to other options, being the offer of such a variant is available at a reduced fee to the Flagship Model, making the idea of usage more attractive to the mass of interested individuals to experience.
I have no beef with this as a Business Method, I have bought into this method myself.
Moving on, Return of a Cart' to a Manufacturer for refurbishment.
The likelihood is that the small print is to state that materials will be used that are equivalent for the work undertaken. Equivalent can be very broad in its meaning and is pretty much a statement used with the intention of assuring the Customer there will be a Cart' produced with the Companies interpretation of an acceptable function.
There is not any Guarantee for the exact Cart' that was bought as being returned.
I can't help but interpret that accepting a service under these circumstances, a Frankenstein Cart' is to be produced.
Where it differs from the above is that, not many will be able to share in its uniqueness unless this specific route for refurbishment is chosen by a large number of the Cart' Model owners.
I have no beef with using this as a method, it is one I am yet to experience, but have heard enough to know there are happy customers.
Companies are making decisions for their product that are a derivative of a Particular Design / Model of Cart'. The Companies will be making decisions to use different Materials for Bodies, Different Magnets, Cantilevers and Styli and in some cases Coils to produce a Frankenstein version of their Flagship Cart'.
Moving on, Third Party Technicians that Work on Cart's.
There are some from this field, who are with very valuable experiences and have worked for, or on behalf of Brands that many would have on a shortlist to own. From my end and in the circle of individuals I deal with regularly, there is nothing being made known that is to be concerned about, if the choice is made to offer a Cart' to a Technician that is known to carry out high quality work, it is viewed as a admirable way forward to let a trusted Third-Party Service sprinkle some of their magic dust on a Cart'.
It is no secret; I have been an advocate of the method of using a Third Party rebuild service, I find the method totally satisfactory, and know there are numerous other that are satisfied too.
To some the idea of using the Third-Party Service route, is not to be encouraged and is seen to be purported in small groups, as being the least attractive method, and the one that should not be considered.
I can't find any place where there is reconciliation on this very restrictive advice, each individual has the right to experience a Cartridge in any guise as they wish.
There is no Guarantee a alternative option is the better.
What others think does not matter one iota and should not be an influence on a decision to be made.
To have a dialogue with a Company or a Third-Party Service and have a Cart' produced in a manner that considers your made known preferences is an experience that can be had a very fair asking price if options are investigated in advance.
yes; the EMIA phono corrector + MC Trio is a package deal; which then can be compared directly with the two high gain internal phono’s inside the darTZeel preamp.
the dart phono’s are very good; overall i prefer the EMIA approach. but then i might prefer it to any phono i have heard. the dart phono is certainly hard to beat at what it does.
my CS Port phono (which the EMIA Phono Corrector replaced) had three inputs; one of which was an internal SUT; the other two were MM inputs which required outboard SUT’s.
as far as balanced cables the only way to go with analog signals, that is a silly thing to say. who has heard all the non balanced choices? no one. i do respect the advantages to a balanced circuit and cables, but things are not so simple as that being the only thing that matters. it's just one aspect to the performance.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
