Dear Coltrane'friends: ++++++ " one of Coltrane's most distinguishing characteristics was the hard edge or "bite" of his tone. That characteristic was a huge departure from the softer textured tone that was more common for tenor players before him; even when they were loud and aggressive. This approach to tone was very controversial among players, and many considered this drier .... " ++++++
I never had the opportunity, as Lewm and some of you, to heard Coltrane but through several LPs I own the Frogman post was just on target. I even fell like Coltrane was always approaching " perfection " on its performance selections and this " subject 2 put some of his performances a little " stress ".
I don't think his sound is exactly " drier " but " precise " and if I have to make a comparison with an audio sytem perfromance I could say that Coltrane is less " distorted " or for no hurt any one less "b textured " more " believed sound " of its instrument voice. I don't think either that Coltrane could be more agresive or with more bite but: different, that's all for me. I love Coleman H. and others but certainly is different.
+++++ " the amazing beauty in his tightly controlled tone and little (relatively) use of vibrato. It changed forever the way the instrument would be approached. " +++++
absolutely YES.
As many of you I own almost all his Prestige ones and I can't remember one of those LPs where I can say: " hey that Coltrane did not likes me ". Well we are talink on the subject on the greatest tenors ever. Each one had and has his own merits.
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: IMHO I think that all we are fortunate enough to discovered the MM/MI alternative ( vintage cartridges. ) 30+ years after those vintage cartridges were designed because only with our each one today audio systems we really can enjoy and be awared for sure what all those " old " gems have to show us.
Why said I that?: well asking for Philips cartridge experiences ( thank you Siniy123. ) I read an old ( 1970 ) Philips cartridge review where the reviewer had a complaint:
++++ " The bass response is impressive. At a playing weight of 1.2 grams the opening pedal notes of Also Sprach Zarathustra (Decca SXL6379) together with the following crescendos were handled with ease. Piano tone is generally excellent but soprano voice is edgy-reducing treble response to take the bite from this resulted in a dull performance. " +++++
my 412-III SE sample performs just great and with out no " soprano voice edgy " or almost any other complaint I have on its quality level performance, as a fact I have none as Siniy123 poste this cartridge is highly recomend.
I think that was and is pity that even the cartridge designers of those vintage cartridges perhaps never had the opportunity to heard the real glorious of all those gems and we are receiving the " benefits " of those designs.
I think we are fortunate about.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
I forgot, this is the link for that review: http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/February%201970/116/771646/Philips+GP412+Cartridge.+Price%3A+,C39.
R. |
Dear Stltrains: +++++ " stayed in my system is my modern speakers and analog source... " ++++
with some vintage cartridges that benefit on today audio advancements. In the years where were build/designed all those great cartridges a real limitation on playback were the it self/own audio devices limtations that today we almost does not have.
This time IMHO are " the vintage cartridge golden years ", better than ever.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends ( Lewm. ): Same body in cartridges is not IMHO a synonymous of same motor/voicing/tunning.
I posted this statement several times for different vintage cartridges including Signets and of course Acutex. I said that cartridge manufacturers put more " effort " fine tunning their top of the line models that with the step down ones. It is wrong IMHO to think that because the body looks the same the difference is only on the cantilever/stylus manufacturer choice. This could be true between two middle of the cartridge line but not on the top ones-
I have several examples of what I'm saying but the Acutex is a good one:
I own the 320 and 315 ( long nose. ) and even that Acutex said it that in practic terms both cartridges performs the same this IMHO is not true, for my ears the 320 is a superior one even that the 315 is a great cartridge by its own merits. I think I already posted but here again: do you think that changing the 320 stylus replacement to the 315 body makes this cartridhe a 320?, yes? well NO: the 315 with the 320 stylus performs almost the same ( and I said almost because is difficult to discern about. ) to the 315 and the 320 with its own 320 stylus is still the better cartridge.
I made the same comparisons between AT 20SS and 20SLa and IMHO the 20SS is a better performer and the same for the Signets and other cartridges like Grace 9 series and AKGs.
Cartridge manufacturers are not stupid as almost all of you could think:
I agree with Ecir38 ( thank you for the link and to Dyna10x too for his link. ) that posted " I doubt been the same ".
Now, with Acutex I send my 315 second sample to VDH and certainly there was and is an improvement beyond even the 320 ( long nose ) and very near the 320 quality performance level ( flat nose one. )
It is obviously that a re-tipped ( cantilever/stylus. ) vintage cartridge can or could performs not only different but better if for no other thing because on the re-tip the cartridge suspension was or will be " refreshed " and this single fact is vital/cfrucial for what we are hearing: this function as a re-tunning/voicing.
I'm not the only one that think that same body cartridge are not the same ( especially top models. ), Timeltel reported that he heard differences between the 315 and 320 ( both are nude stylus and cantilever looks the same material under 50x magnification. ) and if I remember he prefers the 315 performance: the point here is that these Acutex cartridges " looks the same " but performs with differences that almost any one could hear.
Do you think that the Desmond 420 re-tipped one was already converted in the " best of the best " as he are expecting?. My take here is that the 315 or 320 motor is way better than the 420 but unfortunately Desmond has not those 315/320 for comparisons, anyway I will wait for his experiences about.
Lewm, I have no single doubt that if you take your 320 for re-tip you can wait for a different performance on the better side. I posted that my 315 VDH outperform the stock 320 ( not a wide margin but important one. ).
Anyway, independent the " same body " subject a vintage re-tip almost always can give us quality performance rewards.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: I don't own the 312 so I can't speak on it but I can hear the differences between the 315, 320, 315 VDH, 315 w/320 stylus, 320 w/315 stylus and 320 w/315 VDH stylus and of course differences between all and the flat-nose 320.
No, IMHO it is not my imagination and as I posted at least Timeltel heard differences between 315-320.
I don't doubt in your experienced " ears " but I think that in those comparisons you are not looking for the right " things " to look. Comparisons needs to have targets in what to look with very specific recording tracks.
Anyway, you are the best judge at your home.
I'm not aware of that Acutex history about cause and effect of that patent.
Yes, normally any cartridge rebuild could be better that in stock or at least different.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dgob: Well for what you posted that 420 will no more an Acutex one other than the name.
Good this is always an alternative with any other cartridges: leave the cartridge fix source that make anything he thinks could improve the overall quality performance level other than only cantilever/stylus changes.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: Inductance, resistance and the like means nothing against voicing/fine tunning a cartridge. Same cartridge inductance/resistance/stylus/cantilever can performs way different only fine tunning different, designer's choice.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: Yes that's a possibility.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: Is hard to go on with you if you can't understand what I posted about because if I'm ignorant on that subject seems to me that you are more ignorant.
I don't want to go to explain that fine tunning through suspension/compliance and other factors including cartridge internal body differences to control resonances and the like.
But the classic example of two amps that measure the same and sound different could be enough for you can understand about.
cartridges are extremely sensitive ( as a mechanical/electrical device. ) to tiny tiny changes every where in the design where you can't know nothing but the designer.
Take a look of what cartridge designers, like J. Carr, offer to their customers on re-tipping: you will receive your re-tipped cartridge with all " new " improvements that were not on the stock unit when you bought it and if you measure your re-tipped cartridge even that measures exactly the same you can hear its designer cartridge improvements and you don't know why.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm, Frogman, Dgob, Fleib and friends: It is weird and pity that when people speaks on jazz/blues/soul music and speaks on the best " instrument voices " many great players are almost forgoten in similar way that the MM/MI against the LOMC. Examples ( btw, I'm not an expert on music or music composition or the like y only have my " body " that tell me about quality perfromances. ): if we take tenors like in this late posts names are Coleman, Coltrane and perhaps Rollins but what about other " tenor's gems " like Dexter, Ammons, Griffin or Zoot- If we speaks about trumpeters first name in the list is Miles ( like here 9 but what about H. Edison or Chet Baker or Eldridge or Dorham. For piano Evans almost always comes first but W.Kelly or Gardland or ...or are at the same level.
IMHO all these different players have their each one merits and IMHO no one of them have to envy nothing to the " names " top players.
Why people dimish or don't take in count almost all them but the " famous " ?
What do you think?
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: Yes and my " worry " is why almost all people speak about the " same ".
My take with Miles ( other that his name: Miles. ) for example is that he was surrounded ( on playback. ) for other great names: Coltrane, rollins, Adderley, etc when H. Edison for example was almost a " side man ".
I like Bill Evans a lot but what amde him so famous when W.kelly is at least at the same level and no one almost remember him.
What makes D.Guillespy ( other that his slope trumpet. ) so famous?, nothing wrong with that or with other of the big names I like it all ones but at the same time I like you like other not to famous players that in some ways or some kind of " tempos " are even better than the " greats ".
Which your take here? because this happens not only with jazz but on classic music too, an example of this is Mahler that IMHO at symphonic composition level is even greater that Beethoven but almost no one " knows ". Maybe I'm saying a stupid " thing " with Mahler but inside my no-formal music formation is what I think. Yes I like Beethoven and tchaikosky too but Mahler is something very especial for me.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: This Dominic is a serious cartridge fix source and not only that but: TTs and tonearms too:
http://northwestanalogue.weebly.com./cartridge-repairs.html
Thank's again Audiopulse.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: Certainly I don't dislike them and I understand what you mean for what Frogman posted about Coltrane and now you about Evans and Dizzy.
Yes, W.Kelly or H.Edison or Baker maybe don't contribute in that way for been take in count at that level but even that true their skills and soul are IMHO up with the great ones so as a players it self they IMHO has the same merits than the ones that " count ".
Thank you for your explanation that puts " things " in a better overall " stage ". My ignorance level here is realy deep I have to say , however I prefer listen to H.Edison and even Baker that Dizzy or even Miles. Of course this is absolutely subjective and of course that depends of the recording selections where things can goes the other way around.
The arts like music is fully subjective not like audio. Is in arts where I fully agree there are no absolutes.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Frogman: Thank you, I'm sure that every one here will appreciated your next post:
++++ " Much to say about the previous posts when I have a little more time. " ++++
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Fleib: Thank's too for your information, I need to learn and read and research on the whole topic.
I know why The beatles are so famous and not The Animals or Kinks but other that appreciated their " instrument voices " through their recordings and read the LP cover information I almost know nothing on jazz/blues history.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dgob: I will take my time reading that link: thank you for that.
As seems to that all people agree if MUSIC is all about IMHO, in each musical's genre, is way important to know its " roots ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: +++++ " somtimes the item I payd 20 Euro for in some other shop for 18 Euro and even this small amount causes me sleeping problems... " ++++
because the Krenzler's post in this Lencoheaven tread?:
http://www.lencoheaven.net/forum/index.php?topic=6675.105
nothing wrong with me because any one of us is free to sell anything we want.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: Good to hear from you again.
++++ " the 5ea with any of the styli you mention will offer more detail and faster leading edge transients than the 7SU, " +++++
I know are like apples and oranges and that's why I'm curious about. I tested both ( as usual in stock condition. ) and what I remember is not precisely that way ( it does not matters what I remember, this is not the subject. ), question: do you heard both cartridges with even SPL?, thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: Perhaps cartridge suspension is the main subject on cartridge re-tip and yes always " suspension refresh " with my cartridges and yes too Axel has: boron, aluminum, berylium and ruby.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: Ok, Ithink understand: we are talking on different subjects, no problem.
No, I think many of us that like jazz like blues too, I just left in my system Prestige pressing: Lightnin Hopkins " Soul Blues " recording.
Blues is very special and even that many times I don't understand very well the lyrics blues really moves me in a different way than jazz.
Regards and enjoy the music, r |
Dear Halcro/Timeltel: That Folk Singer recording is perhaps my more " clicks/pops " recording I have due that I heard it hundred hundred times and still do it.
Btw, Elmore James?: could you give info on recordings?
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric: I'm not surprised you disagree on the cartridge suspension subject. In several all around subjects ( in audio and out of audio. ) I disagree too due to my ignorance level and that's all.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Rangefinder: All LPs are warped with different warp " levels " and normally can't do harm to the stylus even in the ones that warped severely.
Now, IMHO when the warp is not wide by to short then the cartridge can jump/skip on it and this depend on the cartridge tracking habilities along how good is matched with the tonearm even in this case the stylus not " suffer " but the LP for the mistracking.
I think there are not to much research on that specific subject , at least I did not read about.
Stay calm about and listen to your warped records.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: That Magic Diamond was a refurbished 103 and that's why...
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Thuchan: Congratulations for you got the 6K+.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dgarretson: I agree that for a LOMC advocate with the right phono stage that Denon is something to own at least for comparisons against other top performers.
I never runned higher than 125 ohms but as you know loading with is phono cartridge-cartridge dependent and ovbiously teh whole system " flavor ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dover: That's what I remember from the DL1000 where the S1 is way different. I never owned that Dyna ( to expensive for me. ) but heard it in stock status ( not ebony body. ) and was really good and better than the DL 1000 but again the DL 1000 is a very low output so depend mainly on the quality of the phono stage.
In those old times my ignorance level was way higher than today and certainly my system was very poor on quality performance level that even that I owned the X88D ( expensive too. Mine came direct from Japan at lower price. ) I never be aware of its greatest and I sold it after six months with.
I own the 103D and yes is better performer than the entry level 103.
Multicaps: once my system had MIT muklticaps all around till I find something better more neutral ones, today I don't use any single MIT but I have to say that in some applications are good but not an excellent ones. Well, inside my electronics ( SS ) I mainly have teflon caps and in my speaker passive crossover I don't like MIT ones but each audio item design is different and its needs are different.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Storyboy: Phase reversed?, well I never thinked about. I assume you have first hand great exoeriences with that Technics and I'm guessing that if works with the 205 II maybe it could works with any other cartridges but till we test it we can't know about.
Could you share those experiences with your Technics one?, thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: Thank's but the thread was and is builded by each one of you, the thread is yours all.
So, congratulations and thank's to all of you that posted, post and seen and read it.
The MM/MI alternative is still alive!.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Grbluen2: Welcome a board!.
Well, the AHEE not only convinced almost all of us that the right and only road was the LOMC but today all of us know that LOMC and MM/MI are two very good alternatives " to do justice to our favorite music ". No more " one way ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear T_bone: Nice to hear from you again.
No, my today reference LOMC cartridge is not that 88D, it is something in its own class that shares with no other cartridge.
Btw, if the DACs on your CD player is one of the latest generations then listening to digital recordings is IMHO not " bad " at all but a great experience and a learning one for a skilled listener as I assume you are.
In several sound/music reproduction areas digital is IMHO unbeatable for any analog source. Only an opinion where through experiences you could and are the best judge on this subject.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear T_bone: I like Ikeda cartridges and through time I owned and own these cantileverless design. As Dover pointed out the Ikeda cartridges are not really friendly and when are in good " companion " and set up it can shows very good performance, what Ikeda cartridges makes it makes as no other cartridge but it is far from be the perfect design or near it. IMHO there are some MM/MI and other LOMC that performs at better quality performance level. The Ikeda are perhaps in the lowest ladder step about tracking abilities so distortion and music information are not the best one.
Now, the cantileverless approach on cartridge design is a desired one because " less is more " and the cantilever in normal cartridge designs has a deep influence in the cartridge quality performance level. I think that the cartridge cantileverless design has a lot of " land " to discover with IMHO great expectations and great rewards when that design " disappear " its today trade-offs.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm All are welcomed. Chiles rellenos, cerveza, mezcal and chapulines are ready for all!!!!
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nickiguy: I have experiences with the cartridge fixing sources but Expert stylus and as you experienced I have no doubt this one is very good too.
If waiting-time is important for the people then VDH and Axel are the best option: both are really fast and with first rate quality ( as the other two. ), 2-3 weeks could be the average fix time.
In the other side seems to me that Axel has more alternatives ( cantilever build materials and stylus shapes. ) that can fulfil better what we want or what the cartridge asks for.
I have no experience but I think that the guys of today Garrot cartridges in Australia is another source to fix cartridges. Maybe Halcro could put some " light " here.
Btw, that ADC TRX ( all models. ) design was and is a winner and IMHO does not matters whom fixed. Good that you are so satisfied with.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Don: I can't say if VdH deal with ES . Till today all the cartridges that was fixed by VdH the working time to fixing was no more than a week + shipping both ways.
I wonder how that could be if VdH deals with ES.
Anyway, the important subject is that we have different alternatives about, I wish we can have more in the future.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Audiopulse: Agree with Griffithds. Do you have a link for Northwest Analogue? , thank's in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: IMHO Stiltrains is right on that subject.
I know you are looking the " business " and at least some people of this analog forum already know what those humble MM/MI cartridges can shows.
IMHO the today prices for those top vintage ones are a " bargain " a " bargain of the century " for any one. All those top vintage MM/MI IMHO could easily be in the 3K+ cartridge price range due its quality performance level and this is the reality.
For me if you want to own a EPC100CMK4 you need to pay at least 3K for it: its performance IMHO justify that price against other alternatives and if that cartridge was re-.tipped for today status then even more money for it.
Yes, I know that people that does not have yet the MM/MI experience could be reluctant to pay that price. In the other side there are low very low opportunities to buy any of those top MM/MI cartridges and this is a factor inside the price.
Don't worry you could make your business about.
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: That 102 is not even near the 100C ( even the 205MK4 IMHO outperform it. ) and IMHO that 102 has the disadvantage to come with integrated headshell. Its " brother ": the 202 was a Technics entry level.
Specs on that 102 are far away from the 100C or 205MK4. But maybe some one here could ve interested, at the end is a Technics one.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: This link confirm what the other links that Timeltel shares with us about HF human been perception:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
We have to remember that our whole body works as " ears " on music perception, that's that not only the ears/brain makes that function but our bones and skin and hair ( beteween other biody parts. ) " hear " too. in the other side our brain synttetize part of what we hear that we can't hear but that we have experienced on that/it.
There are several studies on the whole subject that's " severe " complex and exciting.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: Iheard twice the Magic Diamond: one with a Walker and one in other system.
Is it something special?, IMHO it is not. It is agood cartridge but nothing to remember that helps to say: " hey this is great and better that other top performers I heard ".
I don't know the other two models you posted.
Now, the 103 success IMHO is not because the speric/ conical stylus shape but mainly because its motor. That stylus came with conical stylus because the cartridge belongs to a very restricted consumer price range and not because Denon choosed as the better alternative. To confirm this fact all the other Denons including the top ones were designed with no conical stylus shape.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dlaloum: What you posted you already posted several months ago: intermodulation and UHFC: how to differentiate in between?
Maybe a black art but no precise answers yet. We or some one else has to make deep research about. But what you posted not only not diminish what Timeltel or I already posted through conclusions or links only say that there are some subjects that needs explanation or better tan that: need to test in a sure way to know what in a hell is happening down there.
In the other side intermodulation or UHFC the subject is if in any way we can or we can't hear it. Several research/studies said we can. Point is: why can we have doubts about? or how can we prove we can't hear?: can you? or you agree to disagree. I don't have a test laboratory in home that could permit me to separate IMD from UHFC but certainly this can do it.
Btw, when I add the supertweeters in my audio system not only improved the high/UHFC and soundstage information but improved in an unexpected way the low bass. I think this last happened because the wider contrast between frequency system extremes response.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: IMHO in theory the guy behind the Magic Diamond cartridge design probably is right.
I own a Fulton cartridge ( LOMC ) that comes with conical tip (0.65m ) and has very good specs, example on frequency response: 10hz to 60khz running at 1.5grs. This cartridge performs really good and if I don't tell you that has a conical stylus you can't even imagine but you could swears comes with a line contact: in this design I don't feel or think I'm missing music recorded information.
The stylus shape is always important but the whole cartridge design including its cantilever is way more important.
I posted sveral times through the years that cantilever build material is more importabt than the stylus shape and other persons confirm that including experts as J.Carr and by coincidence Dominic ( the new fix cartridge source in the " block ". ) quoted me by email this:
" A vast majority of cartridges can be improved by upgrading the cantilevers and tips. Hollow aluminium cantilevers in my experience have a poor performance and are actually quite flexible. Upgrading the cantilever only, would in all cases offer a major upgrade over an aluminium one. A mentioned my nickel cantilever. These are hand made individually for each upgrade. They are much stiffer than alloy cantilevers, though not as much as boron. This gives a lovely rich and detailed presentation. Boron will sound more refined and accurate, and ruby even more so. Tip upgrades will also help, but not to the degree you may think. There is no getting away from the fact that a micro ridge/line contact tip will give a better performance compared to a conical or simple elliptical tip, offering better frequency extension and groove noise, but even a conical tip will sound very convincing if mated to a better cantilever. Food for thought. I see many many cartridges, and I find there are so many I could improve quite simply with new cantilevers etc. " ++++
What am I trying to say?: that even a conical tip can works great when mated with the right cartridge motor and the right cantilever. The 103 motor is a good one but not good enough for a conical stylus as what happened with the Fulton one. Of course the Fulton has a higher price: 600.00 in its time.
Now, conical or line contact no one can through a pivot tonearm to follow in precise way the groove record modulations because of traking errors by the tonearm geometry, tracking errors by the cartridge it self and that is almost imposible to design and set up correctly a cartridge stylus shape that match exactly the groove modulations cutted in the recordings. We belongs to an imperfect world so all what we can tallk about are theory but on playback almost nothing of that theory can be duplicated.
Btw, Nandric all that near perfect protractors only shows a theory behind it but when the stylus is in playback that near perfect set up " disappear 2 due to record imperfections, LP wraps and waves that change the VTA/SRA and VTF. We have to live with this reality and this reality tell us that we have must to live with these full of distortion analog medium. So a discussion about stylus shape is more something academic that useful on the whole audio analogquality performance subject. We all know that in analog 2+2 not always is 4: some time is 6 and some times could be 9.
Regards and enjoy the music, r. |
Nandric: I forgot, on playback the cartridge overhang that we set up through a protractor is loosed during playback due to records imperfections we already know exist.
R. |
Dear Fleib: Those 123 pages were writed through 4 years and through those years we learned many things and thank's to that " learning " some of us change a little on set up with some cartridges.
About tonearm effective mass and cartridge compliance there are IMHO several " roads " each one with its own trade-offs. Yes one of that road to analize is the one you posted because we have to take in count not only what VTF seen the cartridge but that tonearm moving mass along the tonearm effective length.
I made and have a lot of experiences trying to look for real differences on quality performance ( what we hear. ) that we can related not to the tonearm overall design but to that effective mass in the tonearm and the compliance in the cartridge and honesty till today I have not a precise answer about. Is not easy to have precise answers in that subject because to many factors invloved and related in between.
Through this thread and in other threads I posted that I already experienced resonance frequencies between tonearm and cartridge as low as 4hz with out single problem, at least that I was aware, that same cartridge in the same tonearm with a 8hz resonance frequencies where I can't detect an improvement because of this friendly resonant frequency. Of course all these kind of tests were by ear.
The interesting subject could be to bring that kind of " stage " to laboratory level and see what is really happening there and with that information test under playback if those laboratory results could have some sense on what we are hearing.
Other subject that in some way bother me is what you posted:
+++++ " removeable headshells disqualify you from making "ultimate comparisons" " +++++
in my system I have removeable headshell tonearm designs and non-removeable ones. In both cases the phono wires goes directly from cartridge pin connectors to my phonolinepreamp. I would like to know and appreciate that you can tell us what are the main factors that you took as foundation for that posted statement. Maybe I'm missing something important that I/we are not aware of it: thank you in advance.
Btw, your comment on the M20FL/E gives me the opportunity to test both cartridges again.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: That thread came from 2007 and that's was the first time I was in touch with the MD. I heard it at Slipknot's place on the Walker, the Essential 3150 phonolinepreamp ( I think that with Shindo phono too: I can't remember for sure. ) and Kharma speakers.
From that 2007 thread people were arguing that the MD was/had a 103 motor and I posted there that if that was true does not means performed as a 103 but way different: way better quality.
Nothing is wrong with that 103 cartridge motor, today exist several cartridges that outperform easily the 103 that shares the same motor. This is something as with the AT and CA cartridges and I already posted my take with that was the same as with the 103 and MD. At the end the quality performance level of the MD is not thak's to Denon but to the MD " designer " as with the Clearaudio Virtuoso Wood.
In the other side I agree with Lewm about that MD designer as a good marketing/business guy.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: ++++ " The crux of the matter is the ability to distinguish between "better" and "worse". " +++
or just different.?????
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Stltrains: I agree with you if and only if those full range speakers are designed with a high frequency driver that can goes to 50khz and at the other frequency extreme the crossover from woofer to midrange is no higher than between 80hz to 100hz and the prefrence is that that bass driver could be self powered.
Regards and enjoy the music, r. |
Dear Dlaloum: +++++ " High compliance, matched with a lower mass arm, as a result passes far less energy on. And as a corollary, requires less damping in the arm - which is a good thing, as damping usually adds mass, and the arm needs less mass not more! " +++++
not always damping add mass to tonearm: what about tonearm build material " self damping "? I mean that that material has its own damping by it self to " kill " those cartridge/tonearm resonances. Sounds like this kind of material ( if exist ) could be " ideal " one for tonearm or arm wands.
Even low compliance cartridges and its transfered energy to the tonearm could be " killed " too.
As with the platter build material in the TT the tonearm build material is the " key " on that regards and other quality performance " subjects " with these audio devices that could include cartridge body construction.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
and don't forget Tannoy ones that Iown that goes to 50khz and others that comes from Japan.
Rgerads and enjoy the music, R. |