Dear nandric: I seen you put on sale your Astatic MF-200, obviously you was not satisfied with. I don't know if was touched or not by Axel but that MF-200 IMHO has nothing to envy to the Glanz as the MF-100 ( this the top of the line. ).
Till you have those three cartridges in the same system and test it is very dificult to make a whole evaluation. In the other side we have to remember that your MF-200 and MF-100 are stand alone designs made it by Glanz/Mitachi where Astatic bought the Glanz patent design. The Glanz integrated headshell designs could sounds more dynamics because its additional distortions due to those very old internal connections and obviously that integrated headshell where the Astatic ones have not.
Antway good that you find out that " nirvana ", at the end that's what we are looking around.
I wish I could be there as you some day.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: I have a lot of experiences to share with all of you but time was my " enemy ". I will take that time to post about but in the mean time two of my cartridge references are two LOMC vintage cartridges:
Ortofon MC 2000 and Spectral MCR Signature.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Frogman: +++++ " Music is, first and foremost, about dynamics. Without accuracy in dynamics to convey human expression it is simply sound. It may be beautiful, tonally accurate sound; but, just sound. " +++++
yes and many of us have or achieved only " sound ". That " power presence " I talked about seems similar to what you expressed as " dynamic presence ". Problem with these " new " audio vocabolary is to understand what it means and how can we aware of it against " only sound "? because that " only sound " has its own " dynamic/power presence " level.
Thinking a little about maybe all of us are aware of that " dynamic/power presence " but at different levels. You touched a condition " sin-equanon " when you posted: """ with out accuracy on dynamics """", this is an elusive subject because we all are accustomed to several audio distortions and this fact makes really dificult to know if what we have is true " accuracy on dynamics " or only distortions that I like it. IMHO we have to learn about, I'm learning I'm in that every day process.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: That fuse direction ( as with cables. ) I think was promoted by some fuse sellers/manufacturers. There are some people that swear they can hear a diffrence on the fuse " direction ", I test it with the HFT and SR 20 and makes no difference. The designer/manufacturer on the SR 20 claims there is no difference.
The question about AC fuses is IMHO still in the " air ": why the SR 20 ( or other fancy fuse. ) makes a difference makes an improvement?, I have no precise answers and as like you only speculations with out real foundations.
Anyway, the real and important subject about fuses is that can makes an important difference on quality performance level. In the case of the SR 20 those differences are not a tiny ones but significant. When I received my first SR 20 I was testing my Audioquest 7000 Fe5 that even that's a good performer IMHO was a little on the warm side, that coloration disappear with the new SR 20 fuses and its performance was enhanced. I prefered my XV-1s over the Fe5 till this change on fuses where the Fe5 now is nearest to the top performance level of the XV-1s that I audiotioned with the SR 20s in the system.
Things with fuses are confused or gives no-reasons and build that " confusion ". Frogman pointed out that the fuse scenario is similar to the cables one and no one has precvise answer about. Every cable manufacturers claim several advantages of their designs but : all them are right. all them have reason?, some claims about preclude advantages when are compared against the claims of other cable manufacturer: whom is right????
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: I'm familiar with the Orto too, I owned/ own or listening every single LOMC Orto cartridge and the MC 2000 is different has not the Orto " signature ", not even the A90 ( I don't heard yet the Anna in my system. ) is " similar " in some ways. The whole design MC 2000 characteristics were unique to that cartridge and some of them never used after the MC 2000. Even some of those design characteristics were one against each other: the cartridge is a " heavy " one ( over 10 grs. ) with a high compliance 20cu and a ridiculous output level of only 0.05mv. Normaly the cartridge with almost any tonearm always is out of that ideal resonance frequency range: 8hz to 12hz. Even that it is a winner tracker and beats in this regards to many top MM/MI cartridges that suppose are better trackers than a LOMC cartridges.
The Spectral even that is a LOMC with 0.2mv performs different but for me is a " reference " cartridge.
As I posted I will take the time to report all my last months experiences with LOMC/HOMC and MM/MI cartridges and a stock vintage tonearm that I can't know why I never " take care " on it when is a first rate tonearm by IMHO any tonearm standards.
My each " day " audio item discoveries is mainly with my attitude to stay " disatisfed " always looking for better quality performance level. I meet no Nirvana as some other people because in that first moment that I think Imy system achieved that Nirvana my quest ends. My common sense tell me that in this absolutely imperfect audio world and more specific on analog world the Nirvana is far away that what any one of us could imagine.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear In_shore: I think Timeltel can confirm this: the D3 you bought was not the Empire original design ( that's what Timeltel and other people including me have. ) but a second design named Gold and yours is a little different from the original.
I own the original and heard in my system the Gold and for whatever reason you could think I prefer the Original D3 but as you said your Gold is really good too.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: Forgert about tubes ( what Dover heard it was how his system performed not the cartridge. ). Differences between what Dover heard it and what I heard on the same cartridge is due mainly: when the cartridge was heard by him? last week, last month, last year, 10+ years ago?. I'm listening to this Spectral gem right now.
The other reasons are the differences between Dover and I music/sound priorities and what kind of distortions he and I are willing to tolerate and of course in which overall set up he and I heard the cartridge.
If you can find out this cartridge do it a favor a buy it and if you don't like it I promise you that I can buy from you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Halcro: +++++ " .I appear to like all the same 'distortions' as Thuchan and the Professor. Not that there's anything wrong with that......? " ++++++
of course nothing wrong with that. Certainly there are differences in the kind of distortions all three likes. IMHO you are nearer to Thuchan than Timeltel in the same way that IMHO thuchan has now a japanese oriented sound signature. The thuchan sound signature I think was choosed inside what his group likes that I think is not the Timeltel case.
Anyway, good that any one likes what they like. Nothing wrong with that!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: I own that Empire LAC in NOS condition and I think I never test it. Now, that you linked that Lenco thread a original Empire 4000D3 cartridge posted that the Empire EDR.9 ( that I own too. ) is really good. This Empire was in its time the top of the line with a 250.00 retail price. I have years with this cartridge untouched and maybe is time to give a listen and confirm its performance quality level.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: As I posted please forget of what I said on tubes and yes I'm one of the persons that not only think but can prove that tubes can not be absolutely accurate, at least against SS ones and in a frequency range from 2hz to 100khz. As always I don't want to open the tube window to discuss it, I know you prefer tubes and I know I prefer SS and what we prefer is the important subject and not what I think on what you like.
Btw, sooner or latter I will try my Carnegie One and Carnegie two, unfortunately each single day has only 24 hours and no more.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Thuchan: Some of my vintage tonearms that I own and did not put on sale yet is because I like how it looks and the 8000 is one of them. I use it no more, believe or not I already know everything I need to know on its quality performance level and today can't help me in the Nirvana quest.
Several times that my opinion on different subjects differ drasticaly from yours and other respectable Agoner's is because my targets on that quest does not permit to me to be sticky/stuck/married with any audio item, I'm " married " with MUSIC only and what I want is to achieve the best experience any one can have through an audio system and when I say the best means: REAL, NEUTRAL, ACCURATE, DISTORTION FREE and EMOTIONAL with that marvelous POWER/DYNAMIC PRESENCE that only live music can shows.
SAEC tonearms as many other are good tonearms but not good enough for my targets.
++++ " maybe you should rethink some configurations in parts of your system. " ++++++
I don't know how you builded your audio system or what you move to make changes over time inside that system. Today I work with very precise targets ( final targets, what want I to achieve?. ) my first system steps way before tonearms/cartridges/TT and the like is to up-date/improve electronics/speakers quality performance level ( why do you think I invest 1K+ on those SR 20 fuses?. I don't have the kind of money you have, for me is a tremendous effort. ) because is through these audio system links where I can evaluate/compare cartridges, tonearms or TT. I know that I need to follow with that improve system attitude and I'm willing to do it.
So, Thuchan not because the 8000 is not good enough I have to re-think what is happening in other parts of my system. IMHO my system was and is re-thinking almost each day at a level you can imagine because you don't know it. In my system I'm aware of " things " you can't in yours not only because system limitations ( manufacturer names never build a top audio system. ) but because what you want is different of what I want and because you and me are standing in different " steps " in the Audio Learning Curve.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
A finger error, it has to say:
"""""""""" re-thinking almost each day at a level you can't imagine because you don't know it. """"""""""""""""
Maybe in all these friendly discussions and because how I'm training in audio every day I understand almost all what you and other posted on audio experiences ( even that I never heard it your systems. ) but for many of you is extremely dificult to understand some audio experiences I share that differs drasticaly on with the same audio item you are having.
One thing is sure, I share with all of you the main audio target: enjoy the music always.
R. |
Dear Thuchan: As Nandric posted: different roads to Rome. Problem is that some of us that want it to arrive Rome ( at any Rome's place. ) never did it but arrived to Alaska and the subject is that some of them think that that Alaska is Rome.
No, I don't think not only me but any one of you are " fool ", sometimes any one of us could be wrong and this happens, subject is that we can be aware over a discussion that we are wrong and why we are wrong and then retify. I did it several times through my Agon history.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Harold-not-the barrel: Thaks for your advice, I bought it few minutes ago. Thank you again.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lharasim: Yes, I remember very well R.Fulton, I never had the money to achieve his cables but I owned a very especial TT mat that was well regarded in its time and that I know that today some people are trying to get it, in those old times I was ignorant on almost all in audio and I sold it.
About Jim Strickland I heard several times those lovely Acoustat ( I think the latest I heard was the 2+2, but I'm not sure. )that today several proudly owners refuse to change for any other speaker electrostatic or not, so some " magic " there.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric: ++++ " Should this not be 'all roads lead to Rome?' " +++++
yes, no one of us wants to arrive Alaska but Rome. The subject is not only how can we try to arrive there but in which " condition " we arrived. I mean that all of us can arrive to Rome but I think there are " simple " things that when we are in Rome makes differences in between each one of us. These differences are the important ones that were defined for our knowledge/skills level that is different in each one of us and defined too for what we want to do in Rome and when we are in Rome what we want to know on that " city " how can we have and enjoy the Rome's fun.
Human beens are simple " items " very complex ones, any one of us are unique in almost every way other that all are human beens
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Jbethree: I think you are a lot better than an Agon policy.
I agree with Halcro and follow posting.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: I envy you: two NOS nude stereohedron?, just great!!.
Yes, my Phonolinepreamp was designed with two separate discrete phono stages: one MC and one MM.
R. |
Dear Fleib: I could do it because I have " all " Precept versions and almost all ATs/Signets. I try to do it today/tomorrow and compare other this thread measurements from other persons.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Harold-not-the-barrel : Playing with different load impedance/capacitance values could help a little about. It is dificult to know exactly what is happening down there which factors are contributing to that sibilant problem.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds: If you like the OM20 then you need to hear the =M40 that's even better performer. Ortofon is warranty of high quality performer products and the OM is no exception.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Stltrains: Your 15Sa with the 20SS certainly is a " winner " and almost the 20SS. We have to remember that the main difference between the 15 and the 20 model is because this one measured better due that the the stylus tip was more " perfect " than the similar one of the 15 models.
I have on hand two other 320 short nose samples other that the one I sold. I don't tested yet but for what I remember in my first sample the 320 quality level performance is second to almost none. I don't like how the cartridge looks but I like its performance level.
Good to know that your AKG P100LE is back now, you will enjoy it. I think that after my review I did not give a listening any more. IMHO this AKG is in a different " league " that many of the well regarded cartridges we usually talk about. I don't post very often on the P100LE because people have no reference because they never had the opportunity to heard it not even once. I think that you and me are living alone in the AKG " island " a unique island I have to say.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
No answer to any " stupid " post.
R. |
Dear Nandric: I agree with you. Today cartridge fixing price is higher than the price we paid for the cartridge it self so we have two think twice before that " refresh " be justified but this fact is something good because today we will send to " refresh " only what is worth to do it and not like in the past that we send it everything with a " happy " attitude where" cost was no object ".
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: For the Acutex " hystory " all things seems to me that those cartridges share the same motor. According with the Acutex manual impedance and DC resistance is the same and the only difference between the 315/312 and 320 is that the 320 has an output level of 3.8mv against 4.00mv of its brothers.
So, I think that is probable that after the Axel or other source " refresh " that cartridge will perform " even better " than the stock 320 one. I think is worth to try it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: When an unfortunate home audio system event/accident was at the same time a fortunate one?????
well I just had that kind of experience that I want to share with all of you:
for the last two weeks I was testing two formidable and unexpected great vintage tonearms, the Sony PUA-237 and the JVC UA-7045:
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/sony/pua-237.shtml
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/jvc/ua-7045.shtml
at the same time Iwas and am testing several " new " cartridges that I bought in the last months ( you can read it to have an idea which cartridges are on my virtual Agon system : LOMC and MM/MI. ).
well, when I was testing my " new " Stanton 981 HZS/2 ( mounted in the Sony PUA-237 ) and after made it a comparison with its low output brother ( the 981 LZS. Btw, no contest in almost any way, IMHO the high output 981 Stanton is a better performer than the low output version. Lewm is you like it your LO 981 then I'm sure that you " will die " for the HO 981 after heard it. ) I started a comparison against the the Clearaudio Virtuoso black wood ( mounted in the JVC UA.7045. ) and the Astatic MF-200.
As you know in all my tonearms I use as " internal tonearm wiring " the Audio Note Silver that is so tiny that could be broke is you " see it in a bad way ". This Audio Note cable I'm using in external way in all my tonearms so it is exposed to anything.
Suddenly when I took my wood clamp from a TT to use it in the other TT I hit ( by accident ) with the clamp the JVC tonearm and the clamp " flight " alone and hit the Sony tonearm where the Stanton was mounted and with no stylus guard on place because I was playing with.
The hit to the Sony tonearm was " abrupt " and the Stanton crash against the in place LP. Obviously that original in mint condition Stanton stylus/cantilever bent and the " terrifc " 981 HZS stay out of work. Even with the cantilever bent I tested and one channel had no sound. After this I checked the Clearaudio for sound and when the stylus hit the LP there was no single sound from both channels and the first thing that came to my brain was that because " something " my Phonolinepreamp " was damaged as soemthing different but not so different happened with the Halcro electronics. That night was a nightmare for me because I even can't dream because I was rally worried on the whole concecuences of that accident.
Next day I analysed if the Essential could be damaged for that " something " and my conclusion was that can't be damaged ( our design is bullet proof. ). So, I change the cartridges for other different models with out success, at this moment my stress level was at the top. Then I checked both interconnect cables that were fine.
The Audio Note silver wire is so tiny that you can be aware if was broken and this exactly is what happened. In the JVC tonearm 3 of the four wires were broken and in the Sony tonearm one wire was broken ( that's why the Stanton had sound only in one channel. ). With this " discovery " calm return to my mind and what I did was try to fix both tonearm wires but I recovery only one because the other ( the one that suffer the three broken wires ) was broken almost at the half length of the wire so I can't use it any more ( and I have to say that this cable is an expensive one. ).
Now, I sstill was truly disapointed because the Stanton 981 HZS was out of work but then I remembered that I own/have the Pickering XVS 5000/2 that in theory came with the same stylus than the 981 HZS. The stylus holder in the Picckering and Stanton are way different but for my luck each one fits in precise way in between. Now, I', safe!!!and started to make a Stanton set up ( the Pickering stylus/cantilever/holder is more weighty than the Stanton one. ) again and what I " discovery " was astonished::
the original Stanton stylus was in mint condition as the Pickering one. I made the Stanton set up in the same Sony tonearm and nothing changed but the original Pickering XVS 5000/2 stylus replacement.
What a fortunate accident because the Stanton quality performance level that already been extraordinary improves overall in an unpected way. Why? what happen here?, I could not say it for sure because both stylus assembles were in mint condition but even that both stylus did not track the grooves with similar " applomb ". Example, in the Telarc 1812 recording the original Stanton can't track in clean way all the cannon shots, against that the Pickering one tracks all the shots inpristine way and this difference made and make the diffrence in the Stanton cartridge quality performance level. This fact is a confirmation of what I posted sevral times: that in even circumstances the cartridge with better tracking habilities is always the best performer.
Any one of you need to hear the Telarc 1812 cannon shots through my Stanton is just an amazing and unique experience. Well maybe you can approach that experience because FIM recording label just put on sale a new recording direct from the original Telarc mastering where FIM forms a team for that recording where were the same team that recorded the original one but using the today digital technology. I had on hand this FIM 1812 LP and is really fine.
It is better this transfer than the original? , not really: in some ways it is and in other the original is better. In some of the cannon shots the original beats this FIM re-issue but even that and due that the original Telarc is dificult and expensive to have the FIM recording can gives you a very good " touch " of what " has on hand " your audio system. Btw, with the FIM you have to crank-up the volume because was recorded at lower level than the original.
Ok, where put I this Stanton 981 HZS/2 against other cartridge stars?, obviously at the very top even better than the Clearaudio. I like it a lot even with its original Stanton stylus but with this Pickering one is just formidable!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: Lucky you are to bought that NOS 7500 stylus replacement, well this is the same one in the 5000 and 981 ( both versions ): nude streohedron II.
No, I don't try it yet my Pickering XSV 5000 but obviously I will in the sort time. Btw, I like it more the gold shiny 5000 metal cartridge body that the " plain " Stanton silver.
The 5000 is a step down the 7500 and the 100komhs to loading is to have success with not only the CD-4 but in general because frequency is extended almost flat to 50khz.
LOMC is a different design than the MM/MI, both with is own advantages and disadvantages. Yes the LOMC ones are really good and today my reference cartridges belongs to LOMC cartridges with high compliance that gives it a lot better tracking habilities. Btw, my Stanton , I think , I could put on that " cartridge reference " niche.
+++++ " I long ago spotted the Victor tonearms as stone cold bargains in today's market, but I've never bought one, because I don't "need" it. " +++++
I can tell you for sure that you need that JVC UA-7045 tonearm, is really good and handle with accuracy/neutrality and applomb almost any cartridge, it makes that the cartridges shows improvements that you did not aware were there.
It is not so very good looking and wow factor as the SAEC 8000 or 506 but its performance put on shame those good looking SAEC tonearms. Well, I like the JVC and Sony look and love its quality performance and as you said today we can get by " penauts " both of these " stars ".
I bought a JVC TT ( TT 71 ) not because the TT ( I don't need another TT. ) but because it came with the UA-7045 tonearm. I bought for almost nothing, the tonearm was " free " of charge.
Btw, I tested the TT 71 in naked fashion and compare it against the 81 and 101 and my Denons and for my surprise the 71 outperforms overall the 101 and compete almost bis a bis to the Denon 75/80. I still prefer the Denon but this JVC is a lot lot better that what we could think. Nice discovery by " accident ". I think that between other things ( specs for example ) the Denon double-construction platter help a lot to makes a difference against the JVC ones that are very good performers too. No, the Denons's are not perfect but very hard to beat even for the Technics SP10MK2. Yes, I like the Denons, I don't use ( for now ) any more my Technics because gives me no advantages against the Denon.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman: Yes, Thakker is handling both vbersions the low and high impedance but you have to invest 500.00 Euros for each one. These 980 are the non-calibrated " 981 " cartridge models. Yes this 980 is IMHO better than your 881.
Well, your pocket will decide what to do about. Take in count that the re-sale price on your 881 is important too.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: I'm with you and that's exactly what always looks my posts on that circumstances.
IMHO ( and I posted several times in different threads. ) the name of the game in high end audio are: distortion levels ( any kind of distortions. ). A perfect audio system could be the one that is distortions-free ( I'm talking in general way. Of course there are several other factors about but the main one for me are those distortions elsewhere an audio system. ).
If you read some of my posts about I always said that my main targets in audio are: accuracy and neutrality. You can approach those targets when you work to lower and lower distortions all over your audio system. When we have accuracy, neutrality and low low distortions then that audio system improves its resolution a resolution that we need it when we make item comparisons. As higher resolution as better comparisons and is that way when you really be aware of differences that with a low resolution system you just can't do it.
Your system and mine have different resolution levels and it's there where when we heard the same cartridge we can have some " diffrences " but I want to say that at the end overall you and me can/could coincide on our opinion in that cartridge even that exist those system resolution differences.
That's all.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: ++++++ " There is no such thing as total neutrality in an audio system. It's an absolute that one can seek to reach (one's system can always get "better"), but one should not expect to reach it, ... " +++++
I agree but IMHO there are different level of resolution and distortion in any audio system in the same way exist different level of cartridge quality performance.
I'm not totally sure that my system can resolve every tiny detail than yours or yours than mine ( well I know but is only for " my eyes ". ), what I'm sure is that both are different. That can coincide of detail resolution in 98% of music playback does not means are the same because that " volatil " 2% remaing resolution is the one that makes the differences Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Timeltel: An important, critical and " sensible " word.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
When bass system generated " trash " disappear the system " new " experience is overwhelming where there are no words to express it ( at least I don't have it. ): it's a new experience and to understand it we have to live it or if can't do it " die/live with ignorance ".
R. |
My mistake, the last sentence need to be read it this way:
+++++++ I can't lose with that self attitude ++++++++ , I think?????
R. |
Dear Lewm: There is nothing perfect and if it is true that additional crossover is a " penalty " we have to evaluate this " penalty " against several advantages that can be achieved by the integration of a pair of active subs in true stereo fashion to passive speakers.
I don't want to repeat what I already did it on this subject several times in several threads only that the main achivement with the subs integration is to lower the system IMD, here you can read something about ( obviously that there are other important targets/advantages on that subs integration. ):
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&27&4#27
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&84&4#84
Now, in my system my main ADS speakers are untouched by any external crossover. What I did was to change the ML monoblok amplifiers the frequency range where already are operating by design for a higher frequency that in my case is 78hz. What I did is to change one ML cap and one resistor for different values and a lot better quality, here I'm not only did the crossover as I want it but improves the quality performance using those caps/resistors of top top quality: Vishay 275 resistors ( thank's Dgarretson. ) and top of the line teflon V-caps.
So I have not any single crossover penalty and I'm sure you can do the same with your amps there.
Perhaps the real integration of subs to an existing main speakers be the most dificult task down there. I posted several times that for I can acomplish that task I took more than a year testing and testing on phase, volume, crossover point, etc, etc. till I achieve that almost perfect integration with out that " There is a discontinuity big as the Grand Canyon, like two different speakers. I never said that the subs integration in any system is an easy task because it is not but when do it in the " right " way the rewards are and makes a paramount improvement to the audio system.
+++++ " Anyway, my huge ESLs have thunderous bass " +++++
I never speak about " thundereous bass " using subs because this is not the main target could be a second target but IMHO never the main one.
My bass is nothing but " thundereous ", the bass management in my system is almost perfect and when you heard it you can't tell exist subs on it. You only know when the music ask for it and even that is very well under control: like in a live event with out the live event dynamics.
I know very well your ESL trhough my friend Guillermo system and I know what you mean with that distorted " thundereous " bass that preclude the great clarity that those ESL can shows you.
Now, all what you argue are only theory and this is the way you are. I can remember in the TT naked thread that you was the more fierce person argueing against because in theory several disadvantages and Halcro, me and other told you that you had the opportunity to tested through your Denon and Technics TT and you put several excuses for not do it even that IMHO you could do it, even I told you how.
You can argue anything you want but till you test it in your own system you never can prove your arguments. I'm sure that if in the time decide to test it you never come back to your today system status.
Almost always my arguments are not only theory but facts ( yes my facts but anyway are facts. ). If some one post something where I can be wrong I don't argue but try to test the " alternative " and I do everything to test the " alternative " in the best way and then decide what to do: if I was wrong I will fix it and if not then I learned that what I had was " right ". I can lose with that self attitude.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dover: ++++ " the best subwoofer implementations I've heard have nothing ab..... " ++++
I think you need to hear subs with the same system implementation and set up refination ( fine tunning ) like mine.
As I posted to Lewm till you can hear something similar in your own system it is not only dificult to understand it but dificult that your arguments have some kind of foundation not as theory but as a fact.
Anyway, I don't want or need to convince you about. Normaly through my posts all I want it is to share my true experiences and almost never theories.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dgarretson: I want to share my experiences about: exactly what you are experienced with your Velodynes integration was what I experienced for several months each time I made changes for system improvements elsewhere my system but the subs:
+++++" I can now hear more clearly the discontinuity between mains and sub-- discontinuities of timing and of tonality " ++++
every single improvement in my system need it that I made it a whole new subs set up but when you are " there " ( " perfect " integration ) you will know because with new system improvements you don't need almost any subs changes on set up and that's where I'm .
Maybe I'm lucky with my system because the ADS woofers are paper cone ones exactly as my subs that comes with paper cones ( my model is different from yours, mine are the HGS series not the DD and I choosed because its paper cones build material. ), the ADS and Velodyne crossover filters are by design second order and maybe because of that and the time I put on that sub integration I realy don't have any single discontinuity never. I had it but not now.
In my system the subs are " invisible ", the bass sound always comes from the main stage even that my subs are in front side firing of the ADS main speakers.
Btw, I try several diffrent frequency crossover in the subs and main speakers ( including 30hz as you. ) but in my system/room what works better is obviously what I have now. Crossover frequency points are critical in the subs/speaker/room integration more that we can think.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear firneds: Precept 440 made by AT?, these experiences for tomorrow. I have to slep now.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: The Velodyne acelerometer/servo senses 16,000 times each SECOND the cone movements to correct any single deviation that could increment the THD.
For you can have and idea of what we are talking about think on this the very well regarded JL active subwoofers at 50hz and 120SPL at 1m shows a THD from 6.5% and 10.0% THD, obviously that at 20hz that THD goes even higher.
Been optimistic your ESL at least shows five to ten higher THD on that same circumstances and this is the kind level of distortions you can hear through those ESLs and maybe your ESL can't handle 50hz at 120SPL!
Velodyne shows 0.5% THD at 20hz!!!!!!!!!
There is no contest against no other single home system active subwoofer and against your ESL could be " patetic " to make any comparison on the bass frequency range and this sole fact makes a paramount difference by order of magnitud.
IMHO no argument can " fight " against those facts.
I think that every one of us must to take more seriously the bass frequency management in your audio system. IMHO as good this bass management as good that audio system, here is where belongs the systems differences in between.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear friends: I have not to much time today to be more specific/wide on the Precept 440 ( AT especial design. ) but right now all I can say is to recomend that if you look out there do it a favor and buy it. IMHO has and belongs to a cartridge reference level niche.
Yes, was designed and build by AT but is a " new " AT kind of performance.
Latter I will try to find out time to be more specific about.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Halcro: It's weird what happen with your DM10 because normally that kind of audio level electronics were designed to protect the differeent stages against that kind of events and many others. I understand this is the seond time in the last few months that your DM10 ( for different kind of events. ) was out of work. I don't like it that situation and maybe is time to think in the possibility of a change of Phonolinepreamp.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Friends:
M E R R Y C H R I S T M A S A N D
A H E A L T H Y F U L L O F S U C C E S S
2 0 1 3 ! ! !
to all of you along your dearest family.
Sincerely,
Raul. |
Dear griffithds: Stupid of me because now I will have a Pickering stylus with no cartridge to hear it.
I'm not angry with your wrong statement that I followed but with my self because I always make a research before I to take any single audio action but this time. My mistake was the Richard reference you did because he is the real Stanton/Pickering guru ( that I know him very well through Lenco forum. ) and if he was your reference then I take your statement for sure.
Never mind as I said was my mistake. I hope that in the future that error by my self could give me some reward: who knows?
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds: No, are not the same. What I'm telling is that over the years when appeared " line contact " stylus shape: Shibata, Stereohedron, VDH 1 and the like many people name it as " lene contact " because all them have a wider stylus contact area with the groove.
About AT its Sibata ones are different than the Line Contact ones or the MR stylus shape even in what AT name it as Line Contact there are variations and diferent quality on the polish of the stylus or grain oriented and the like.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Travbrow: Good, now you are " calm " because with no answer to our email we go on " desesperation ", at least is what happen to me in that situation.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Halcro: Thank's for the clarification about. I was thinking something really bad because even you started a thread only for that " event ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " By the way, you guys would get into a lot less trouble, if you would only stick to the stylus assembly that the audio gods intended for use with your particular cartridge. " +++++
yes, less problems but less learning/discover " new and exiciting " experiences too.
My latest 981 HZS experiences confirm my statement because thank's that I'm not sticked to the 981HZS and tested with the 5000XVS many of us learned about.
I think that each one of us are looking for the " best " we can achieve and that's why some of us are hyperactive on that subject.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds/Timeltel: I decide to go for the TL3/4 cartridge body for my TL4S stylus. As Lewm said it: it was with those cartridge body the designer intented the best of both.
Stanton/Pickering are so " wide " in models that intent to test an almost " infinite " stylus alternatives in between could be not only " boring " and time consuming but maybe with small rewards for the huge " job " to do it and remember that to do it we have to buy cartridges/stylus.
I think that I will stay " calm " about Stanton/Pickering with my two Stanton 981 L/H version , the Pickering 5000XVS and the TL-4S.
Is there any reason to go on with? , I think not.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: Well, stay " calm " only means that I will not following Stanton/Pickering cartridge hunt with what I own I think is enough.
Of course that the fire of new experiences never expired or expire, exiting/adrenaline is part of our audio life!.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dover: Something like that was what Cardas made with its cartridge wood body build by Benz Micro and where the BM has not the wood body " holes ".
It is obvious that those " changes " on the build material makes a difference because change its resonances frequencies and how those resonances travel and " broke " through its " trip ".
That's what happen with tapered cantilevers and tapered arm wand tonearms and even on tiny shape differences on headshells.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Fleib: The 550 fits the PC-440 and I think that AT 440 too.
I don't post yet my Precept 440 experiences because I just changed the last SR20 fuses ( 4 of them. ) in my ML monoblocks that as the other fuses changes makes a difference for the better and I have to re-evaluate not only the Precepts but all the other cartridges ( MM/MI/MC. ) with I used as comparisons.
Btw, I heard the AT 440 in my system ( time ago ) and other system and I found out is a cartridge that not satisfied my " priorities " at both frequency extremes. I would like to try it again if I have the opportunity.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |