It is my subjective opinion, yes, that carbon fiber does not make "music". I tend to agree with Lew on this one. IIRC....didn't Lloyd Walker design a carbon fibre arm for the Proscenium? This iteration did not last long and was replaced by a ceramic or titanium arm tube? As I seem to recall from an interview.....Walker said much the same thing about carbon fibre? |
Greetings Nandric,
I may have been quiet recently.......but I have been silently lurking :-) Many changes to my system (Shindo power conditioner, Cardas Clear balanced interconnects, Cardas Clear speaker cable and Vandersteen Active bypass crossover for the 2Ws subwoofers) have raised the resolution quality to another level which has necessitated re-assessment of my previous cartridge/arm/turntable opinions. This assessment process.....because of all the variables involved with the multiple combinations of cartridge/arm/turntable available to me.....is extremely lengthy (yet enjoyable).
In regards to Alex(Foxtan)........let me say that for many years, I have had a successful relationship with him.....having bought cartridges, headshells, tonearms and even my original Victor TT-81 DD turntable. With the TT-101 for which he had been searching on my behalf for a year or so........he stated that it was in perfect working condition. When we agreed on a price, he delayed sending it for a week claiming it was being checked by his 'technician'. I then sent him a 'checklist' for his 'technician' to go through which included:- *Both speeds to be accurate *Brake function to be operational He again assured me.... "Hi Henry, As usual all my item are tested and confirm in good working condition before I list it. Regards Alex" When I received the TT-101.....I had to write back:- "Hi Alex, The TT-101 arrived today and I must say how disappointed I am after all the care I took in confirming that it was in perfect working condition? 1)The 'Power' switch does not function at all. It is always 'ON'. 2)The 'Stop' switch has no 'braking' action at all. The platter continues to spin. 3)The motor makes a continuous noise at both 33 & 45 speeds. 4)The motor switches off by itself after 20 seconds of operation on both speeds. The cosmetic appearance of the table is fine but its operation could not be more dysfunctional. Could you please inform me how to organise a return postage and refund?"
After I sent the turntable back (at a cost of $250)......I never again heard from Alex (despite many Emails).....nor was a refund forthcoming. I had to go through PayPal Disputes to finally have them process a refund which didn't include the return postage.
Does one bad transaction make for a 'bad' Dealer? Probably not......but his snaky behaviour during and after the transaction sure leaves a bad taste :-( |
Thanks Lew. I also am wondering about Raul’s evasiveness in revealing his two ‘choice’ LOMC cartridges? Furthering your thoughts on trying the ZYX UNIverse LOMC cartridge………I have had three of them and for at least the last 5 or 6 years……it has been my ‘reference’ cartridge and easily the best LOMC that I have heard. It is also quite arm tolerant, sounding well in arms as diverse as the Hadcock GH 228, Continuum Copperhead, Graham Phantom II, DaVinci 12” Grandezza, Fidelity Research FR-64s and FR-66s. The Fidelity Research FR-7f I recently acquired……comes the closest to it of all the LOMCs I have heard in my system (although the Lyra Olympos I’ve heard in other systems may indeed equal or exceed it in some ‘emotional’ aspects?). As good as the UNIverse is though……….it still suffers IMO, in comparison to the best MM cartridges in the important areas of ‘realism’ which I mentioned in my previous post.
Raul, Your references to colourations/distortions leads back to the quote at the beginning of my previous post….and the position of subjective vs objective which is close to the heart of our Balkan friend Nandric?
Once I had arrived at my ‘discovery’ of the Moving Coil puzzle……..it was as if an enormous weight had lifted from my shoulders? No longer was I puzzled by my preferences…..nor was I ‘constrained’ by the accepted correct ‘sound’ of cartridges in general. There are some MM cartridges which can sound tonally….close to LOMCs. Because of the prevalence and acceptance of the MC ‘sound’…….I feel that without consciously knowing it….we tend to favour those MMs (which approach the MC sound) as being ‘neutral’ or ‘uncoloured’? But if I conclude that Moving Coils do not, to me, sound like the ‘real’ thing……why should I accept that Moving Magnets should sound close to Moving Coils?
Liberated as I now felt……..I listened to one of my favourite MM cartridges…..the Empire 4000D/III Gold mounted in the Copperhead tonearm on the Raven AC-2 turntable. A liquid performance of emotional integrity enveloped my entire listening room. Here was the ‘reality’! No mamby pamby pussyfooted politically correct vapid ‘interpretation’ here!!? Air…transparency…gut-wrenching bass…..three-dimensional imaging and…..the clincher……’believability’!!
I immediately reached for my other MM cartridges which were previously thought to be ‘coloured’ but shared the Empire’s DNA. The Fidelity Research FR-5E and FR-6SE as well as the Empire 1000ZE/X and the Garrott P77. Each one brought the emotional impact and ‘truthfulness’ that I’ve never experienced with say……digital?
The concert grand piano is arguably the hardest instrument to record and reproduce convincingly? It has the widest dynamic range of any instrument….and it can actually be played in a home so that the reproduction of it on our systems……can be truthfully compared. The same can be said about violins, flutes, clarinets etc……but they are relatively ‘easy’ instruments to actually reproduce? The piano is a percussion instrument….but it is also a ‘stringed’ instrument. On the real thing, one can hear the ‘striking’ of the hammer felt and the vibration/reverberation of the strings. Very few recordings exist which accurately capture these effects. Two that do it the best IMO….are the 1981 recording of Daniel Barenboim playing the Liszt Sonate in B Minor on Deutche Grammophon and the Keith Jarrett Koln Concert on ECM. When played with the MMs I have now elevated to ‘Golden’ status…..the reality of a concert grand in my living room is achieved. Can I really ask for more? |
Hi Lew, I'm glad you found my posts of some interest. I have, for some time, been ruminating on the puzzle (to me) of the LOMC attraction? What alarmed me the most......was why I heard (or preferred perhaps).....differently to the majority or high-end audiophiles and reviewers? It is similar to my inability to listen to digital reproduction for any length of time and certainly never to enjoy it? As with my aversion to digital.......where many have told me that I haven't heard the very best hardware available......I was fearful that perhaps those same folk would claim that my 'system' (or phono-stage, tonearms etc) was not 'up to' the demands of the very best LOMC cartridges? Which is why I have taken the last five months to 're-analyse' all the cartridges in my newly upgraded system.
It was only with the ability to quickly change from one cartridge to another and back again....from one turntable to another and back again....from one tonearm to another and back again....that I finally 'cracked' the conundrum?
To me....it was a significant 'Eureka' moment! The 'lure' of the LOMC was in the INITIAL comparison to the MM. We are all 'suckers' for increased detail? The 'Quest for Detail'....as I call it....is nowhere better exemplified than in the continual 'discovery' of a better and (usually)...more expensive LOMC cartridge of the month by the foremost analogue reviewers of TAS and Stereophile? When the judgment for a ‘better’ cartridge revolves around ‘more detail retrieval’…..and that is often the case…..then who can blame the cartridge designers and manufacturers for pandering to that conviction? The unfortunate result however IMHO….is a sound that increasingly departs from that of the ‘real’ thing? Is it any wonder then that we can become blasé about the sound of a ‘live’ symphony orchestra…..and claim that there is more ‘detail’ in our home systems?
It’s true that I have heard more ‘detail retrieval’ from a super SS preamplifier and amplifier than from comparable valve types….but does that equate to a more realistic presentation of the air, transparency and soul of real voices and instruments? An easy test for this ‘realism’ vs ‘detail quest’ is with the crowd clapping on a recording of a live performance (preferably a very good one)? Not a single LOMC cartridge that I have heard, recreates the volume and naturalness….the air and transparency….and funnily enough….the ‘detail retrieval’ of the best MM cartridges in this regard?
Detail retrieval is but one attribute of a cartridge’s performance. Let us beware the absolute ‘Quest for Detail’ :-)
Regards Henry |
the exchanging of headshells is of some value, but that's a personal opinion. And it's an honest opinion...... Trying to justify 'opinion' by speculation or invoking 'voodoo' science is annoying IMO. Now there may well be some reasoned thought behind all these 'theories' on energy transmission and vibration but it doesn't make them right? Nor does it establish a hierarchy of 'importance' in the actual design and function of tonearms and headshells? I think Fleib answered his own question....can we actually HEAR it? There are so many honourable convictions in audio....especially when it comes to analogue? Sprung turntables vs rigid.....heavy vs not so......vacuum hold-down vs none....clamps vs none....belt-drive vs DD vs Idler. High mass tonearms vs medium......uni-pivots vs gimbal bearings.....fixed headshells vs removable......straight arms vs 'J' or 'S' shaped....single length phono-cable vs junction box. White papers can be produced on these....and many others.....which 'prove' the theoretical superiority of someone's conviction? But can it actually be PROVEN in the listening? Can we actually hear the evidence of these theories?....and I don't mean have each one of us proven to himself, the best direction for his audio choices? I mean.....in a blind listening test on an unknown system.......who is willing to bet they can hear the difference between a uni-pivot and a gimbal bearing tonearm? Who can tell the difference between a fixed headshell tonearm and a removable headshell one? Who is willing to bet they can hear whether there is vacuum hold-down or not?...whether a clamp is used or not?...whether the turntable they are listening to is belt driven of DD? And has anyone ever seen a blind listening test where any listener is able to verify whether a MM cartridge or MC is playing on a consistent basis? Yes...theories are the beautiful minutiae of audio....but a 'single' theory is rarely its own reward? And no more '?s' for you Professor until you learn to use them with the abandon of a non-academic like me! Regards Henry |
Dear Fleib, Agreed…..we do have a basic problem. I’m not a great proponent of blind listening tests either…..however when a statement is made that a principle in audio is superior to another, that statement should be demonstrable in some scientific manner? If it is claimed that a rigid headshell is better than a detachable one….this should be audible on any system…..not just one’s own? It cannot be logically valid that a statement is true but cannot be proved to be true?
I have the luxury of having two turntables operating side by side with three different arms on each…….two with fixed headshells and four with detachable. If I cannot tell the difference in any way between those arms……how accurate and reliable is such a statement?
I don’t mind what anyone believes is contributing to their system’s synergy or success as long as they don’t claim some universal laws which they cannot prove and which I have personally disproved?
I can believe the passion of those advocates of valve amplification…..but it does not negate the merits of solid state?
As someone once wrote……”There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
Regards |
I also agree with Raul on these issues. ...but isn't a resonance that shows up in the electrical output on test equipment, more scientific than people listening on an unfamiliar system and being put on the spot? 'Scientific' would include controlled testing using a dozen different arms of differing shapes and materials, with a dozen different headshells with all testing repeated many times? It would need to monitor the torque values used with the headshell locking collars and also test with and without the rubber gaskets between the collars and the tonearms. Different rubber gaskets would also have to be tested? After all that......we need to ask ourselves.....'Is this a more fundamental influence on perceived sound than the tonearm material?".....or the tonearm bearing?......or the fixity of the tonearm base?...or the rigidity of the cartridge to headshell connection? Should we not 'scientifically' test all these at the same time? And then how do we establish the hierarchy of 'importance' with all these tests? I think you are missing my point here Fleib.......if I cannot hear the effects of this 'resonance' you are measuring compared directly to my tonearms with fixed headshells......why do you assume it is important or even more illuminating.....why do you assume it is 'bad' rather than 'good'? If scientific testing determined our choices in audio......all valve equipment would be relegated to the dustbin of history? Oh.....and all my headshells are occupied with cartridges. That is their sole purpose....not for tuning :-) Regards |
The Kebschull preamp uses internal MC transformers for the MC input, and does not represent a high gain tube phono preamp. Hmmm....I've got it here right in front of me. Can't see anything that looks like MC transformers? Can you post a schematic? MC input handled without noise Koetsu Urishi, VdH Grasshopper, Clearaudio Concerto, Clearaudio Insider Gold and Lyra Helikon. Enough gain if you ask me? You may well have a skewed view of the tube world if this was your reference. You may well be right. It is still the finest, purist most transparent and transcendental sound I have heard in my system....or any other. |
Visualize a bell shaped curve. Resistance will raise or lower the response in the vertical plane, capacitance moves the center left/right on the horizontal scale. By combining settings, equalization through loading is the effective outcome and a variety of responses can be obtained. I like the Professor's explanation.......especially as I consider myself a layman/listener in this respect. My Halcro DM10 phono stage allows continuously variable resistance up to 60K ohms which may not be considerably different to 47K ohms......although to my ears there appears to be an increase in HF response? Apart from about 2 or 3 of my MM cartridges which need some taming and thus sound better at or below 47K loading.........I find the majority of my cartridges are happily listened to at 60K? I then modulate the response using the variable Capacitance loadings built into the phono stage. I can imagine that perhaps the Empires and the Fidelity Research MMs might benefit from a 100K loading?.........but that's all academic to me as I ain't fiddling around in the Halcro? |
Similarly, suppose the goodness/badness of the Orsonic is traceable to its unique physical form (as opposed to, say, its metallurgical makeup); couldn't one draw a reasonable conclusion about another headshell that shared that form? I would say so?......... I never had three Orsonics......only one.....and there is some doubt (since the company Orsonic went out of business more than 10 years ago) if my sample was original or a copy? Nevertheless....even whilst carrying a mild-mannered MM cartridge.....when the going got tough, and the music complex and loud.......I could actually hear the headshell 'bending' under the stress. How do I know it was the headshell?........slipped on another five headshells complete with similar cartridges and played the same track. I sold it shortly thereafter. Looking at the Orsonic design from a 'structural' point of view......one would conclude that little engineering acuity was involved in its design? The brief appears to have been.....'make it as light as possible'? Now 'lightness' may be accomplished by choice of materials eg titanium, magnesium, carbon fibre etc..........or by 'eliminating' material eg holes or reduced thicknesses? From an 'audio' perspective.......'rigidity' is the prime requisite for any headshell IMHO? The Orsonic design places immense strain on achieving decent rigidity (in all planes) comparable to 'normal' headshells and thus will always be at a disadvantage when the 'going gets tough'? |
But, good live sound (and certainly, the best live sound) is so superior to the best reproduced sound that it is I that fails to see the argument. There is no way that any audio system can get close to a live sound...period. Anyone who thinks their system is close is living in cloud cuckoo land. Well.......statements like these are obviously 'Gospel'......and so self-evident that only a fool would claim otherwise? And they are such 'safe' statements because of that very fact? Yet more than 30 years ago I believe......tests were conducted by Quad (I think).....where behind a curtain, a real violinist stood between two speakers and played the same piece as contained on the record. Most listeners on the other side of the curtain were unable to reliably pick the live violinist? Now I'm not claiming that the recorded sound can be 'better' than the 'best' sound of the real thing......... But the 'best' sound of the 'real thing' is so rare as to be an endangered species.......and our dutiful grovelling to the altar of 'live' music is doing a disservice to the advances that have been made to our reproduction systems? I have not heard a 'live' symphony orchestra performance I have attended over the last ten years which can't be bettered in every aspect......on my home system? Admittedly.......only a dozen or so records I own, can accomplish this feat but that is irrelevant IMO? Over 50 years of attending 'amplified' performances............probably only 30 to 40 remain in my memory as truly inspiring and yes........unable to be matched on my system (but this has a lot to do with live undistorted SPLs possible). The other performances......I wouldn't wish to replicate in my home? If this is not your experience......I'm happy for you......but please don't assume the mantle of righteouness as 'defender of the faith'? The 'bible' is accepted only by its believers and blasphemy is rarely tolerated? |
Dear Raul, Whilst I agree that the bottom octaves are important in achieving a realistic presentation.....like you I have also heard 'hundreds' (not thousands) of speakers....but I disagree that almost all ( decent speakers. ) performs very good from that frequency range an up I find that almost all speakers sound like........speakers? Almost none disappears......and in doing so.... presents an illusion of three dimensional instruments/voices? Almost none creates a transparency and an 'air' around, between and behind the images? Almost none appears to be effortless in its presentation? Whilst the lower octaves are great to have.....they can never make up for the deficiencies in the mid to upper regions. One of the most memorable speakers I heard with this ability.....were the original Martin Logan CLS electrostatic panels driven with valve electronics. They had little bass.....yet managed to disappear and present a spooky facsimile of 'the real thing' which enticed one to actually walk around? |
Lew, If you really want to hear the very best of what LOMCs can deliver....I have two suggestions. Firstly....the ZYX UNIverse which is .24mV and quite unfussy about arms (I used it with success on 6 arms from a Hadcock GH228 to the Copperhead and FR-66s. It is now back in production with a new price of $5,000 from Mehran of ZoraSound ZYXEvery discriminating listener to the UNIverse has had nothing but praise for it. Secondly.....if you want to save yourself $1,500 yet own possibly the greatest LOMC cartridge ever made.......buy a Fidelity Research FR-7f FR-7f for $2,000 and get a Fidelity Research FR-64s tonearm for $1,500 FR-64SIf you send the FR-7f to Axel.....for €179 extra, you will have the best LOMC anyone has ever heard. Better than the legendary Olympos! |
There are other sessions when the components seem to not want to have anything to do with each other. Greetings Professor, I know what you mean and I sympathise. This last week.....for the first time in a year....my phono-stage has been destroyed by the vagaries of the power grid. And this...despite the fact that I installed a Shindo Mr T power conditioner for the turntables and preamp since this last happened? To hear the soundstage collapse taking with it, the transparency and emotional content is heartbreaking. At these times it is hard to reconcile the beauty and 'soul' which one listened to only yesterday....with the hard-edged brittleness akin to the worst digital reproduction? I can perhaps understand the vagaries of the electrical supply in the wilds of Kentucky :-).........but in the midst of a metropolis of nearly 5 million like Sydney......I am aghast. In my system this phenomenon seems only to attack the phono-stage.....leaving the line-level inputs untouched? I believe there is a case here for the Discrimination Commission? I hope your occurrences are not often? |
Who is Phillip Holmes? Are you as sick and tired as I am, of reading the same shallow, uninformed drivel that masquerade as 'Reviews' by the majority of audio writers today? I was browsing through Dagogo last night...and stumbled upon a reviewer I'd never heard of before......but one who, not only can write.....but appears to have a knowledge and experience and passion, sorely lacking in the current mainstream crop? His name.....Phillip Holmes. Just read this Review of the AT150MLX he has written and see if you agree? He also goes some way to explaining why those people with some valve electronics.....do not 'get' the benefits of MM cartridges? I have never seen this mentioned before? This man seems to know his 'onions'? |
Greetings Professor, Some of us experience excitement when discussion turns to audio. This is as it should be. Quite right.......and excited you should be with a NOS AT-155Lc stylus assembly. I thought I had five of these beauties but I was wrong......I have six!! And four of them have the white silicone undisturbed sealant over the compliance screw.........but you know.....sometimes they may have run out of WHITE silicone and who could really blame the technicians in the laboratory if they then used black? :-) Two of mine have just that! And that black dot on the end of the cantilever is actually a deep cobalt blue. And sometimes the technician had a little too much on the brush and coated the last top end of the cantilever as well as the end point. All the line contact styli however are perfectly identical. Enjoy.....and I found your cartridge comparisons extremely valid and informative. I look forward to more? Regards Henry |
Dear Raul, For months maybe years I know exactly what kind of sound is enjoying Halcro and he can't believe it because I never been at his place but I know very well almost all his audio system items and his posts help me about. There is no experienced or respected audiophile who has the temerity to write such rubbish.....except you? You have never heard my speakers as they were a pair of only a dozen ever custom built in Australia.....and mine have had extensive revisions including new Scanspeak Mid and Tweeter drivers as well as Duelund capacitors. As such....there are no others like them anywhere in the world. You have no idea what my listening room sounds like. You have no idea what an Axel-modified FR-7f mounted in an FR-66s tonearm sounds like....nor an Axel-modified Dynavector XV1s mounted in a Copperhead tonearm sounds like. Yet you continue to make outrageous claims about 'knowing' the sound of other people's systems. Perhaps you could give professional audio reviewers some tips on 'how to make their lives easier'? But you're in luck Raul....... In a few weeks, Thuchan will be visiting Sydney and will hear my system. Why don't you describe on this Forum exactly what you 'know' my system sounds like in detail (hopefully using specific record tracks to make your points).....and then Thuchan, after his visit.....can proclaim you the prophet you think you are? Here is an opportunity Raul, I hope you will take advantage of? Regards |
Dear Raul, A perfect speaker the best can do is to reproduce the signal with out degradation and there is no perfect speakers/rooms. Well I believe that the the sound of any system is primarily the result of the speakers and room interaction. So if you believe that the speakers are unimportant......it lends even further credence to your claim that you 'know' the sound of my system? Now please describe in detail....the sound that you 'know' so well. Here is your opportunity Raul, to prove your claims. I hope you are not backing down from this simple 'test'? We all know that the German audiophiles laugh at you and your claims....so please don't give them even more proof of your insecurities? For someone as confident of his abilities as you are......this is your perfect 'test'. Please describe the sound of my system on this Thread, Regards |
My take is that digital mis a lot more accurate, " natural "/non-colored and lower distortion alternative where we are nearer to the recording and nearer to the live event. My take is......that this statement is one man's opinion. And perhaps just as valid as his opinion on valves vs SS? There has never been a digital playback that I have heard......which sounds remotely like the 'real' thing. Perhaps I am not putting that clearly?...........never, ever, ever...have I heard a digital playback which has 'fooled' me into thinking that's about as close to a 'live' performance as I can get. Yet many times......no.......hundreds of times.....I have heard vinyl sound so spookily close to the 'real' thing.....that I've gasped in wonderment. Raul speaks of the CD Gladiator. After less than 6 minutes of listening to this on my system......the 'Eject' button on the remote is just never close enough....... If this is what Raul thinks 'live' music sounds like......it perhaps explains a lot about his cartridge preferences? Raul can produce all the facts and figures he likes to 'prove' his claim about the superiority of digital.......but there are equally many facts and figures which prove the superiority of analogue. But who needs 'facts and figures' to prove this particular argument? It has been raging unabated for 30 years, and if Raul was right......vinyl would have died 20 years ago as we all feared it would? Instead...it is the CD which has 'died' whilst the vinyl disc is being produced in greater and greater numbers. Michael Fremer never wavered and nor did I and enough audiophiles who continued to carry the baton. There are more and better turntables available today than ever before....and also tonearms and cartridges the likes of which we couldn't imagine 25 years ago? So Raul.......you can claim whatever you want about the mythical 'superiority' of 'digital' over 'analogue'. You can also claim that 'black; is 'white' for all I care. It doesn't make it so.....and indeed it is NOT so. And this poppycock about changing the rest of our systems to 'accommodate' the horrors of digital?...........perhaps that is your problem? |
Is it possible we are back to "people hear different"? I know many audiophiles who can't tolerate the sound of digital reproduction for a period of time. I have also read the writings of many reviewers and contributors to Audio Forums who are similarly intolerant. I have never read nor heard of.........anyone who can't tolerate the sound of vinyl on a turntable (source material being adequate of course). For those who can hear it.......there is definitely an artifact of digital sound reproduction which is tantamount to 'distortion'? |
This is my fouth time under Agon scrutiny and perhaps not the last one. Dear Raul, I can understand the monitoring of you and your posts. You......can offend people :-) But the gentle Professor and Thuchan? Regards |
I was going to write something on the Garrott P77 Original vs Garrott P77/SAS.........but Don just covered it so well. Everything he says is spot on. The Garrott Bros certainly did modify the internals of the original A&R P77. Dover actually worked with them in Sydney and is more qualified to comment on the details. When Don says the P77/SAS sounds like the AT 155LC.....I can see (or hear) what he means. I however believe that the sound is more robust and euphonic than the 155LC with possibly greater bass extension? The bass....whilst extended on the P77/SAS....is not yet what I would call completely 'controlled' or 'tight'? I'm hoping this may improve with time....although it is not a noticeable criticism overall. I have another Garrott P77 with the original Garrott stylus and concur in totality with Don's comparisons.
Regards |
I'm with Fleib on this one......😷 For 5 years, because of Raul's influence.....I ran all my MM cartridges at 60K Ohms Resistance as this was the highest the Halcro DM10 could go. Only in the last year have I moved away from this 'mantra'.....and been amazed at the differences...😳😍 Not only is 60K Ohms too high (bright😖) for most of my MMs (let alone 100K)😱.....I find that some of them sound better when loaded as low as 10K Ohms...😎⁉️....and 20K, 30K, and 40K are all very much the norm in achieving a smooth, lush and convincing presentation....👍👏 Combining this versatility in Resistance loading with the variable Capacitance the Halcro DM10 allows....gives me the opportunity to 'contour' many of my MMs to sound very much the same as each other 'tonally'...😳 Of course things like Soundstage, Attack, Depth and Emotion are all unaffected by Loading and are fundamental to each cartridge's individual character. Unlike Resistance....which generally tilts the upper frequencies as it itself rises.....with Capacitance I find no such universal relationship 👀⁉️ Sometimes a figure of 70pF Capacitance will give the correct delicacy and translucency to the 'highs'.....whilst sometimes a figure of 430pF will be correct for another cartridge.....depending always on the Resistance being used...😱⁉️ And because of the varied competencies of the recording, mastering and mixing engineers involved in the myriads of records out there.....I find myself often changing the loadings on specific recordings.....and sometimes even for different tracks on the SAME recording....😡😑😰⁉️
All this does not make my life easier or more fun 😢.....but I am now 'trapped' in this endless contouring for perfection.....but never really sure that I have achieved it....❓😳 I need help...😗 |
Why no variable resistance MM/MI phono stages? There is, as we see, a market. My Halcro DM-10 Preamp has an inbuilt Phonostage with both variable Resistance AND Capacitance......for the MM Section only..😎 The MC Phonostage has fixed Resistance of 220 Ohms..😊 Displaying an understanding and appreciation of the merits of MM cartridges at the turn of the millennium.....was a brave (and almost unique) position for a high-end amplifier designer....👍 If I could have my wish for an ideal phonostage granted today....it would be for a MM (only) active stage (I would use an SUT for LOMCs) with electronically remote-controlled variable Resistance and Capacitance capability...😍 The changes (particularly for Capacitance) can be quite subtle and need to be heard from the listening position IMHO 😊 In terms of both loadings....every MM cartridge has potentially a different 'ideal' combination...😳 Some of my cartridges....like the Fidelity Research FR-6SE and Garrott P77 like the 100K Ohms loading with minimal Capacitance....whilst others like the Signets and ATs, prefer 40K with a bit extra Capacitance...👀 But this of course assumes that all records are cut 'FLAT'.....which is rarely the case...❓ Using Resistance and Capacitance loadings like 'Tone Controls' from record to record (or even track to track)....can be valid and quite satisfying...😎 Now where is that remote-control....❓👀 |
Lewm kind of inspired me with his saunter down 'memory lane' and the mentioned MMs of yore...👀🎶 With two turntables, six arms and thirty odd cartridges......I have found myself cycling through a group of about a dozen loved units over the last year or so....😊 It's easy to forget those MMs which had their 'day-in-the-sun' on this Thread many years ago....😔 With memory jogged....I quickly attached the Acutex LPM420STR and the Empire 4000D/III and gave each a renewed listen...🎤🎹🎺🎸 As my system has improved since the last time I listened to these two......I can reveal that I was 'floored' by the experience....😘 Both these cartridges exhibit a rich sound full of colour and dynamics yet with an unmistakable 'accuracy' of tone and detail from top⬆️ to bottom⬇️.....which (dare I say it) makes most LOMCs I've heard, sound anaemic....😷 |
Welcome back David....👀 Your contributions have been missed...😥 Fleib has 'held the fort' on behalf of the cartridge 'boffins' in your absence..👏 Part of the theme of this thread has always been value for money, and the ability to achieve true top level "High Fidelity" performance at price levels that are at least an order of magnitude lower than the current TOTL market, and frequently several orders of magnitude lower! It's timely to remember this important fact for most 'high-end' audiophiles still believe the road to Nirvana resides in the next 'new' $8,000 LOMC cartridge...👀😷❓ There is a hint of snobbish 'elitism' I fear, in the total rejection of vintage cartridges by some....especially of the MM variety..😥❓ And speaking of which....there has even been some displayed on this Thread with a palpable absence of discussion about the once ubiquitous Shure V15/III..❓😎 The imminent scarcity of some of our favourite MM cartridges....and the discussion on the JVC X1 and Z1 illuminates this....limits the opportunities for those yet to enter the vintage MM market... I have tried several of the modern production MM and LOMC cartridges like the Cleraudio Virtuoso, the AT150ANV, the ZYX Universe, Lyra Titani and find them lacking in the sheer emotional content available from the best of the vintage models..👀❓ A year ago...I bought a Shure V15/III with original stylus virtually NOS....and its performance astonished me...😘 Better than my original Garrott P77....😜 With the replacement to the Jico SAS stylus....the Shure and Garrott both leapt in performance to a level difficult to achieve with most other cartridges...👍 Now there must have been millions of Shure V15 cartridges produced in its lifetime...so that the possibility of finding one is very good although the craze for these beauties world-wide has now pushed the entry price to around $300-$400. With a SAS stylus at $130....this makes for a great MM experience at $400-500...👏🎶 Happy hunting...😀 |
Fleib, I seem to remember specific criticism, why the TK7LCa was not recommended. Please refresh my memory.... While the 5Ea, 7Ea, 7SU, and 7LCa share the same body and your opinion may differ with stylus substitution, none of those other relatively high inductance carts are worthy of cart of the month IMO. You're entitled to your opinion....however my point was that we (or I in particular) were not always (and still) rhapsodising about Raul's 'Cartridge of the Month' as Lewm's post seemed to indicate. And as we have already established...you have never heard a genuine 7LCa so your thoughts are somewhat ephemeral.... Point taken about the TK3Ea...but should you ever have the chance to insert a 155Lc stylus therein...you may indeed be surprised. You and I continue to clash on your 'theoretical' evaluations regarding a cartridge's 'sound' based on its specifications as opposed to my actual listening experiences. I don't quite understand your intentions... |
Fleib, Quote from you on another Audio Site 15th Jan 2015... If the generators of the 7Su is the same as the 20, then the 7LCa is odd man out. It's 5mV, 550mH, 800/900 ohms.
The 7Su is an earlier generation having a round plug? I believe the 7LCa has a 100 series rectangular plug.
neo
The question marks about the plug profiles of both the 7SU and 7LCa appear to indicate no familiarity...? If I am wrong, I apologise... 🙏 |
They say you have to kiss many frogs before you find your prince...🐸 Luckily with vintage cartridges...that adage doesn't necessarily apply..😍 Over the last six years the majority of the fifty or more used vintage cartridges I have bought have given me much satisfaction as well as knowledge. As one's ears become keener and more selective, the purchases become more informed and perhaps esoteric......and through Forums like this....newly discovered gems can be unearthed. And so it was that through the words of Griffithds and with the help of Banquo...I acquired a Victor Z1 and Victor X1/IIE. There is no 'burn-out' with phono cartridges as each new model promises to deliver a unique experience... In the case of these Victors....that is exactly what occurred...👅 I know the majority of 'high-end' audiophiles sneer at the very thought of a humble MM cartridge and smugly write a cheque for the next $8,000 LOMC panacea to their vinyl playback, and if one compares the current available range of production MM cartridges...I may agree with them. But the simple fact is that the art of MM design and production reached its zenith 30 years ago and some of those models are simply better than the very best current LOMCs produced and certainly better than modern MM design. Why is this so...❓👀 Possibly for the same reasons that some turntables and arms designed and produced 30-40 years ago are better than those of today...😎 In the world of analogue audio, it should be remembered that many great minds, many great companies and more funding than can be imagined today were concentrated towards the ultimate betterment of the analogue chain..🎼 |
Well, in those times I found out in Europe the last and only one in the world NOS MK2 stylus
Perhaps mine is the illegitimate 'forgotten' one from Japan? http://i.imgur.com/DOtiqTR.jpgFrom where incidentally.....they were all made and sold initially 😜 |
My experiences mirror those of Fleib and Griffithds. I have two Victor Z1 and one X1/IIE bodies and styli http://i.imgur.com/kdZ6QOZ.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/W0EFgRB.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/DOtiqTR.jpgI have the original elliptical stylus and cantilever of the X1/IIE and the original Shibata on beryllium for one Z1 as well as an original spherical for the other http://i.imgur.com/5JKvL0a.jpgI also have the SAS Shibata on boron replacement stylus which fits all of them http://i.imgur.com/0cshL30.jpgI have listened extensively to all cartridges on three different arms with a multitude of different headshells and whilst the X1/IIE is superb when mounted in the right headshell, the Z1/SAS is slightly better albeit with a more pronounced lower and mid-bass output. Like Fleib and Griff, I have difficulty in telling apart the X1 and Z1. It is only the original spherical stylus on the Z1 that is noticeably inferior in my system. |
Hi Jeff, Peter Lederman of Soundsmith has a number of alternative options for the Grace re-tip but if you're patient and alert enough, you could get lucky and find a near mint F9E complete with original stylus and cantilever. Good luck... |
|
John, Do you prefer the Grace 9E over the Ruby? Easy question to answer......I haven't heard the Ruby 🤔 I have though, read many apocryphal tales of its legendary qualities. The chance of hearing one perhaps in the future excites me. The Acutex 420LPM/STR may indeed be inferior to the 320 which I haven't heard. When I first played the 420 in a metal headshell 4 or 5 years ago.....it didn't strike me as particularly unique. Wind forward to 3 months ago when I mounted it in a Yamamoto wood headshell on my SAEC-WE8000/ST tonearm and it caused me to look up 👀 It was transformed into a 'Killer Cartridge' with holographic soundstage, prodigious and tuneful bass combined with ethereal highs. married to an all-important natural and convincing midrange. A cartridge that continues to be a joy to return to. If you have a wood headshell like the Yamamoto Hs-1AS or Ortofon LH8000...you should try it again... Regards Henry |
It's been years since I listened to the M20FL Jeff but I never really had it in my list of 'greats'. I recall it being smooth, full-bodied and pleasant but I preferred other more detailed and refined vintage MMs. My sample now resides in my son's collection....but even he prefers the Empire 4000DIII/Gold. The Victor X1 and Z1, Garrott P77/SAS and Acutex 420LPM together with the perennial favourite Signet TK-7LCa are still to my ears......the cream of the vintage MM crop in my system. Regards
|
You didn't attach the Link to my post Jeff.....but the M20FL was one of the first MMs I bought after finding this Thread and I can believe that I was impressed enough to compare it to the XV-1s. Just to cruel your impressions even more, the XV-1s is not even in my top 5 LOMC cartridge favourites......👀 Sorry to say 🙈
The Garrott is almost impossible to find...even in Australia from whence it originated so you might have more success with other models. The Grace F9E is certainly worth the hunt and there are thousands of Shure V15/III samples out there which are really elevated in performance with a SAS stylus implant. Good luck...
|
|
Glad to hear you like the V15/III/SAS Jeff, although I wouldn't go so far to describe the original V15/III as "boring...lifeless"? Perhaps there is something wrong with your original stylus? The substitution of the SAS on my V15/III added to the refinement, extension and transparency of an already good and exciting cartridge combining all the necessary traits of the vintage MM genus. Enjoy...😎 |
Welcome to the Thread mrubey. You raise an interesting question....or questions. "Consensus"......hardly. Favourite CURRENT production HO cartridge....? Frankly....I haven't heard a current production MM cartridge that can play in the same sandpit as the great vintage MMs of the late 70s and 80s. I think you would do well to read as much of this Thread as you can and write down a list of the oft-repeated MMs which pop up. Most fanatics here have built their collection from buying these vintage cartridges on EBay or HiFiDo or similar outlets and if you shop carefully and patiently...you will need to spend no more than $300-$400 for a cartridge which will give you as much, or more pleasure than a $1,000 current production model. There's also fun in the hunt..😎 Good luck.
|
Good choices mrubey, Both the Soundsmith and London Decca are not MM cartridges. I have a London Decca Reference which is superb but didn't want to recommend a cartridge which costs as much as some exotic LOMCs.
|
If anyone has any experience on both Z1S & F-9E : What can I expect by changing from boron to sapphire? Since I’ve already have a (cantilever less) F-9E ,could it be wise to prefer the OCL? Is there any chance to possibly exceeds the Z1S ? Dear geoch, I have both the Z1S and F-9E and whilst the Grace is very, very good.....I can't say it's up to the Victor Z1/SAS. Be happy with the boron SAS..... You won't better it with the sapphire or ruby...😎 Regards |
Good to see you back here Geoch 😀 Excellent choices of cartridges over the years..... I too am a big SAS fan having one in my Garrott P77, Victor Z1 and V15/III. I'm currently in the process of testing the differences between the original SAS, the Neo-SAS(S) and the Neo-SAS(R) on my P77 👀 One of my early LOMC cartridges was also the VdH Grasshopper (aka Symphonic Line)....and I recall the unbearable high-lighting of the upper frequencies 😱 Strange because one of my favourite LOMC cartridges at the moment is the MIT 1 which has a VdH stylus on a beryllium cantilever 👐 I too admire the SAEC tonearms having owned the 308N, the 407/23, and finally the 8000/ST.... Which arm do you use for your London Ref? Regards |
Looking at those FR graphs for the different loadings of the X1-II Chakster....I hope you will realise that your liking for 100K Ohms loading is a subjective aberration which bears little relation to 'flat frequency response'.....🤔 |
Chakster, for years I ran many of my MM cartridges at 60K Ohms thinking they sounded better.....🤔 In the last three years I have found that virtually all of them sound better at 47K or lower..... There are probably only two or three left, out of 40....that I prefer at 60K Ohms 😎
|
I too am able to infinitely adjust the loading for my MM cartridges between 60K to 20K Ohms 'on-the-fly'. Unless you can hear in real time, the comparisons.....It is hard to distinguish the very subtle differences.
|
You have to try 100k then, 47k vs 60k is not the big difference Why would I do that if I find 60K mostly too thin and edgy....? |
The jump from mm to mc requires a significant investment in both turntable and system. A statement devoid of explanation or scientific fact. |
So now you add a complete and detailed description and pricing of a system which was totally missing in your first generalised statement.... My former system of Rega Planar 3/Hadcock GH-228/Garrott P77 and Kebschull preamp with inbuilt phonostage for both MM and MC required zero investment to "turntable and system" when I moved to a series of MC cartridges over 20 years ago.
Your original statement proclaims the word "jump" as a descriptor for MC against the supposedly 'lower' MM and as such is false. Many turntables and systems may benefit from "significant investment" regardless of, and independent from, their choices of cartridge types.
|
Chackster, Lew is being fair in his responses and giving you full credit for the subjective evaluations of your cartridges. It is one of the most difficult areas of analogue high-end to equate subjective experiences of phono cartridges. There are so many variables that can affect each user's individual experiences....from turntable to tonearm to headshell to phono-stage to SUT. And a significant factor can indeed be the attention to set-up....🤗 To illustrate the point.....I have owned a vintage Sony XL-88 LOMC for several years after having owned its bigger brother, the XL-55 for even longer. The XL-55 is a romantic, ballsy cartridge which delivers delicious full-bodied images totally in contrast with todays analytical/detailed products. If one imagined the XL-88 to offer similar tonal 'house-sound'.....one would be shocked...🤔 The contrast between the two is enormous....the XL-55 is a monster...10 Gm and massive in comparison to the XL-88's 6.8 Gm diminutive stature. When I first mounted the XL-88 in one of my FR-66s tonearms on the Raven AC-2 and ran it through the Kondo SUT.....I was disappointed in its diametrically opposed presentation to the XL-55. Instead of the gutsy full-bodied bloom presented by the XL-55......a somewhat insipid and lacklustre performance relegated the XL-88 to one of my FR-5 cartridge storage boxes.Today I mounted the XL-88 in my FR-64s on the Victor TT-101 running through the Halcro MC phonostage and my jaw dropped at what I heard. This may just be the best sound I have yet heard in my system...😎 But it is a sound that remained 'undelivered' when mounted on the Raven/FR-66s/Kondo....So, absolutes are dangerous in audio and can vary enormously... that's why we usually write....YMMV 😁 Regards |
Hi jtnicoosi, I have bought and listened to many ’current production’ or ’recent’ MM cartridges and IMHO there is none that can compete with the vintage MMs produced in ’The Golden Age’ of analogue (70s and 80s) 😪 There is simply a ’magic’ produced by the vintage cartridges which somehow eludes the current contenders....and I have found the same in relation to LOMCs..... Many of the really great vintage MMs require patience (and luck) to find (generally on EBay)....but are still available 😃 My stock advice to those wanting to taste the best of the vintage MM story which are readily available cheaply is:- Both these cartridges are available (Victor on eBay and V15/III on HiFiDo) in numbers and the condition of their respective styli should not be of concern to you because you will want to immediately replace the stock stylus with a brand new Jico SAS (available directly from Jico in Japan). The Victor is superior to the Shure but both can provide close to the best sound available in analogue today IMO. I agree with Chakster about the merits of the Garrott P77.....I have two of the originals (both with their original styli). The difference however, when you replace the original stylus with the Jico SAS......is astonishing 🤗 If Chakster thinks highly of the P77 with original stylus.....he will not believe the transformation with the SAS... Good luck |