Hi Raul,
When I actually think about it, my question need not really apply to armboards as it is difficult to say that one size fits all here or that a secured wooden armboard has to produce any more colourations than a metalic one. My own experiences also testify to that fact. I suppose I was just thinking aloud.
Thanks for the response |
Hi Dgob, Raul,
Regarding different woods, I would think that the material is less important than the way it is utilised, whether in a cartridge, arm or deck. Similar materials are used for most arms for example, but have different outcomes.
MC cartridges generally transfer more vibrations than MMs into the headshell and arm, which then have to deal with it somehow, and in dealing with it will themselves have resonances. In this regard, MMs have the advantage.
In musical instruments, there are a range of materials used, woods and metals, which illustrate how different materials affect the sound.
In my opinion, using different tonewoods, in hifi items, whether cartridges, armboards, or plinths, just adds their own signature, in the same way they do in guitars. Woods are known for being good for musical instruments, because of their resonant characteristics. None of them can be neutral, whatever that means in this context, though they may be preferable.
Some woods are less resonant than others, and some non-woods and resins less resonant still, so that would appear to be the route to go down if one is looking for neutrality, if by that is meant no added coloration.
|
Dear John_gordon: Yes, the way it is utilised and where I can add is important.
I feel that there is not to much research ( scientific one. ) on build materials/mix for TT/tonearms or cartridges other than what experiences on " playback " told us.
Same materials in a different product " configuration "/mix sounds different as you said. The resonant beahvior between tonearm and cartridge is something complex for say the least but those resonances are the ones that put on the signature on that couple and this means its quality performance level ( everything the same. ). There are many ( other. ) factors/parameters involve there that " shows " its influence in that mechanical/electrical " circuit ".
I think that some of us ( me by sure. ) have to learn several " things " on the whole subject.
Many of the persons that posted here knows the importance on cartridge performance with which headshell performs better and said " headshell " means ( between other things. ): headshell build materials, same cartridge with different build material headshells ( even with the same headshell weight. ) performs different.
As I said we have continue to learn.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi John_gordon,
We all seem to agree that its not so much what you've got as how you use it! I'm not really affected by the armboard debate as I'm now using an independent arm tower but it does make for interesting discussion.
Thanks for your thoughts and advice. |
Hi Raul/John_gordon,
I just has another quick thought on the materials and sympathetic resonances issue.
I've tried a host of clamps and mats on different tt's and spent much time experimenting with these. It turns out that I can get the best performance (neutrality and detail) when using a SAEC SS300 metalic mat with a Michell record clamp - whose vinyl material is said to be very similar to that employed in producing LPs. However, the clamp only gives of its best when I replaced its original foam o-ring with a self made composite of industrial viscoelastic sheeting and glued two of the same sized rings (cut out from the two distinct sheets of foam inserts that are provided by Ringmat for use with their cork mat on the Xerxes tt). I had to cut the three sheets to the same diameter as the original Michell foam ring and bore the spindle hole through the centre of the assembly but on replacing them and fitting everything together, the sum of the parts are far exceeded by the whole. It means that 'any' record is pressed completely flat against the inert SAEC mat and vibration and colouration is completely managed. Marvellous!!
Just in keeping with your useful points and to reiterate my agreement. |
Regards, John Gordon: If comparisons are to be made of a TT/TA to a musical insturment, my antique Black Widow tonearm with an ADC XLM-11 Imp. cart is so succeptable to resonance/EMI it can be played like a Theremin. But, when there are no sunspots AND if the BW's in a good mood--- ;-).
Peace, |
Timeltel,
I've heard that the Black Widow with the original (ridiculously high compliance)ADC XLM 1/supra is sublime: assuming the vtf can be set accurately (and, of course, the sun is at the equinox.) |
Raul, On 08-19 you mention: "BINGO'...I found the sweet spot on the Virtuoso. Man, is it up in the back", that means positive VTA right? and if yes, how much?... thanks |
Dear Jorsan: Yes, positive. Only slightly. This is a patience work that gives you a worth rewards. As I said in the review the Virtuoso never performs " bad " at any VTA/SRA set up and this characteristic is what makes that find out the sweet spot takes more time.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Jorsan: I forgot, that " Bingo " came from here not by me:http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1200430667&openflup&4890&4#4890
I'm sure that Griffithds will share his experience with you.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Regards, Dgob: The wrongly maligned :) BW sounds great with the XLM-11 but in it's current location acoustic feedback initiates an intolerable resonance.
There is however much to be investigated concerning the impact of various materials between pickup and plinth, J. Gordon's relating of these influences in comparison to musical insturments may seem somewhat "romantic" to some but is not to be dismissed.
Halcro and Thuchan are responsible for an exploration of wooden headshells and I'm finding the boxwood Yamamoto HS3 is effective in reducing the bass bloom sometimes heard with even the best alu. cantilevers. The neutrality of the ebony HS1s (thanks for turning me on to this, Henry) does nice work in relieving the "rounding off" experienced with some of the higher output cartridges with a reputation for warmth. A Japaneese oak headshell by Orto. is on the way from Wm. Thakker. The Orto. LH-8000 weighs in at 8.5gm and I anticipate it will be a good match up for a Signet TK7SU on an EPA-250 arm as the TK7 has a rewarding fullness in it's presentation that, on my rig, leads to the need for better control in the bass.
Mounted on an ADC 6.5gm mag. HS, a Signet TK9LCa/ATN25 stylus is offering a sparkling performance whereas the same headshell "kills" the very attractive presence of a recently acquired Acutex 420.
My AT20SLa/ATN20SS has been moved to the carbon fiber/fixed headshell EPA-500H armwand, Cardas wired. Low bass is improved and listening to the exceptionally well recorded drum/cymbol kit on Van Morrison's "Saint Dominic's Preview" (1972) is illustrative of the need to spend a little time in setting up for best results. Re: "St. Dom.", Morrison's vocals are somewhat constrained but the insturmentals are of near reference quality, great definition to be heard and the compositions are interesting, too. IMHO, YMMV & all the usual etc's.
Peace, |
Hi Jorsan,
The comment "Bingo", pertained to my Virtuoso that was bought in 2008. I rotate my cartridges often, so their is know way to tell how many hrs. are on it. It has been one of my 2 favorites so I have tended to use it more than the others. I had the stylus checked for wear and was told it was in good shape. Some signs of wear was evident but still alot of live left in it. Shortly after that, Raul did his review which got me looking for a replacement. I have bought and just recieved a Black Virtuoso with the Sound Smith basic cantiliver/stylus replacement. I am in the processes of compareing the two and 1st thing that I have noticed is the VTA's of the two are quite different. I'm not willing to comment on any differences that I'm hearing until I have had more time with the new one. The new Black is just slightly down in the back. I have a tiny bubble level (weights less than .1gr.), that I set on my tonearm just above the cartridge and use it to perfectly center the bubble when I 1st setup a cartridge. Think of the bubble centered in the black circle, not touching the circle anywhere. This is perfectly level. The new Black Virtuoso requires the bubble to float to the back of the circle, just barely touching the black circle. That is where I have found so far and I repeat, so far I looking for the sweet spot on the new Black Virtuoso. This would be as Raul has described, slightly up in the back. My old Virtuoso (red), required the bubble to float back so far that 1/2 of the bubble laid on the back side of the black circle before the sweet spot was discovered. Is it possible that the old suspension became weak thereby forcing my to raise the arm up excessively to find the sweet spot? Possibly. It's also possible that stylus angle was always at this degree. Lets call it a Q.A. issue. Perhaps their has been a change in the build of this design pertaining to VTA? There is quite a difference between the Specs. of Rauls cartridge, and the specs. of my old Virtuoso (see the comparisions earlier on either this thread or on Rauls actual review). I must apologize for the length of this but I'm trying to both explain and also understand all of this myself. I'm seriously begining to think that there has been improvements to this cartridge design over the years, and the differences between my old Wood and the new Wood (both in specs. and VTA angle), is brings this to light.
|
Thanks a lot for the long answers, all clear now. |
Hi Griffithds, ***There is quite a difference between the Specs. of Rauls cartridge, and the specs. of my old Virtuoso (see the comparisions earlier on either this thread or on Rauls actual review).*** What specs are you referring to, the stylus/replacement? There is no difference in electrical specs AFAIK. It would not be unusual for a replacement stylus/cantilever to have a slightly different SRA/VTA. I assume that Soundsmith's replacement is superior to to the original stylus/cantilever. Raul mentioned that Peter Ledermann said that it was a bonded diamond. Pictures of the cantilever look like it's not even tapered on the orig. Mine came w/o a cantilever, so I don't really know. I think that if you sent the old one to Soundsmith it would be the same except for the wood top. Regards, |
Dear friends: I found out this CA Maestro review that was made more than a year ago: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/frr.pl?ranlg&1275789975&&&/Clearaudio-Maestro-Cartridge
even that Phaser and mine systems are different and that the period of time between the Maestro and the Virtuoso reviews was so long IMHO at the main cartridge characteristics ( Clearaudio " signature ". ) I think that Phaser and I are in agreement.
I was unaware of Phaser's review till this week and now I would like to know from Phaser if he still think almost the same on the Maestro performance after more than a year of his review.
Anyway, good to know that even that the Maestro is a little different design shares Virtuoso Black Wood high quality perfomance level. Btw, I " ranked " the Virtuoso a top the Maestro and one of the reasons is that the Virtuoso is IMHO better " inside the sound "/detail. Not that the Maestro does not shines in this regard but the Virtuoso BW is a little better, as I posted: maybe to much wood in the Maestro but who knows.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Raul, you and Phaser(Ian) system are more alike than different. Both SS for all amplification duties. Ian really liked the Maestro better than his double price Transfiguration.
The MM cartridge will add some of the tone that SS is missing. Nothing wrong with that of course as it is always system balance and choices.
cheers |
Hi, What Do you consider a better match for the virtuoso, a VPI JMW 12.6 or a SME R2-12 tonearm? . Thanks in advance |
Dear Lewm/friends: +++++ " I have no opinion on this Neumann issue, only curiosity. Many years ago, Ralph Karsten told me where to install a resistor in the RIAA section of my MP1 preamp so as to introduce the Neumann correction. " +++++
well, I asked because if it is true that the recordings comes ( almost all ) with a RIAA correction ( Neumann or what ever. ) at the high frequency range then seems to me that the " right " way to play does LPs is with an inverse RIAA eq. that mimic it on that correction too.
Why any one of us could want to play LPs with a different eq. with what was recorded?, I mean if we want to preserve the recorded signal integrity to be nearest to the recording.
The subject here is not if the Neumann correction on playback could introduce " problems/distortions " for an improper design/implementation but the validity to use an inverse eq. correction on playback.
What do you think?, maybe it is time that phono stage designers take it in count in their designs, don't you think?
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Fleib,
In Raul's review, I posted a follow up dated 8/18/11. It lists the differences of the specs. that pertain to our 2 cartridges. Mine came right off of the pamphlet that is provided by CA and came with my Virtuoso. His matches the current specs. that are listed for this cartridge by CA. They are different in what I would concider key areas. It would not matter if your cartridge came with or without a cantiliver/stylus, or that SoundSmith replaced them, the specs. of this cartridge from CA would still be the same. Please look at the differences and give me your opinion of what these differences (if any), would create. |
Raul I have installed several different eq circuits in my vintage preamp. I am running them in and plan to audition the 4 of them for a favorite. I listen to classic rock, blues mostly. I do understand the passion for playback as it was recorded but in electronic music there's so many variables. Neummans correction is interesting and I would like to try it. I will do a web search thanks again for more alternatives to phono eqs. Mike |
Dear Stltrains: I don't know you but me for several years was facinated for external added equalization. I owned multiple and different type of equalizers. I remember my Crown, Souncraftsman, MXR, Machintosh, Levinson, Klark Teknic, DBX or Accuphase ( and more. ). Always trying to compensate for ears and audio system deficiencies and just for fun. In those times I was unaware what RIAA inverse eq. ment and I remember that when I readed that a Soundcraftsman integrated came with RIAA eq. I try to get it only because that RIAA eq.!!!: this was my knowledge level.
Time to time comes to my mind those old times and I think: what if I take my Klark-Teknic equalizer ( I don't know even where it is. ) and connect in my AS?, till today I never did it but I think could be interesting and maybe we can take advantage of today technology and in specific with digital equalizers units. Thuchan presume because his unit had " seven " eq. options, with an add-on equalizer we can have as many as we want or imagine: not big deal if you have the right equalizer or as you the add-on eq. electronic circuit.
That kind of system equalization is a good alternative and interesting too but I'm refering to other eq. alternative: the one that can mimic ( inverse ) what is in the recording. I think that always is important to find out " what is in the recording " before try to alter it. The Neumann correction is IMHO a good " place " to begin with as is what some phono stages already do like the EMT unit that Thuchan owns.
Along this alternative what is interesting too could be to correct the cartridge frequency response deviations from flat response but here maybe we need a " near perfect " LP track test with recorded 20 hz to 20 khz frequency range.
Anyway, several alternatives but this time my focus is in: what do you think on my Neumann correction original question? recordings with the Neumann corection most be hear it with phono stages that mimic that RIAA correction ( inverse. ) or it does not matters?
Regards and enjoy the music, raul.
|
Hello Griffithds, Sorry I missed your follow up to Raul's review. The specs you posted might indicate a change in the stylus/compliance, or they might just be a correction of their specs. Frequency Response 20Hz-20kHz-- 20Hz-20kHz Output Voltage 3.6mV------- 3.6mV Channel Seperation 30dB-------- 30dB Channel Balance 0.2dB-------* 0.3dB Tracking Ability 90um--------* 80um Tracking Force 2-2.5 optm.2.2--* 2.0 Coil Impedance 0.66kOm-----* 0.68kOm Coil Inductance 0.42H------- 0.42H Load Resistsance 47K--------- 47K Load Capactance 100pF------- 100pF Cantiliver Alum-------- Alum Weight 6.0g--------* 10g
The change in the impedance spec is pretty much meaningless. The difference is less than 3% and is probably less than the tolerance on most carts. With the inductance remaining the same, it looks like a correction of specs rather than any change to the generator. The tracking ability and VTF change also looks like a tightening and refining of the spec. There might have been a change to the moving system. 80um is excellent. 90um is exemplary. This becomes irrelevant with a Soundsmith replacement stylus. I think CA did a great job in choosing parameters for their line of MMs. Their 10Hz cu is rated at 15. This is more appropriate for med/heavy arms that are likely to be used. I think this contributes much to the resulting performance on these arms and is a bigger factor than has been previously stated. Regards, |
Raul it is most enjoyable having the ability to hear what small changes in caps/resistors mean to what you are hearing phono eq wise. I have retired a highly regarded mc phono amp and returned to gear that's almost older than me. Between the super sounding mm cartridges and vintage gear I believe the vintage music I love has a true to life sound that does satisfy my soul. I haven't had a lot of luck researching Neumanns correction can you add a link. Thanks Mike |
Dear Stltrains: http://www.stereophile.com/features/cut_and_thrust_riaa_lp_equalization/index.html
http://www.klaus-boening.de/html/timeconstant.html
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Griffithds: I agree with Fleib. There has to be an improvement/revision on the " moving system " to pass from that 80um to the 90um, this was not at random but on purpose. This IMHO is the main difference or at least the one you could hear it on playback.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
On the topic of EQ....
I have been continuing experiments using Digital EQ... The driver has been the search for phase linearity and the possibility of achieving linear phase as well as amplitude.
I was thinking about Square waves, and the manner in which phase and amplitude variations alter the shape of square waves.
Given that we do not have any test tracks that can effectively be used for real quantifiable analysis of phase, I am having to turn to a more subjective approach. To that end, I started by mapping out the variation in a square wave when one applies + or - 4db of EQ at various frequencies... I did this both using linear phase filters (amplitude only) and minimum phase filters (traditional analogue phase+amplitude) - The test plots are up on my website for perusing /sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/.
I still have to take the next step which is also to do phase only variation by applying mimimum phase EQ then using linear phase to correct the amplitude - leaving the phase variation intact.
I got impatient, and took a look at what happens when I EQ a cartridges response using minimum phase (on the basis that most natural phenomena - such as resonances are minimum phase) - lo and behold, the square wave reproduced with that EQ in place (which took the cartridge to +/-0.5db from 70Hz to 19kHz) the Square wave became "squarer".
The problem remains of whether the test tracks are sufficiently accurate to allow accurate correction...
But they are definitely sufficiently good to improve existing default phase and amplitude linearity.
I still need to do the phase only plots so that I can get an understanding of what that looks like (I will also post the results up so people can have a look...) The end result will be a set of pictures that show what each specific type of distortion of a square wave looks like...
From there one can take a look at a square wave output of a cartridge on a scope, and relatively quickly work out that there is a particular type of variation from flat, and roughly in what area of the spectrum that variation is...
I was not surprised at being able to achieve +/-0.5db, what did get my attention was the way the wave "squared up"...
With this reference tool (the reference plots) I can now read the many vintage reviews that show square waves, and get an understanding for the performance of the cartridges involved that I could not get before.
It now becomes abundantly clear, that a square wave with a large overshoot rise, is telling me that there is a high frequency resonance, the sharper that rise (and the squarer the top/bottom) the further out in frequency that resonance is.... But a cartridge that shows this overshoot, can also potentially cause phono stage problems, as the phono stage will be trying to pass an amplitude peak of possibly +10 or greater db... if insufficient headroom is available... other issues would then arise.
Another reason for "synergy" (and reverse synergy....)?
The arrival of advanced digital EQ (over the last few years) provides us with a new set of tools that can be used to optimise the performance of our cartridges in a search for the ability to reproduce the master....
If minimum phase can achieve 90% of what is required, then freeware like Electri-Q (posihfopit edition) can potentially be used as a high quality audiophile tool.
Raul - most of those old Equalisers were traditional analogue filters - which means minimum phase - and are therefore potentially the right tool for the job. (it's been there all along!) - that is assuming what I am seeing initially continues to be true - that minimum phase does in fact correct the square wave distortions that appear to be caused by phase non-linearity.
Bye for now
David
P.S. I really really want a properly designed test record for frequency amplitude and frequency phase testing!! (and impulse tests... ) |
Dear Dlaloum: Between my specific test recordings that I use or used through the years are the STR 112 ( CBS ) that has square-wave test, intermodulation test and some other tests, the other one that could help you is the SRT 14 from Stereo Review. As a fact there are several old specific test recordings that you have to find out through the net/ebay.
I think that is almost impossible not only to have the specific test track we are looking for but that the recording be at today quality performance standards.
Btw, I think that I still have 3-4 of those old equalizers, maybe could be time to test it and use it: why not?.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
David, That's really interesting stuff. It's ironic that the old audiophile adage that using an equalizer introduces phase shift, has come full circle, LOL. A word of caution - a phono cartridge was not really designed to reproduce a square wave. The sq wave results may not be completely accurate or indicative of the actual cartridge performance. IMO you should verify results with listening at every step along the way and not base conclusions on test results alone.
It's been my experience that eliminating extra components in the signal chain tends to improve fidelity. That is, if high quality components are used. I can't help thinking that it would be preferable to have a reasonably flat frequency response without the EQ. Cartridges with extended response - high frequency resonance, seem to have very good phase linearity. It will be interesting to see what you come up with. Regards, |
Hi Griffithds and Raul,
Just to confirm that there are absolutely no performance differences between the black ebony Virtuoso and the brown Satinee Virtuoso - apart from the colour of the wood. There is however a difference between both of these options and the metal version. As Raul suggested, the Wood versions would appear the better option concerning performance.
Hope others find this information as useful as I have |
Hi again, any comments about my last post will be greately apreciated:
" Hi, What Do you consider a better match for the virtuoso, a VPI JMW 12.6 or a SME R2-12 tonearm? . Thanks in advance "
thanks |
Dear Dgob: Good to know it but : what were your experiences with the three cartridges at quality performance level?
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul,
I got the relevant supplied information directly from Clearaudio. Sadly, I'm personally still in the 'research' stage and yet to buy or try one.
If I do have the opportunity to audition them before buying one, I will definitely let you have my impression concerning performances and any differences.
As always... |
Hi Raul,
Almost forgot, but one additional useful bit of information here is that the ebony black Virtuoso is only build by Clearaudio (OEM) for Marantz. Purchases of this one therefore have to be made through Marantz: whereas the satinee brown Virtuoso can be purchased from Clearaudio retailers.
Hope this also helps |
Is anyone familiar with a Denon DL-109d MM cart? There's one for sale here, and it's said to be the best MM ever. Regards, |
Hi Fleib,
I agree totally - the more linear the initial phase & frequency response, the less messing is require to correct it, the less additional distortion is introduced along the way. Without a question of a doubt, the best thing is to start with a very linear cartridge/stylus having no LCR resonance or cantilever resonance within the audio range, and preferably pushing these resonances out far enough that they do not impact on the 20-20k range (50kHz? 75kHz?).
So far a few very nice sounding cartridges are all showing cantilever resonance between 19kHz and 23kHz: Empire 1000z AT20ss ADC SXLM Pickering XLZ7500S Jico VN5xMR SAS Shure V15HRP Empire/Benz MC1
BUT all of them show dropp off below 100Hz, a hump between 100 and 400 (peak between 200 & 300), and a slump around 10k (of varying magnitude and width) Correcting the above anomalies does improve the square wave (and frequency response) - but I have not yet done real listening with it...
I would like to get my hands on a Dynavector Karat or a Technics EPC-100 as they have a reputation for extended very flat frequency response.... far more so than any of the above cartridges that I already have.
Raul - I do have the SRT14 test record, but found the Ranger Square Wave test record to be better. (seems to be more cutter distortion on the SRT14) I would love to get my hands on the CBS 112... will keep my eyes open for it.
I have been having footfall problems, which have been frustrating me (I know, a shelf would be better, but is not currently an option!) - I fitted magnetic levitation feet this evening, and the footfall influence dropped dramatically.... should be able to do more listening now. (also new driver arrived for my headphones... to be fitted tomorrow, or the day after...)
bye for now
David |
Dear Dgob: Well, I'm more interested on your experiences than in Clearaudio ones.
I'm just waiting Griffithds experiences/comparison with both cartridges.
regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Dear Jorsan: I don't have first hand experiences with that cartridge in those tonearms but seems to me that can works with the Clearaudio.
If the SME model you posted is a universal removable headshell then my vote is for it.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Hi Raul,
Thanks for your interest and, as promised, I will let you have my impressions once I've had a chance to actually listen to one. In the meantime, I hope that the information that Clearaudio provided will help clarify some issues and encourage others to try either of the wood (MkII) options with a little more confidence.
I'm also really looking forward to hearing Griffithds' feedback on his experience with them and to trying one myself.
As always |
Dear Fleib: I owned the 108 and nothing important to remember. Denon was not a " high " name on MM cartridges those times, at least in America, and IMHO was not a real challenge to all other MM old time competiors for bisiness.
I never heard the 109 and to say it was/is the " best MM ever " could be true if the seller tell us against which other MM/MI cartridges he made his comparisons and in which audio system and obviously why he made that statement: what support it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Thanks Raul, the ad sparked my curiosity. The seller seems to have experience with many carts. The ad is here on Agon.
David, I still can't reconcile resonance between 19 - 23K, on carts that have response beyond 30K. Beyond primary high frequency resonance, response should drop off like a rock. Wasn't the 20SS spec to 35K? I'm not sure what to make of this. AT wouldn't publish that spec if it was down 20dB. Regards, |
Hi everyone and especially you Raul.
I'm sorry for the length of time it has taken me to post my findings with the 2 versions I have of the Virtuoso. I wanted to make sure I have had (repeatedly), both set at the sweet spots before making final judgments. I would like to 1st say that I have a Denon 103R with the Midas alum. body installed. I have had the use of 3 different types of wood bodies, borrowed from friends, and have tried them all on the Denon in my system. I settled on the alum for this cartridge because it tightened up everything. The wood bodies tend to soften the presentation abit. Not a bad thing, just not what I prefer. The differences in the woods are of the most suttle of changes in tone. I repeat, changes in tone only. Those of you who have tube equipment will experience far greater changes in tone by just rolling tubes. I mention this because I expected to hear between the 2 woods, (old being the femenbak and new being ebony), a slight difference in tone presentation and thats all. What I'm hearing is a greater depth/3 demensional type of presentation with the ebony version. This is not what I'm use to hearing with just different wood bodies. There is no doubt that the 2 cartridges are of the same family. On some records, I could not tell them apart, but it seems that the better the record, ( 180 and 200 gram types), the sound stage would open up into a more believable presentation of acutal instruments being played in the room. I know Peter of Sound Smith says that the $150 cantilever/stylus job just renews the cartridge to its original condition, but the differences I'm hearing leads me to believe his basic upgrade is truly an UPGRADE! It really is a more of you are there type of difference. I've tried to put into words, differences in voice, or bass, or treble extension, but there is none that I can detect. They both appear to track the same, that is exceptionally well. It's really that out of speaker, floating around you type of improvement that I'm experiencing. Really hard to put into words. Upon 1st listen, I felt perhaps what I was experiencing was a comparsion of an old (3+ years),to new, cartridge presentation. After extended listening sessions, and discovering records that I could not hear any differences between either of them, is when I excepted the fact that both cartridges were playing at the top of their potentional. Raul, I hope someone near you has a new CA (untouched by an outside source), Virtuoso that they would lend you to compare with your SS (I feel improved), version. As great as my stock/original old version is, the new SS ebony version raised the bar for me. I am pulling together the funds to send my old (even though it's still in great shape), Virtuoso to Sound Smith to have his best cantiliver/stylus install just to see how far this cartridge can be taken. This experience has lead me to expect greater things for this cartridge from Peter at Sound Smith! |
Hi Fleib,
yep - I kept hoping for more - but this is what I measured...
They do have some response out at 35k... unlike the LCR resonance there doesn't seem to be a similar drop off after the cantilever resonance.
The problem is none of these mention their +/-db out to the very extended F-R, so they are not meaningful! The denon test record I have goes out to 50kHz - so when I have a cartridge/stylus with some potential past the 27kHz I can measure with the pink noise track, I pull that out... but I have yet to find a serious contender... I just ordered a NOS stylus for my Shure Ultra400 - we shall see....
bye for now
David |
Hi Griffithds,
It would be interesting to hear your feedback after you have soundsmith make the same cantilever and stylus changes. Maybe the earlier respondent who suggested that this would be where perceived differences lie had a point.
I'm eager to hear: although others can now rest assured that it is fairly easy to obtain the ebony version through their national Marantz retailer.
Many thanks for your informative feedback |
I would like to clarify a comment I made in the previous post. I heard this expanded soundstage on (some), standard records also. Not just the 180 & 200 gram discs. I've just reinstalled my Benz Micro RubyIII and went thru some of the list of records I used with the SS Virtuoso Black. That soft wood tone presentation is back with the Ruby. I like the new Virtuoso better. |
Hi Raul! I am an almost newcomer in turntables-carts field. Recently (before 8 months), I bought from Greece the last piece of the great-last production of Technics SL-1210MK2 turntable.
I have a system that I am very pleased of it. Onkyo P-304 preamp, Onkyo M-504 power amp, Onkyo selector U-30 (I have many components to connect) & Scandyna - Blueroom Minipods loudspeakers with Scandyna's Bass station.
I had load in the Technics turntable (I didn't done any modification yet), a Denon DL-304 cart. The sound was amazing BUT only at first sight! With a better hearing, the sound was pretty harsh and very disappointed! |
I have also a Lenco L-75 refurbished turntable, with a Denon DL-160 in his arm. Compared those two carts-turntables, Lenco-160 bits the Technics-304 combination!!
I had sold immediately the DL-304 and now I am searching a best cart-solution for SL-1210MK2 turntable. I have also a Shure M-91ED and I wonder if it was a good start (or a final one), to put a Jico SAS needle, in order to having better results.
What would you advise me to do? (A desperate music-lover asks for your "tricks" & solution..) |
Hi Flieb,
If my memory serves me correctly, that Ultra 400 you have was touted to be the best thing Shure ever produced. Highly regarded by all in the bussiness. How would you compare it to other cartridges in your collection? |
Hi Griffiths, I've never owned an Ultra 400. I seem to remember reading something lately, but can't recall who posted it. There was an Ultra 500 too.
About your CAs; If you want to save the original stylus (possibly for comparison), talk to Peter. He might have an extra plug. If not, you could get the cheapest replacement stylus for an AT95 and use that for the plug. Also, the AT P-mounts with the unusual looking plastic stylus holder, also fit perfect. You can get an AT-90 on ebay or amazon for around $20. Regards, |
Dear Griffithds: I just losted the opportunity to hear the CA ( red and untouched. ) because my friend " detsroy " the cantilever of the cartridge he accepted to borrow me.
++++ " It really is a more of you are there type of difference " +++++
this a main characteristic on the SS that certainly ( as you posted ) been an upgrade and that certainly too very difficult to explain/put on words but a subject that involve cartridge overall quality performance level.
Yesterday I had again the Maestro in my system and I'm still hearing a great performance but ( as you said. ) with different tone, softer if you like.
Yes, as you seems to me that with a better stylus the Virdtuoso can be even greater performer. Note that I'm said " better stylus " meaning same cantilever or at least same build material cantilever. Well this is what I would do it but obviously that it's your call.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Delamostrel: I hope you are enjoying the analog experience where cartridge/tonearm set-up being a critical factor that could makes a paramount difference for the better when it's " right ".
I don´t have experience with the Shure 91 but with the 97 and V15III both with SAS/Jico stylus and both are really good and mate with your 1200.
If you want to invest for a " finale one " then my choice today is this one:
http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1319872263&/Clearaudio-Virtuoso-wood-
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |