Dear Acman3: I just bought two Nagatron stylus replacements.
I'm not to worry about the stylus shape, seems to me that the one that comes in my sample is very good even if it is conical, but more about cantilever build material and suspension.
One of those stylus samples I will oredr to Axel something especial about that suspension and if it improves its tracking then I will go with the Axel top fix-work. As I posted and I think you already know the cartridge motor in the Nagatron 9600 is really especial and deserve the best we can do for it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Greetings Dgarretson, Please post your specification/configuration of the M320 stylus to request to Axel. Substances aside, (my Acutex w/420 is addicting enough!)I enjoy the Acutex bloom like no other as inacurate as it may be to me the 420 has a certain "Je ne sais quoi" available in no other cartridge. I am also curious if you used an aftermarket stylus or the original with the M320 upgrade. |
Dear Tubed1, my used M320III STR came with an original stylus with a bent cantilever armature tab. If you have a M320, you know that the design is unconventional, with two armature tabs at the hinge of the cantilever that project perpendicularly down into the induction coils at the forward section of the cartridge body. A bent tab has the effect of canting the stylus and shifting channel balance. In the later 415/420, it appears that Acutex simplified the design by moving the induction coils from the front to the rear of the cartridge body and eliminating the armature tabs.
Since the diamond looked(and sounded) pretty good, I asked Axel to straighten the tab and do his best retip as appropriate. We'll see what comes back. This is my first go-round with Axel and I'm inclined to accept his judgment. |
BTW, the unusual construction of the M320 stylus suggests that preserving the armature tabs requires slipping a tube cantilever retip over the existing armature sleeve. I can't imagine how an entirely new cantilever could be fitted to the stylus holder. |
What the Acutex does correctly, and better than many other cartridges in my experience, is make sense of the dynamics-related aspects of a musical performance. In my prior comments about this cartridge (in another thread) I did not once make any reference to that cartridge's handling of "inner detail". The focus of my comments has been it's handling of dynamics overall, and ability to present the musical content in the bass range with a level of truthfulness that is usually reserved for the midrange and (less so) the highs. In my experience even the best gear/ systems gloss over musical detail in the bass range, and I think we are so accustomed to this that we routinely handicap that aspect of performance when we assess equipment. Think about just how often we are aware of the musical contribution of the bass "voice" in a composition or improvisation as a melody. Well that is what it is, but is heard (more times than not) as simply bass "weight", "extension", etc. Can we clearly hear that the bass note is the root of a chord in the music and identify it as such?
I made the point that the cartridge "is not a beautiful sounding cartridge" because it has a sense of what I like to call "directness" that will sound somewhat unrefined to some in the quest for ultimate "refinement". The problem is that music doesn't always sound refined; it can sound pretty nasty sometimes. And if we think that the gulf between what even the best rigs are capable of and the incredible complexity and variability of the sound of real music has been narrowed to the point that we can use terms like "accurate" to describe it, I think we are kidding ourselves.
I have never heard the Acutex 320, and based on Raul's and others' comments I am sure that it is a terrific cartridge, and very well be a "better" cartridge than the 420. I do own and have listened with (at length) to the Andante P76, Azden PVL50, Empire 4000IIID Gold, and the AT 170MLOCC (or something like that) among other MM's, and more MC's than I can remember. I mention those MM's because they are (or were) considered "contenders" (particularly the latter three) at various points in the life of this thread, and I can safely say that overall the Acutex sounds more like what music sounds like to me than any of the others.
IMO, the heart of a musical performance lies in it's expressive qualities, and this is connected to dynamics. It is a very complex issue since oftentimes equipment is not consistent in it's dynamic ability at various frequency ranges. The end result is that a performance can sound confused, tense, or simply boring. When a component can separate musical lines with similar dynamic expression, while at the same time make sense of how those lines are intended to interact, then I think there is something special going on. This cartridge has been described as "addictive". Personally I have never known "tonal refinement" to be addictive; the ability to let me feel the deepest groove of the music certainly is. |
My comments are about the Acutex 420, in case its not clear. |
Dear Frogman, Normal hearing capability presupposed we all hear in the same way. But we all interpret what we hear with our cultural, educational and personal developmet as a backgound. There is no such thing as 'objective' or 'neutral' hearing experience. Our consensus is based on our similar cultural background I assume. Our disagrement on the other hand on our different experience and tastes. You post about the Acutex 420 is clear, eloquent and with very good aruments but you wrote this in a kind of 'defensive way'. Because of Raul ? If we agreed on everything there would be no need for a forum as this one. Nobody should apologize for his preferences I think.
Regards, |
Dear frogman: My mistake to said " inner detail " but " dynamic overall " and this is what I'm refering to.
Btw, remember that the bass fundamentals have harmonics too.
Acman3 posted he was enjoying the 420 and I can say I can do it too because the cartridge is not so bad that we can't enjoy it.
Now, I know very well that music sometime could be " nasty " ( as you say ) but this is not the rule. In the other side I'm comparing it against not only the M320/LPM320 that are ( IMHO ) overall better than the 420 but against the G800, Virtuoso and Nagatron 9600 that are terrific performers and IMHO even better than all the ones you name it.
Btw, the more home audio system elusive frequency range ( at any price ) IMHO reside in the bass and is here ( bass management. ) where an excellent system distinguish over a good one. I supported and still support this statement because I have the experiences about ( first hand. ) through years on audio listening so many audio systems that " I can't remember " as live events at normal and near field listening. The other frequency extreme is very important and elusive too and maybe hard to be aware on " real music " against distortions in that range, we have to be trained ( heavy trained ) to understand and be aware of.
The bass management is a critic part on that dynamics you are talking about and that dynamics is the difference not only between a system performance and a live event but the main difference between a " child and a mature " audio system. I heard 300k$ systems that were only " childs ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric,
I agree with you. But defensive? Not at all. Merely striving for clarity. Interesting, the parallel between how we each hear differently as well as how we each interpret the written word differently; no? Yes, part of my comment is in response to Raul's "inner detail" comment, but only as a "launching pad" for the general comment about a subject that I feel is often overlooked. Tonal quality is usually given much more attention than rhythmic quality, IMO. Besides, this is only electronic gear after all; certainly not worth getting defensive over. Regards. |
Dear Acman3: ++++ " Acutex 420 likes linear arms, so you may need to get another arm to fully hear it. " +++++
I'm truly convinced that the " problem " with the 420 is a native design one, I tested in several tonearms/headshells including my " universal " self design tonearm and I did not found out something that could justify to buy a linear traking tonearm for this cartridge.
I think that with all in audio there are some items that are better than others and that's it. We can go to the road to buy new audio items only to " see "??? if an audio item could be better performer!!!!: this could be an endless " crazy adventure ", don't you think?
Remember that we all have music sound differences in our priorities. In my case the 420 does not fulfil mines and certainly not what my system likes because my system does not needs any " distorted help ".
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear nandric/Frogman/friends: That's why we all need a " common listening bias process " where through different audio item evaluations we can understand in precise way what each one of us are we talking about with precise LP tracks ( and which part inside those tracks. ) where those evaluations been made it.
I was part of an intent to do it in other thread but we had no luck because almost no one really been interested on it. Even in this thread I made it a second intent about but no real response from almost any one.
Maybe in the future???
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Nandric,
I agree with you. But defensive? Not at all. Merely striving for clarity. Interesting, the parallel between how we each hear differently as well as how we each interpret the written word differently; no? Yes, part of my comment is in response to Raul's "inner detail" comment, but only as a "launching pad" for the general comment about a subject that I feel is often overlooked. Tonal quality is usually given much more attention than rhythmic quality, IMO. Besides, this is only electronic gear after all; certainly not worth getting defensive over. Regards. |
Ipad strikes again! Apology for double post. |
Regards, Frogman: The Acutex's are chameleons. It's been mentioned before. Tonearm/cart matching is as influential to performance as any of the carts I'm familiar with. Have been doing some "TT rolling", the Acutex 420 is a complete stranger when heard on the 12" graphite arm on a Pio. PL-70L 11 with variable silicone damping. The upper-mids have taken several steps forward in apparency as compared to the impressive bass heard on the EPA-250 arm. To my ears, this is not an improvement, however the AT20SS gains hf clarity, a tautened body in the bass registers and a very attractive mid-range luster on the Pio. Exclusive arm. Headshell build materials, the thickness of those materials as well as isolation techniques and the materials involved all have an easily heard influence on the Acutex LPM series of cartridges.
Cartridges share the category of "transducer" with microphones. The LPMs are responsive to the vinyl below as well as (IMHO) more so than the usual influence of the arm above. Practical observation and a considered position as an enthusiast relieves one of the professional requirements of measuring resonant nodes of a pipe, the Young's modulus of a specific material, the relation of boundary resonance to line transmission of those resonances, or the influence of taper, sleeving or bend of that pipe. I have noticed that some cartridges do well on a specific tonearm, not so well on another. This, at my informational level, is frequently referred to as "synergy".
Is it possible that with certain microphonic carts, the characteristics of the tonearm are more evident? This is not a suggestion that those who are critical of the 420 have inadequate gear but rather that the mount is not the Acutex's best feature.
Frogman, IMHO there is a certain mechanical resonance related "brassy/boomy" quality heard with the Acutex LPM 4xx carts on the several tonearms I have available. This quality is (again, IMHO) favorably reduced with a mount fashioned of a material other than the flimsy plastic provided by Acutex, even the mount from the earlier 3xx carts offer improvement with a 4xx generator fitted. In all other considerations & in particular balance, soundstage & imaging, I believe the cart is excellent.
Peace, |
Dear Raul, I assume that you mean by 'common listening bias process' that we should all have, say, 4-5 of the same LP's such that anyone can refer to some specific tracks in order to substantiate what he hears ? This way we can argue about the same music or tracks. So in this sense we will know what we are talking about. This was your idea some time ago but is somehow lost while, if I remember well, there was consensus that this was a very good idea. This means that we need suggestions about those 4-5 LP's.
Regards, |
Dear nandric: Yes, that's part of the idea. In reality could be wider that only that.
As any one of you I have my audio item evaluation/set up process where obviously I use always the same LPs/tracks. As I said is a : whole process.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Hello Raul, Nikola, Seems like a good idea to discuss cartridges with a common recording, although I don't think our problem has ever been we couldn't understand what the other was hearing. We just are listening differently to different things.
A while back, I was reading someone's idea about how cymbal's should sound like brass and not white noise or brass and white noise. Now, I find myself listening to the cymbals half the time instead of music. Just an example how we develop things to listen to we hate instead of music.
Sometimes I think we have developed more things to hate, in the chase to get everything right. My psychosis gets in the way of my enjoyment of the music. Fat bass, mark off that masterpiece.
My first recommendation would probably be a Bill Evan's record. Which one, and which edition of it? Surely a reissue would not cut it. ;0) |
Perhaps we should all have reference recordings for assessment comparison and certain track testing only.
On the other hand this all sounds boring and tasteless... first we all have the same lps, then we all get the same reference system (for comparison purposes only of course), and then it all boils down to IMHO which is all different for every one to begin with and then we all become Raul plain vanilla clones echoing the great El Diablo. El Diablo 1, El Diablo 2 etc. etc. etc....... No doubt that LPM 420 is over the top. Acutex M320 is truly a phenom. Wait stop the madness, I quite enjoy that big bottomed girl of an Acutex LPM 420. Distorted as it may be. |
I tested in several tonearms/headshells including my " universal " self design tonearm and I did not found out something that could justify to buy a linear traking tonearm for this cartridge This is an illogical rationale. How can you conclude that trialling a linear tracker would be a waste of time from your experiences with pivoted arms. That's like me saying you are wasting your time trialling LOMC's because you have a solid state phono stage. As an example my Shure V15VxMR sounds vastly different on my ET2, Dynavector DV501 & Naim Aro. You wouldn't even recognise this cartridge when moving it from one arm to another in my system. Each arm elicits a considerably different presentation of soundstage, bottom & top end extension and harmonic structure from the same cartridge. IME finding the optimum arm can generate as big a difference as going from say a Koetsu Black to an Onyx Gold Vdh - which is massive. It would seem to me to be useful when commenting on cartridges that we state which arm we used primarily with that cartridge. I do wonder if potentially MM's are even more arm sensitive that LOMC's due to the higher moving mass on the cantilever slewing around. I also note that in the vintage MM's we are discussing the compliance varies quite a lot from borderline low to high, which suggests arm matching is critical as well as output/impedance - possible overload on some phono's. This suggests we need to take an educated guess as to type of arm the designer had in mind to get the best out of any particular cartridge. |
I agree with the last three posts. Just as important as reaching consensus on shared LPs for test purposes, the broad dissemination of Acutex 4XX cartridges from the italian seller into this group presents an opportunity to adjudge tonearms and ancillaries against the independent variable of a shared cartridge. Does the tail wag the dog or the dog wag the tail? |
Dear Dover: I don't think so. I owned the Dennesen, ET and the Forsell one. I heard in very good audio systems with cartridges I know very well: Rockport and Walker ones.
In no single case LT tonearms gave me something so especial that could told me that's the right road over the pivot ones. No one LT I heard can match the frequency extremes quality performance level on cartridges mounted in a pivoted tonearms. Different? yes but not better, at least through my priorities and that's why I don't have a LT tonearm.
In the other side that 420, IMHO, don't deserve that I buy a LT tonearm to find out " how good it is " when I already know it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
I bought a month ago and a Trans-Fi Terminator arm and all the while I struggled to adjust it. I did and am extremely pleased with the sound I get. I tried two cartridges Audio Technica At 20 SS and Acutex 320 with long nose. Acutex 320 is a phenomenal cartridge. The sound it makes Acutex cartridge 320 is the best sound from a MM cartridge (I used Grace F-9 Ruby and Micro Acoustics 630) that I heard. Who can find this cartridge will have great satisfaction in his soul. But it must Terminator arm mount that I've made it before and Infinity Black Widow arm that sounds good but not phenomenal. I want to say that I have a Lenco L 78 as the turntable. |
Frogman wrote:'Interesting , the parallel between how we each hear differently as well how we each interpret the written word differently;no?' But my point was that we all hear in the same way but interpret what we hear in the context of our culture, education and individual development. To tell other what we have heard we need to use 'words' ( terms or sentences)while our individual 'musical vocabulary' is different. Frogman is a musician and I am lawyer so obviously he has a much richer musical vocabulary while I am assumed to have a much richer legal vocabulary than he. But we share the same hobby and like to talk about or to exchange our opinions about our experience. Well I know no other way to express the complexity involved than in terms of variables. Consider Raul with all his carts, tonearms, turntables, developed methods, etc. He is obviously working with much more variables than, say, I do. I enjoy some works of a peculiar composer and don't like his other compositions. It may be interesting to know the reasons but I don't care about such questions. I was always searching for 'the' music that I would like and there are many 'transformations' in my tastes during my life. Each of us may have different approach in the sense of variety of complexity from simple to complex. One may call this different 'intensity' of involment or different intensity of passion involved. So looking this way to the opinions expressed it is actually suprising when we agree on something or, what is the same, reach consensus sometime. This individual (psychological) part should however not be confused with 'technicalities' or technical data for each component involved. Those may be called 'objective' in the sense of the 'accepted technical knowledge at present'.
Regards,
|
Dear Porto: Lucky you are to own the 320. I can see that you are a Lenco owner where are so many advocates to this TT and I think that means there are very good reasons to the Lenco's cult.
In the other side, as some other contributors in this thread, you are enjoying the Trans-Fi tonearm too. I don't know if that tonearm is a good match for the 20SS but I appreciated if you can share with us your experiences about. I think Dgarretson own that cartrridge too but I can't remember if he posted his experiences about. Thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Btw, that you own the Ruby and the MA 630 ( both very good performers by its own merits. ) and posted how great is the Acutex 320 performance level is a really hig praise for the Acutex!!!!
R. |
Today I received the repaired M320 from Axel. He straightened the armature tabs and replaced the suspension. No retip was needed. So it will be about comparing a refreshed M320 to NOS M420 and M415. |
With the Acutex 320 at the top of the MM/MI heap has anyone done any comparison M320 shortnose vs LMP 320 longnose? |
Hello Tubed1, Haven't you read the entire thread ;0). Raul likes the M320 better than the 320LPM.
The Acutex 320/315 is a great cartridge, as are many others. Once you get to the top level it becomes more of " different" than better,IMHO, although I have not heard the Technic's 100mk4 or the AKG 100poole which Raul also likes as best MM/MI.
Timeltel found, it seems, the last stash of 3xx styli about 2 years ago. I have not seen any more. BUT... the Acutex 312 are available cheap and could be upgraded to possibly surpass or equal it's awesome big brother.
Just food for thought.
The Acutex 420 does not make the top 10 list of cartridge's, but is possibly the most fun. It is like the fratboy always ready to party. Great drive and bass. Sound stage second to none. Biggest negative is it's biggest positive. When you listen to some reflective music, it still wants to party. Instead of the subtle renderings of Bill Evans you hear his attack on the keyboard. Extremely interesting but not correct to my ears. YMMV.
Raul, I to am using the Trans-Fi arm. Fantastic arm, although I do not have the experience of you are others on this thread. |
Dear Acman3: ++++ " and could be upgraded to possibly surpass or equal it's awesome big brother. " +++++
I can't say if that's true or not ( 312. ) but I know that the 315LPM VdH rettipped is even better than the 320LPM.
Other than re-test top LOMC cartridges and due that I own more that one MM/MI cartridge samples on the " best " MM/MI different cartridge models as several stylus replacements on those same cartridge models I decided to make changes on the cantilever/stylus on almost all of them with " today " Axel " technology " in a way that with one body cartridge I can listen to 3-4 different today cantilever/stylus alternatives with 3-4 different quality performance levels, in this way with each cartridge body I really have 3-4 " different " cartridges that gives me 3-4 different experiences.
Sounds as a lot of fun to comes in that way. No, I'm not interested to interchange vintage stylus replacements for other vintage stylus replacements ion some cartridge models. I like the better to grow-up/improve through today/new alternatives that till now shows me is the best way to go.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Porto, Welcome to The TERMINATOR World ! I´ve been running The TERMINATOR 3Pro for 2.5 years, and I bought The Tomahawk wand just a few weeks ago. Your Infinity Black Widow has a 3 gram wand and my SME III has 4.5 gram wand. They are quite similar, both are made for the most compliant carts. Also The SME III with titanium nitride wand sounds very good but not phenomenal, in today´s standarts. I have The Audio-Techica AT20SLa and waiting for a new original replacement stylus with berillium cantilever (ATN20SS), thanks to Professor´s advice. Also waiting for The ACUTEX M315 III STR (NOS long nose) from the US. The SHURE ULTRA 500 has always sounded superb in my system over the decades. Can those famous esteemed carts match the musicality of my good old ULTRA, quite titilating question to me. Cheers |
AT 20SS cartridge compared to Acutex 320 long nose appeared lifeless but a great tracker and had a great dynamic but for me the most mattered richness, naturalness and soul. But I would not be able to realize that without this arm Terminator, who tormented me long to me I can do not to have distortion. I still have not got rid of all the distortions but what remains does not worry me. If I do not want to destroy this wonderful sound that I got with Acutex 320. It's like a spell makes me float. All other cartridges Grace and Micro Acoustics were good but not Acutex 320. |
Regards, Porto, Harold-n-t-Barrel: Raul is owed the honors for bringing the AT20SS to our attention. For the first twenty or so hours it was a disappointment. Anemic was, IIRC, my description. Around thirty hours it started waking up, enough so that tweaking alignment actually made a difference. On the 12" Pio. arm, it's simply glorious. The Acutex's went the other way. Fortunately the EPA-250/SP15 is now doing duty in an office system, the Acutex are restored to their former glory through a serviceable Kyocera A-710 MOSFET integrated and modest Tannoy DC-3000 floor-standers.
A 320 (described as low hours) on a headshell, plus a SaturnV integrated headshell with an extra generator is offered on ebay. Search if interested. No association.
Porto, does your cat demonstrate a preference for the LPM 320 ;) ?
Peace, |
Timeltel how do you know I have a cat? |
Timeltel how do you know I have a cat? He is the Professor after all......... |
Porto, our Professor assume that everybody has a cat so he deduced that you also must have (at least) one. |
Dear Halcro: I just received the FR-6E and I would like to know ( other than tonearm. ) if thre is or are something where I have to take more care for achieve the best that cartridge can shows. Thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Regards, Porto: The question was one of genuine curiosity. I have a cat, Pi' sant, who's main goal in life seems to be the shedding of copious amounts of hair. She'll join me in listening sessions, sometimes for lengthy periods if she approves of my selections. In adjusting anti skating I've learned to trust her ears. She's very attentive to soundstage depth/width & center image.
Pi' sant tolerates Pink Floyd but disdains electronica in general. You mentioned your cat's dubious acceptance of Harry Belafonte, Lenco Heaven, the "Acutex...Bar" thread.
Wishing you good listening &
Peace, |
Yes, when you read what I had written on lencoheaven you did not do than plastic stick that holds stylus and cartridge body and had not yet Terminator arm. At that time it sounded like Acutex not exceed Grace F-9 Ruby. Since then my cat, Portolica, has heard many settings. What mattered was the adjustments as stylus is perfectly perpendicular to the disk. And something else that took me a long time was to find the optimal slope between manifold and record. Another thing that really helped me was the speaker cables Ortofon SPK-7.8N-9000S / X And last but not least amps Heathkit AA-191 that I consider exceptional. One on each channel and preamp settings on the flat and tubes Mullard EL 84. These amplifiers have worked very well on almost any speaker that I tried. They have 3 watts, but what watts!! My speakers are Tannoy GRF 15 GOLD-RED speakers, say Red-Gold because they have elements of both drivers. I consider myself a Terminator arm down to is how the wires are connected to the cartridge out, because I think they have a bit of influence in VTF. |
Dear Raul, I thought you were getting the FR-6SE? I have the FR-5E and the FR-6SE so have not heard the 6E? I find with both of mine that 1.3gm-1.5gm VTF seems the best with a positive VTA. Loading of 100K Ohm should be good and a bit of added capacitance may help? I'm sure with your experience......you'll dial in the best sound? Good luck. Henry |
Dear Halcro: It is a 6SE. I have not the cartridge manual and through the web I found out that the VTF cartridge range is 1.5gr-2.0grs so I started with 1.5 gm. and finished with 1.8gm, positive VTA, 100k/350pf. I started with the FR-64 and now I think the AT-1503 makes a better match.
The cartridge is not very good tracker but is " easy " to the ears.
IMHO through the time almost all of us already experienced that the quality performance cartridge " bar " today is higher that when this thread started, we all learned through all these years. Maybe if I found out this FR cartridge in the begining I could be more satisfied with its performance level that I'm now.
It does not matters what changes on set-up I try the cartridge shows a " problem " in the bass management: first the cartridge does not goes to low in that range and does not goes with tight/weight precise way but due to its " bold " low-mid bass we can think that goes low on the bass, this " problem " is so emphasized that put a signature coloration to all records affecting all the frequency range. That coloration is a kind of distortion that impart distortions on the harmonics too all over the frequency range.
Seems to me that the cartridge was or could been designed to help electronics on those old times with poor bass management and with over-bright high frequencies and could help today to systems with those characteristics.
I don't try it yet in my tonearm because the Nagatron 9600 refuse to leave it, it wants to stay there for ever.
Anyway, a good experience with a cartridge that I can hear but not live with for ever: Acutex, Goldring, Nagatron, Clearaudio, Astatic, etc, etc " raising the bar " to high for other contenders like this FR.
Could be a good idea to put on the Axel's touch in this cartridge?, well that's something to find out.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Hello Porto, I also used to try to find optional "slope" between manifold and record, but I had serious tracking problems with some records, while with others none. So it is a wrong way, there is no optional slope att all. Manifold and platter must be perfectly paraller to each other & perfectly horizontal IMHO. Then you will find the balance in EVERY different album you will play. Also, with an excellent tracker of course, reasonable warped, concave & convex records play with ease. And this is the wonder of Vic´s TERMINATOR: no need to flatten records with clamp to maintain sufficient trackability. Tracking problems are gone forever then.
Most things in mechanics are simple, also this. My very old YouTube video shows my then TERMINATOR T2 handling a very violently warped (a sharp fold) record:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql9Gq6ir7hA&feature=colike
Please note: the record is flattened with clamp but the warp is still sharp on the edge. When the stylus almost jumps off the groove, you may hear somewhat ringing sound on the video in first ten seconds, but this ringing gradually weakens as the fold evens out. If the balance is tilted one way or another, the stylus can´t follow the groove and will jump off or stick. No exceptions. I fine tune the balance with this record and an old stylus on this merry-go-round. This avoids risking fragile cantilevers.
The original GROOVE ISOLATOR is covered with Reso-Mat, also made by Vic the Magician himself. I still use clamp to fine tune ORACLE´s very sensitive suspension, but clamping itself to achieve better sonics is no longer necessary with Reso-Mat.
Best regards |
Dear harold-not-the-barrel: I would like to see that tonearm 's " show " where the tonearm be mounted in a separate/stand alone arm board.
A friend of mine owns that tonearm but he is extremely sticky with his " propieties " and I don't think that tonearm could comes to my place.
Other that what some of you owners of that tonearm posted in this thread I know and I read it thta exist a lot of " noise " on that " great " tonearm design and I think too that any one of us even just for a " new experiece " have to experienced if we have that opportunity.
Btw, how much I have to pay for it. thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Raul, FWIW for a few years I've been exchanging impressions with a number of Trans-Fi owners who have supplanted decent pivots such as top VPI, Graham, and SME. I've never found a soul who, once the set-up has been sorted, prefers a pivot arm. I believe the top version is around $1200 including uninterupted tonearm wire. The skepticism seems mostly to be rooted in experiences with other linear arms, solipsistic theorizing, and allergic reaction to the unorthodox aesthetics(somewhere between butt-ugly and techno chic. |
Raul, contact DAIWOK (David) on Lenco Heaven. He was very influncial in the tweaks that brought the tonearm to the level it is now. The designer of the arm is also a member of the Lenco Heaven forum but not to be biased, I recommend you get in touch with a consumer (David). I have no experience with the arm but from what I have heard, when properly dialed in, it is difficult to beat. |
Dear Professor, I would also like to see that performance too but I´m afraid I´m too lazy to do it with my deck ! I´m addicted in hearing my various records now. In the future perhas... You could try to persuade your friend to lend his TERMINATOR, it is very easy to set up, much easier than a pivot arm IMHO. And I also like your humour, and I don´t take myself too seriously.
However, your idea of separate mounting is brilliant ! Especially in the case of a suspension deck like ORACLE. I must try that in the future. But firstly I need to add mass on the suspension to get better balance and go that way to the end. I´ll pray that your friend would let you to try his tonearm. Your review will be highly appreciated as you prefer stand alone arm installations. I think also other TERMINATOR fans are keen to hear your comments.
As for the noise goes, in the first place it comes from the record itself, and that I hear clearly. After years of study Vic the Magician found out that it is not issue of equipment, cartridges, arms etc. in the first place. I´m not glad to say that most of my (commersial rock) albums are "noisy" now, but I do have some albums that are very silent. With The TERMINATOR we can hear the imperfections and flaws in the cutting process of vinyl easier, unfortunately. Of course, on the other hand we hear that some carts are noisier than others. Anyway, noise in some extent is there in the groove, as are other imperfections of sound, such as lack of dynamics, over sibilance, peakyness to name a few.
The price is reasonable under £900, just visit www.Trans-Fi Audio.com I sure you it´s gonna be quite of an experience.
I thank you for your installion advice ! |
Dear Harold-not-the-barrel: Professor?, that's a mistake: certainly I'm not. That title belongs to Timeltel where Nandric/Halcro and his posts makes that he received the well regarded Professor title.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
David, Great we are finally in the business, ha-haa ! The ideas & implementations of Vic the Magician are brilliant as we have experienced over the years. Hmm, I think his designs are "not unorthodox, they are beautiful". Kind of a quote from Jimi Hendrix as he was asked at Dick Cavett Show if his performance of the national anthem was unorthodox at Woodstock, August 1969. Cheers |
Raul - been seeing this HUGE thread on this forum for quite some time, but I cannot say I have been following it (sorry). However, now I have a reason to join in and ask you for a recommendation.
My daughter wants a turntable for Christmas. I found a Pioneer PL-12D but it does not have a cartridge. I need something good, but inexpensive (<$50) for it. What do you recommend?
I plan on pairing it with a Marantz 2216B receiver, so she will be in retro/nostalgic heaven with this rig.
Thanks, Bob |
Dear Terminator's friends: Your " unique/sole " enthusiasm speaks a lot of what the Teminator is and what the Terminator is not, thank you.
For that price IMHO it is a must to test and own. I will do it in the near future. Something different is happening down " there " and I would like to know it.
I'm not sticky with no audio items even including my own designs, I'm open almost always to learn to experience " new " roads " in favor of music. I think I can't lost nothing if I buy the Terminator other than the " emotion " that all of you created in me about.
Yes, I will contact with David and of course with you too.
Thank you again.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Ptmconsulting: Surprise me that a " new generation " lady asked for a TT, good!!!!
You can buy from LPGear the Audio Technica AT-95, a lot better performer than what its price could say.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |