Timeltel - I too am fascinated by the way in which language alters (or perhaps more correctly - shapes..) thinking patterns. An area of some fascination for me. I wonder how many international diplomats are aware of this....
Jcarr
Thank you for all the valuable info.... and as I sit by the knee of the master... I will ask a few more questions!
>That is because the coil former is non-permeable, and therefore, rather inefficient in terms of generating electrical output from physical motion. But in return for that inefficiency, they avoid the distortions that all permeable cores inflict. All MMs and MIs have this distortion. So do most MCs that offer relatively high output voltage in comparison to their impedance. So do Raul's beloved step-up transformers (^o^). But non-permeable core MC cartridges like the DL-S1, FR-7, JVC L-1000, Benz-Micro Ruby et al, don't.
How does this distortion manifest?
What type of distortion is it?
How is it spread across the frequency spectrum?
When I measure a cartridges response, what patterns could I look for that would identify or be associated with permeability?
How do I identify a non-permeable core cartridge?
(I continue in my search to understand... and model... cartridge behaviour)
As an aside there AT continue to market their lower end p-mounts with a carbon fibre cantilever... But I am not aware of any mid to top end styli with CF cantilevers...
bye for now
David |
Jcarr,
I once heard the Denon 1000A on a now departed friend's system and recall his love for that item. The memory of the impact of first hearing that level of sound is still with me. Of course, it is difficult to really assess that performance or impact as my own experience of sound and hifi have been greatly changed over the decades. Still, it remains the one MC (of those I have already owned and heard) that I would still love acquire. Maybe one day!
As always... |
Hi Timeltel,
Yes, during my time in the Academy, a friend who was completing his doctorate conducted an interesting test concering community and communication. It is a test that I repeated while working as an academic myself.
Have the students provided with a variety of instruments (drums, tamborines, mouth pipes and similar instruments that need not talent to produce a rhythm with). Give them a few moments to decide on an individual rhythm that they could play repititively but which did not match anyone else that they could hear rehearsing. The aim here is to produce dissonance.
Then have them all start playing their piece at the same time and a cacophonous dissonance is instant. Then time them and at some point they all start to play in a singly recognisable rhythm.
Given the current site and interests, I thought that might be an interesting experiment to share.
As always... |
Hi Fleib:
>Maybe it's due to modern adhesives, but exotic cantilevers usually don't sound like the tip/cantilever interface presents much of a problem.
I'd say that the situation with adhesives is somewhat better than it used to be, but still not good enough. Even today. changing (or simply modifying) the adhesive is enough to alter the sound. I will also mention that carbon fiber, which inevitably contains a decent proportion of adhesive in its composition, has seldom been used as a cantilever material, despite measuring fairly well. The reason seems to be that most cartridge designers who have tried it, simply don't like the sound of it, particularly by itself.
>The current DL-304 and DL-S1 are somewhat unusual.
>They also have very low output and 30 or 40 ohm impedance!
That is because the coil former is non-permeable, and therefore, rather inefficient in terms of generating electrical output from physical motion. But in return for that inefficiency, they avoid the distortions that all permeable cores inflict. All MMs and MIs have this distortion. So do most MCs that offer relatively high output voltage in comparison to their impedance. So do Raul's beloved step-up transformers (^o^). But non-permeable core MC cartridges like the DL-S1, FR-7, JVC L-1000, Benz-Micro Ruby et al, don't.
>Results seem very system dependant.
A cartridge like the DL-S1 prefers to have as few electrical contacts between itself and the phono stage input as possible, and a v-e-r-y good phono stage. In this sense, their requirements are no different from any other low-output MC. A little bit more extreme in degree, that is all.
>They have relatively high compliance, low VTF and seem best in med/heavy arms.
I'd describe 14×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz test record measurement) as medium-compliance, rather than high. Hardly anyone describes Lyra as being high-compliance, but even we usually stay around 12~13 (again, 100Hz test record measurement).
If you study Denon's technical literature, you will see that although Denon spoke on multiple occasions of high-compliance and the calculated benefits on tracking ability, in reality they hardly ever ventured beyond 14 with their MCs. The DL-1000A, with 20×10-6cm/dyne (100Hz test record measurement), is perhaps the only time that Denon made a truly high-compliance MC.
hth, jonathan carr |
Dear Professor,
Brilliant....I chime.
My daughter however opines
Where the hell are the bloody rhymes!? :^)
Cheers
Henry |
Regards, Jcarr: Thanks for taking the time to share the info. on cantilevers. Just finished listening to a Grace F9-L. 5.0mv output, alu. cantilever/LC stylus. There is a market for well designed MM carts. The Grace seems like a good one. Any information on cantilever damping would be recieved with interest...
Peace, |
Regards, Dgob: Someone mentioned my "name"?
Internal logic. Nationalities, cultures, languages structuring thought patterns. What little I know about it is intriguing stuff. I saw many students with different behavioral sets learn to work together in the classroom.
Peace, |
Hi Jcarr, Thanks for your post, very interesting. Maybe it's due to modern adhesives, but exotic cantilevers usually don't sound like the tip/cantilever interface presents much of a problem.
**Also, I will point out that Denon used aluminum alloy cantilevers for a number of cartridges that offered wide-bandwidth playback. The 103S was designed for Quad-4 playback, and offered a playback bandwidth that extended out to 60kHz. With the 103D, Denon claimed a playback bandwidth out to 65kHz. The 301 claimed a bandwidth of out to 60kHz. And so on.
I no longer use aluminum alloy cantilevers for my own cartridge designs, but I have no doubt that it remains possible to design a fairly good-sounding, fairly nice-measuring cartridge using an aluminum alloy cantilever.**
That really is interesting. The current DL-304 and DL-S1 are somewhat unusual. They have relatively high compliance, low VTF and seem best in med/heavy arms. They also have very low output and 30 or 40 ohm impedance! Results seem very system dependant. I have an old 103d that came with a vintage table I bought. I've been afraid to use it cause it has the original tip and I don't have a proper microscope to check it. I'll have to get that together.
It seems that AT and Ortofon are getting away from using micro tips on aluminum cantilevers. I get the feeling that AT is trying to tone down a bit. The 33EV has aluminum and a .3 x .7 with response to 50KHz. The OC9III has boron/LC, also out to 50K. the orig 440 spec was 32K. Notice that Ortofon put a shibata on the 2M Black.
I've read opinions favoring the sound of aluminum.
Regards, |
Nandric,
Btw, I do not seek to merely disagree with you and do find somethings of interest in your response to Timeltel (09-14-11) concerning a sense of language, translation and mathematics.
As always... |
Hi Nandric,
I was refering to the Dgob to whom you oft make reference. He who is implicated in: "The phylosophy of science should be abolished because Dgob solved the problem about the truth..." The same Dgob who appears in your comment in various guises: fool and prophet. The fact that this person resides in your thinking is fine, to me.
As for your view of linguistic truth, I was there when Derrida was a rage in continental Europe - maybe not so much in Germany (but no ground, IMO, to go to war over). I came after Russell pointed the acknowledged flaw in Frege's original arithmetised logic; after Kant pointed the weakness in Wolff; Hegel pointed a weakness in Kant; Heidegger pointed a flaw in ontologicial assumption; Marx pointed the weakness in Hegel etc. I know some that argue that Husserl (of Caretesian Meditations) and his reworking of the cogito presents a radical break with post Platonic western philosophy and I dare say I will be here long after the 'new radical break with all that went before' emerges.
I am not dismissive but it could appear that to stand outside and above past thinkers has an uncanny habit of reducing the thought of those thinkers. Straw men often burn better and apart from illuminating the face of the torch bearer serves mankind little purpose. But, as I have said, I could be wrong.
As always... |
Dear Professor, I feel very hounored with your poem but the
honesty forces me to state that you overrate my (literary)
English. There is this 'strange' situation with my English.
I can read and understand , say, Quine, Tarski, Davidson or
Chomsky but the literature needs some other 'level' or 'languge capability' of understanding. That is, I think, why scientific translations to other languages, seem
to be much more easy. Ie in the scientific community all over the world the participants are already familiar with their own terminology. I have ,for exapmle, a friend who has
no idea about the Russian language but has despite of this a subsciption to some Russian (mathematical) periodicals. Ie he can obviously understand the 'mathematical languge' without understanding of what is called 'plain'-or 'vernacular' language. My quess is that they understand each other because they are thinking about the same, uh, things.
Regards, |
Hi Dgob, When you address you self with your thoughts you can prove what you like. But writing about Frege without any knowledge about his work is, say, very strange. Frege is called the father of the modern logic because he was the first who 'invented' the predicat logic and quatification. After more than 2000 years of the domination of Aritotelian logic this was a very huge advance in science.
But this contribution of Frege was only his first work.
I have no intention to introduce you to Frege's work but
that you are 'innocent' about his contributions to the fundation of mathematics, logic, phylosophy of lanquage and phylosophy of knowledge is a shortcomming in your education. This of course is not something that you can blame on me.
Regards, |
Regards, Halcro:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The sibilance and glare of outrageous distortion,
Or praise pickups and arms amidst a sea of opinion,
And claiming subjectivity end them?
VTA on the fly, too steep, too little;
and by a slip to say we bend the cantilever,
then the thousand natural shocks that budget is heir to:
'tis a compulsion devoutly to be avoided.
Too little, too steep; Perfection, it's a dream –
Oy, cantilever's a nub!
When we have shuffled off our moving coils,
MM's give us cause – where's the respect?
And makes us rather hear that natural hue of resolution.
Surely tonearm pod and absent plith,
Have inconsequential movement;
With this regard pivot to spindle run not awry,
And lose the name of accuracy.
So off you now, the square Ortofon!
Acutex, in thy glorious harmonics;
Be all the muse's joys surrendered.
Henry: As always, pleased to share. YMMV.
Peace, |
One aspect of cantilevers that has received no mention so far is the relation between the cantilever material and how the stylus may be affixed to the cantilever.
Ductile cantilever materials such as aluminum or various grades of duraluminum allow for a certain degree of pressure-fitting to take place, that is, the hole in the cantilever is made slightly undersized, the stylus is press-fit into the cantilever, and glue is added as surrounding reinforcement. The appeal of this approach is that it allows direct contact between cantilever and stylus. If I am not mistaken, titanium allows the same approach to be used.
More exotic cantilever materials like beryllium, boron, ruby-sapphire may have superior mechanical properties when viewed in isolation, but are more brittle, and therefore do not allow direct contact between stylus and cantilever. Inevitably a layer of adhesive needs to be interposed between stylus and cantilever, and this acts as a lossy filter that limits the amount of vibrational information that the stylus can convey to the cantilever.
The exception is that if the designer elects to use a cantilever made of diamond, it is possible to carve the stylus and cantilever out of a single piece of diamond, a method which was used by Sony in their XL88D, XL88D Custom and XL88D "Custom" cartridge models.
Also, I will point out that Denon used aluminum alloy cantilevers for a number of cartridges that offered wide-bandwidth playback. The 103S was designed for Quad-4 playback, and offered a playback bandwidth that extended out to 60kHz. With the 103D, Denon claimed a playback bandwidth out to 65kHz. The 301 claimed a bandwidth of out to 60kHz. And so on.
I no longer use aluminum alloy cantilevers for my own cartridge designs, but I have no doubt that it remains possible to design a fairly good-sounding, fairly nice-measuring cartridge using an aluminum alloy cantilever.
hth, jonathan carr |
Hi Dgob,
I must confess that I have no idea what you are talking about! Some of this might just be down to language (or where you 'reside,' regarding 'philosophy'). However, your (interpretations of Frege's) arguments still amuse and clearly stand for themselves. Given space and time, 'others' might share the humour.
For me, I am sorry but I simply cannot continue to afford your every comment a response. Maybe when you make a useful statement concerning hifi (or given the location, even on cartridges) we will have something of value to discuss. Maybe?
As always... |
Greetings Professor,
I had no idea that Poet Laureate was also attached to your Doctorate?
Please tell me that it took no time at all for these verses to formulate in your mind.
So much time away from music would be a pity...or did you compose whilst listening? :^)
Forgive me.....an Acutex cartridge awaits :^) |
Hi Dgob, 'Others should have their own perspective here and
maybe that is where the truth of this matter must recide'.
This is just one single sentence which demonstrate that you have no idea what you are talking about. First: what others should have I have no idea about. The other probable have some opinions but this is to 'abstract' because 'others' is like a quantifier without refering function. Like: 'someone has stolen my car'. My problem as well as of all those with stolen cars is that 'someone' is not a name. Then the thought that the 'truth' must have some place in which it 'recide' is pathetic. This logicaly
imply: find the place and you will find the truth. The phylosophy of science should be abolished because Dgob solved the problem about the truth. One only need to find the place where the truth recide.
Regards, |
Hi Nandric,
You amuse me. Others should have their own perspectives here and maybe that is where the truth of this matter must reside.
As always... |
For Nikola, who enjoys great literature.
Round about the platters go;
Into the mix fine details throw.—
Add VTF, that cartridge must have weight,
Must be an Ion,
Turns a minute, it has thirty-eight.
Aligning now and sleeping not,
Rest not now, must see what I've got.
Stylus of diamond nude to stake,
on the cantilever to roil and shake;
Best is of ruby, aluminum is a log,
Wooly and fat, the hf's worry the dog,
Addled mids, and bass's-bloat it flings,
Of cantilevers beryllium,
The golden-ear'd in lofty praise sings.
Aluminum for an arm of powerful rumble,
Like a hell-broth of hiss,
And turns groove walls to rubble.
Double, double toil and trouble;
An Aluminum cantilever,
Could it ever be more,
More than just a vinyl shovel?
Oh!- the wonderful sound;
Digg'd I in the dark;
Euphony in play the exotic dowel was eclips'd;
The devil had in an aluminum thin wall slipp'd;
Make the thing of alloy;
And tapered to rid of flab:
Shibata nude and dragon tooth sharp,
Then it your heart with music will stab.
Add thereto some lower induction;
Next throw in a pinch,
Of compliance reduction;
These the ingrediants of our delight.
So for those who keep from aluminum in fear:
Double, double coil and V-magnet,
Platter turn and sound so dear,
Surely makes my CDP sound stagnant.
Peace, |
Hi Dgob, We are obviously using your 'dialectic' all the time without knowing that. But we call this 'discussion' which consist (or should) of arguments. And those kind of 'things' are actualy sentences or propositions which we
write in our post. Nobody calls his arguments,say, 'divine' but the result will be the same as with calling them 'dialectic'. Those arguments are judged in terms of 'strenght', sense or nonsense, but not in 'divine' or 'dialectic' terms. While we are in debt to the 'old Greek', probable the most for their invention of the concept 'cause' , there is some progress made in methodology since.
Regards, |
Dear Nandric: IMHO the " euphonics " is in the designer hands and not in a specific " in self " part of that design.
A designer can choose to achieve an accurate and neutral sound/performance in the same way that he can choose different level of item colorations on different frequency ranges to " motivate " the customers. I hate these ones.
Now, in electronics design it is much easy to achieve that accurrate/neutral item because if you are a good designer you even don't need to voicing it but when we are talking on transducers like cartridges or speakers you need to voicing it and you did/do this through an audio system and trhough your ears ( designer ears. ) that not always are accurate and neutral.
Yes, I know that you don't like the answers that tell you: this is acomplex " task " but the reality is that this is a complex task/subject. At the end we are in the designer/market/profit hands. I already told you that manufacturers/designers are like a chefs and they will cook what the market are waiting for: euphonic sound, unfortunatelly the majority of those euphonic sound audio items are non-accurate and far away from neutrality against a few audio items that have euphonic sound and are accurate and neutral. There are different level of euphonics performance.
I owned the Myaby Ivory ( a very expensive cartridge. ) that when I owned my system was a poor one and I think never permited that the cartridge shows its best performance. I sold it to a friend with a top audio system and when I heard at his place I really can't believe how good the Ivory was and I was really sad ( for my self. ) because I " losted ".
Last time I heard a Myabi was two years ago in San Diego: I heard it in an unknow system for me and what I heard at first does not like me to much because the owner was loading the cartridge over 500-700 ohms then I suggest him to go down to 100 ohms and things change for the better and I can tell you that the euphonics I heard were inside an almost accurate/neutral performance in that system context.
Live Music has its own euphonics " weight " and that's why Music wake-up each one emotions/feelings, so I'm not against euphonics in this regard/meaning.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Hi Nandric,
I use the term 'dialectic' in its Platonic/Socratic sense. There was no intended 'showing off' here. For others, it simply means the striving for truth in/through open dialogue and that is where it tied into the conversation that I was holding with Dlaloum.
As always... |
Dear Raul, My question about the aluminum cantilever was in the context of assertion of some of our members that aluminum as cantilever material is inferior in comparison
with boron, ruby, beryllium,etc. material. I myself was not
aware of 'inferiority' of aluminum so I mentioned your new
'star' with aluminum cantilever and also Takeda san with
his Miyabi carts. Assuming that cart designers are always
looking for the optimal parts for their products it make sense to talk about the parts individualy. So this presupposes that they compared those materials with each other to be able to determine what meterial they want to choose. But those materials have different properties and to my mind this imply that each of them is individualy tested and examined. It is a fact that most of them use boron at present so we may assume that they do this for some reason. And this reason must have something to do with the physical property of this material. However when Dlaloum mentioned 'euphonic' quality of aluminum I was not able to resist the temptation to tease you with your aluminum cantilever . Ie Raul and 'euphonic' quality are not so easy to combine.
Regards, |
Hi Dgob, What do you mean with 'dialectic'? Is this some 'quality' or property of sentences or propositions or what? According to the modern logic any indicative sentence or proposition is either true or false (tertium non datur) and this independant of our psychology. Ie if we know or not know that some sentence is 'actualy true'.
To add 'dialectic' to whatever sentence you like will not
change anything about the so called 'truth value' of the same sentence. As Frege made clear 100 years ago the 'truth' is not a predicate. In our forum everyone who have
some thought need to express this thought in a sentence. What kind of added or any information we get from you when you add that your thought was/is 'dialectic'? To my mind this is only 'showing off' with your familiarity with those old phylosophers like Hegel.If you have an clear thought you can express this thought in a sentence without any reference to 'dialectic' of whatever. From your actual statements ane can see that you have no clear thoughts.
Otherwise we may be able to understand what you want to say. There is no 'dialectical method' that can help in such
a case.
Regards, |
Dear Nandric: Characteristics ( stand alone ) of any material are at our hand all over the net.
For me speaks on aluminum ( or other material ) alone has no sense in the cartridge overall design.
No, I'm not " angry " for your post, things are that our targets here are different, I like to speak on any subject inside a " live " environment that could make not only sense but that tell me something to learn inside that environment and no I don't like to answer a question with other questions but some times my way of think makes me to arrive this way.
Your question about aluminum material is similar as if I ask about Shibata stylus shape ( stand alone. ). It is different if I ask about that stylus shape inside a specific cartridge design/targets.
Anyway, go on: you know that even that some times I did not show this way: I'm open mind almost always. I can't learn in other way.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dlaloum,
As I tried to say, 'I agree'. And I suppose I sit within the dialectic between objective/archivist/scientific proofs and subjective/euphonistic/scientific verifications.
The former criteria allow for the formation of a less biased value system (component quality, aeshetics, law, ethics, etc). The latter allowing for evolving challenges to such value systems (hifi commentary and/or journalism, art appreciation, democracy, etc).
No arguments here. |
Hi Dgob,
I agree that the environment is complex - but that does not mean that we should not aim for an appropriate goal....
Aim for the stars, you may reach the moon.
The alternative is to give up and accept whatever sounds "good" at the time... and depending on mood, weather, fashion, shift to a "better" option as the seasons change.
You suggest erring on the side of caution... but where do you sit in this great divide.... euphonist or archivists?
The one is never satisifed as there is never enough time to subjectively evaluate all options (after all a euphonists evaluation must perforce take weeks or months.... thereby limiting the number of cartridges one can listen to!) - and the archivist is searching for the perfect cartridge he knows to be physically impossible.... and knowing that still seeks for the best facsimile of perfection.
bye for now
David |
Fleib,
"Who was king a month ago? Any crusader will tell you that the holy grail has yet to be found, if indeed it exists."
I think you have eloquently raised an important point here.
Personally, I still find most admiration for the Technics Mk4 and the Glanz G5. Are they 'the best'? I'm not sure but they consistently (although not on all days or recordings) impress me the most - across a variety or performance and expectation levels - of those that I have heard so far.
Were I to go the route of Raul ( a route that he understandably took in order to clarify his assessments for an expectatnt audience) and award scores to cartridges, maybe I would follow Martin Colloms' practice of awarding marks out of 100 and across a set range of clear performance parameters. Here, my favoured cartridges would probably score around 90-93/100. |
Hi Dlaloum,
Having said what I just did (assuming that that one is posted before this latest one), I agree with your views regarding euphony and hifi targets. I do also believe that the justifying use of science that you are suggesting is the only way to go. Yet, the combinations of components and environments that produce the end product (high fidelity musical reproduction) seem so varied and complex that I obviously tend to err on the side of caution. |
Dlaloum,
While I find your behavioural explorations interesting I am confused by your statement that: "making something artificially different from the original, does not reflect the intent of the artist(s)."
'Artistic intent', is (IMO) too complex an issue to relate to accuracy of reproduction. And accuracy of reproduction also allows for variants according to our desire either to produce a facsimile of live performances with which we are familiar (here I refer to a facsimile because of the innate variations afforded by different venues and acoustics) or an (even more challenging) guess at what the 'original recording' was like. I know some argue that R2R and original mastertape is the answer but if you examine the sonic variance and options on R2R playback you will find that we have simply shifted the domain of the challenge about "accuracy". For these and similar reasons, I think things will remain very complex beyoond mere behavioural analysis.
Maybe my belief is misplaced!
As always... |
Dear Professor, The Germans who seem to be born with phylosophy discovered how easy it is to refute a phylosopher: one need only to read some other. While you
seem to question 'the method' of classification you obviously can't do without so you 'put' me in one of the two Russelian 'categories'. It is one old tradition to use
the 'opposites' for some kind of 'mental orientation' but there are probable more possibilities than two.BTW I am a Fregean and not Russelian kind of a guy. One can always avoid some question by refering to some other . Say
the aluminum question by refering to the whole cart and than argue about the complexity of the whole. No wonder that 'some of us' are still confused with aluminum cantilever. But Dlaloum deed not avoid the question and explained the physical properties of the innocent material without any metaphisical argument like the 'art' or 'artisans' who seem to be capable to endow éxtra physical qualities to their 'work of art'. However I don't
believe that Raul will be glad with this explanation. His hearing should of course never be questioned.
Regards, |
Hi Fleib
quite agree... the Aluminium may sound more "musical" in certain circumstances - but that may be euphonic 2nd harmonic distortion.
Also a resonance beyond the audible range can alter the "overshoot" on a square wave test - basically it will exaggerate certain types of dynamics - making them more "audible" and possibly making the cartridge sound more "hifi" (or more musical depending on individual taste, and use of language!).
The ear is easily deceived - frequency variant compression applied only to frequencies above 14kHz can provide an illusion of additional detail and air...the lower level (as in amplitude) detail is raised up to a higher level making it more audible, while the peaks remain exactly as they are... Subtle, sneaky, often sounds very good - and absolutely inauthentic to the original recording.
One can of course argue that had Mozart and Bach had access to synthesizers they would have used those as part of their repertoir... but they didn't and making something artificially different from the original, does not reflect the intent of the artist(s).
Note: I am not saying that one particular material has this problem and the other has a different problem. But I do caution that most high end cartridge designers of the last 20 years have focused on a euphonic approach... (part of the movement that has also seen a resurgence in the use of Valves).
Designers of the 70's and early 80's were attempting to overcome the physical limitations of the medium and of cartridges to create a perfect replay/reproduction medium.
Once Digital took over as the main toolset for "perfect" reproduction (or the attempt of it) - Vinyl gradually slid off on a slippery slope to euphonics....
Clearly there is no point trying to make a perfect reproduced when the goal is a euphonic aural experience.
So we now have the phenomenon of a range of differing cartridges being tuned with different forms of designed-in colourations.... you can have your recording red, blue, green, or taupe - there is something for everyone, and a cartridge to meet every mood.
But very little to assist in analytically reproducing the master recording.
So I question designs like Miyabi (which I am doing without ever having heard one...- so this is not a specific attack!) - where there are aspects which appear at first sight of the design to be inherently flawed - I trust the response of many listeners that report a very positive, pleasant, euphonic experience - but I have seen little in the way of reports that might lead me to believe that these designs would effectively provide me with an untinted window on the original master recording. (and there is nothing wrong with that... if it is your goal)
Bye for now
David |
Hi Nadric, **The Virtuoso is already proclaimed as 'the best' cart ever so you need to explain how 'better' than the best is possible?**
1) I respect Raul's opinion but I might not always agree. He has experience with more cartridges than I, and I've found his opinions invaluable. I know there was a coronation, but IMO there is no, one best cart.
2) Raul's sample was not a stock cartridge. The stylus and cantilever were replaced by Peter Ledermann (Soundsmith). It had a nude .3 x .7 elliptical on a tapered aluminum cantilever. Stock would be a straight alum cantilever. I'm not sure what the stock stylus is. Apparently it's a bonded elliptical. I haven't seen one and CA tells us nothing about the tip on their site. Tell you the truth, the stock assembly looks like a Jico replacement stylus for the AT-95. I wouldn't be surprised in the least. If you cut the plastic wings off one of these Jicos, it plugs right into any CA body. They are pretty good quality bonded styli with a straight alum cantilever.
Exotic refers to any cantilever made from material other than aluminum. That would usually include beryllium, boron, ruby and sapphire. They're all somewhat different in rigidity and weight. Carts are different in design and cantilever length, so we can only talk in generalities or about specific carts. Kings come and go. Who was king a month ago, 20SS or Technics? Any crusader will tell you that the holy grail has yet to be found, if indeed it exists.
Regards, |
Regards, Nandric: There is perhaps an element of Socratic dialectic in your question?
Bertrand Russell distinguished "knowledge by acquaintance" from "knowledge by description". This might be somewhat analogous to Carolus Linnaeus' coining of the terms "methodists", those who care about the principles of classification (acquaintance), in contrast to the mere "collectors", who are concerned primarily with description and pay little or no attention to taxonomic arrangements.
To state that alu. has certain properties is quantifiable in the lab but when attempting to qualify its performance as a cantilever then it might be admitted there are conditional considerations. It then becomes somewhat like the belief "The sky is blue" is true, even if the sky this morning was red.
This is the sort of thing epistomologists have argued over forever but it might reasonably be tenented that theoretical knowledge in the matter can never be substituted for practical application.
I'm pleased to consider that you'd entertain such a Hegelean premise by hinting of alu. cantilevers being “raised” to some higher level of performance by circumstance. ;-)
Peace, |
Hi Griffithds,
I think that depends on who/what we're talking about. Certainly ZYX, VDH, Benz etc use boron without question and design around it. It is generally considered superior. Because rigidity is higher and it's light weight, detail is greater and resonance is of higher frequency. Cantilevers contribute more to tip mass than the tip. Miyabi and Denon are strictly aluminum, which is more forgiving and possibly "musical". I think aluminum is also slightly more dynamic. Less rigidity allows for greater excursions, but with less control. Long aluminum cantilevers will almost always resonate in the top of the audible band. (Thanks Dlaloum) This tends to blur the highs. I suppose that can be overcome with design.
Thanks to MMs with replaceable styli, we can hear for ourselves what these differences are, at least to some extent. I already posted about putting a beryllium ML on a 440. Maybe a 440 stylus will sweeten a 150MLX? LOL, I doubt it.
Regards, |
Hi Fleib, I never made any statement about cantilever material, not to mention 'the best' of them. I only mentioned contradictory statements about aluminum cantilever. Considering the fact that we are talking about physical properties of this material those statements can't impossible be all true. You are adding to the confusion by such an hypothetical statment as 'the Virtuoso might sound even better with an exotic cantilever/micro'. The Virtuoso is already proclaimed as 'the best' cart ever so you need to explain how 'better' than the best is possible? Bisides
'exotic cantilevers' are not mentioned by anyone in this
thread. This loose way of speaking is not the way to explain anything. My point is still this: if aluminum cantilever is inferior in comparison with boron, ruby, beryllium or whatever, how is it possible that Virtuoso with an aluminum cantilever and Takedas Miyabi Standard and Miyabi 47 can get such a prease? There is no way that an
'artist designer' can endow property to an physical object
which this object not 'posses' by its nature. For such things we will need the old alchemist.
However Griffithds alredy made my point in some other description.
Regards,
|
Hi Fleib,
What scares me the most, when we talk about changing cantilivers, are the words we all have been using. May, may not, might, probably. They are all true. We roll the dice and take our chances.
I would quess that cartridge designers try different cantilivers in their creations before deciding on what they want to present to the world or do they just say, I'm going to use a alum. cantiliver and then proceed to design around it? |
Hi Nadric, There is no "best" cantilever material. Perhaps the best cantilever is no cantilever, as Raul suggested.
Cartridges are of sufficiently different design that you can only describe general characteristics to cantilever material ie. weight and rigidity. Switching from one material to another may or may not yield pleasing results, depending on the cartridge and the listener. While Miyabi may have an aluminum cantilever, the vast majority of high end MCs have boron. The top ATs all have boron except the newer 33EV. That doesn't make boron better in all cases. If you changed to boron on a Miyabi it would probably sound worse. I think you have to discuss this on an individual basis. Because the Maestro has a boron/micro, but might sound a bit over-damped with the extensive wood, it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the Virtuoso might sound even better with an exotic cantilever/micro. The generators are the same.
Regards, |
Dear Raul, It is not easy to argue with you. There are at least two kinds of 'arangement' of things. The aggregation and the coalition. The first is an arangement of 'similar' things (a heap of stone) the second of different things. The latest is also called a 'composition'. A cart is obviously an çomposition of different parts. The cart designers try to improve their carts by changing or alteration of one or more parts in their cart. J.Carr, for example, altered the stylus suspension in order to get the centering of the stylus within some exact values. J. Allearts deed 'the same' before so that the VTF on his carts is within 0,2 gm. In this context it make sense to talk and discuss individual parts which make the whole composition. But you are always refering to the whole of the composition. Everything depends of everything else, and so on. Now an holistic approch is of course legitimate but without individual parts one will never get an composition and consequently a holistic approch would make no sense at all. I am very interested in this 'cantilever material' issue but while many make 'general statements' about those materials there is not even an answer regarding the aluminum cantilever. The physical material in casu can impossibe have and not have 'inferior' properties in comparison with boron, ruby, beryllium or whatever. Or so I thought.Ie to my mind it must be possible to discuss individual parts without necessity to always involve the 'whole'.
Regards, |
Dear Fleib: Overall I agree with you. No, there is no " one size fit all ". The cantilever been a critical an important factor on cartridge design is just one of the carrtridge design factors, that's that is only part of the cartridge. Of course that a cartridge designer has to analize full characteristics on diferent build materials on cantilevers and its " shape ". The cantilever must fulfil the designer cartridge performance targets: thi is that the cantilever must help to achieve those designer targets.
A cartridge designer ( as almost any audio item designer. ) is like a chef that can cook with the same ingredients different " plate " flavors.
For a good chef having on hand: aluminum, boron, ruby or the like perhaps is not the most important part but how he can cook around any of thgose " ingredients " to an specific " flavor/taste ".
I think that are at least two critical characteristics in cantilever materials: transmitting speed and self resonance/distortion control.
Transmitting speed is essential and critical for the music reproduction: dynamics and transients are two characteristics that makes the difference with different cartrridges, as higher transmitting speed as we perceive better cartridge dynamics due to faster transients. At the other side as more self-free of resonances/distortions the cantilever transmit the signal in purer and precise way " incrementing: dynamics and the " feel " of faster transients that we can percieve as: power, power that only the live music has.
Yes, the cantilever design is important and maybe more that we can think but I'm with the statement that say that " the best cantilever is no cantilever ". In real terms the best cantilever represent in the signal reproduction a " delay " in the signal transmition that means a downgrade on dynamics and transient speed.
In the 80's I owned the Dyna Nova 13D that was a very expensive cartridge, I bought from a Dyna distributor in Laredo, TX who put on sale his demo sample for me at a " bargain " price that I can't refuse. Unfortunately in those times my audio system performance was well away from today but even that maybe this was the best cartridge I owned in those all times. I remember that almost always the cartridge put me nervous when I used because that to short cantilever. Not only me but even the Dyna dealer can't explain the importance of that tiny/short cantilever.
Looking to the Virtuoso one its cantilever looks as a " gigantic ". I wish and would to have that Nova 13D on hands to give a listen on today audio system standards, I think that this Dyna could be a revelation but why Dynavector grow-up with out " return " on design to its Nova 13D? I don't know.
Btw, we don't see the 13D very often on sale over the net and this means its owners knows what they have.
regards and enjoy the music,
raul. |
One size does not fit all, regarding cantilevers and their properties. Even cantilevers of the same length and general material can be different. A straight aluminum cantilever might be more rigid than a tapered one, but heavier. Ruby and sapphire are generally heavier, but SS uses an extremely thin single crystal piece of ruby. Combined with a micro tip, I would think tip mass would be reduced compared to stock. But exotic cantilevers aren't always preferred. Maybe Takeda san puts the time and expertise into making the output of the Miyabi compliment the resonances of the cantilever, but I doubt if mass market companies do the same, at least to that extent.
During the heyday one of the big MC manufacturers, possibly Dynavector, made a video(s) of cantilevers in action. They used laser interferometry or some such method to tape this. The description of aluminum cantilevers was of wild gyrations like a bull whip and at times it looked as if it would fold up on itself. I would love to see that video. An aluminum cantilever usually sounds more robust, especially in the midbass, but less detailed and exact. We all choose what compliments our system and taste. I don't subscribe to the notion that there is one best cartridge.
Regarding ATs answer to the digital challenge; Maybe it was because early digital was so harsh and unmusical that AT got off track. Their cartridges generally got much worse from that time. For the sake of a higher output, they compromised inductance/impedance and went for detail uber alles. I believe the 440 came out in the 80's. Output was 5mV. It had a nude ML on a tapered cantilever. I had to load it at 30K/100pF to prevent ear bleeds. In all fairness it sounds good like that, but even better with a beryllium ML or LC at 47K. AT now seems to be finally addressing that. The generator of the Virtuoso is more like an AT-15/20. The wood top damps vibrations or whatever, right at the mount. I wish there was a beryllium/boron stylus that would transplant into the plug. They break if you try. I'm sure CA ordered that body and plug for a reason. They charge something like $600 for a new crappy stock stylus. The Jico LC is probably better. I'd sooner send it to VDH or SS, but I don't think the generator is better than an AT-20. The body is lighter, the compliance is 15, and the wood works wonders.
Regards, |
Hi Dlaloum, You are obviously searching for the 'objective'
cause -effect phenomenon in cantilever material. But you never stated anywhere that some material has and has not some quality at the same time. So I was not able to discover any contradiction in your statements. Ie you are within the bondary of physical science.But you of course know about designers preferences which may be called 'subjective' in the sense of their subjective preferences. Some call this 'art' but I prefer 'mythology' as a more adequate expression. If an physical object lack
some property no art whatever can provide the non existend
property to the object in casu. But our hobby seems to consist of both parts: science and mythology. I don't however believe that you will ever include mythology in your research. You can use your time much better I assume.
Regards,
|
Dear Timeltel: I bought not one Signet sample but three ( I already sold one. ) and there is no difference.
Btw, I think you missed my post on AT line. What I remember of it is that it is near a Siny123 post with his opinion about.
Yes, the Astrion and 140 deserve a " serious " listening.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Hi Nandric,
in researching cartridge and cantilever behaviour there are a range of distortions that are directly related to cantilever behaviour...
Specifically: cantilever resonance, and torsion/flexing.
The first I am starting to get a reasonable handle on ( and appears to be mostly unknown/ignored/disregarded by most audiophiles)... the cantilever resonance can influence both frequency and phase response octaves above and below the peak resonance point...
Numerous designers have used the cantilever resonance along with the electrical resonance to generate a near flat frequency response but there are problems with this approach.. the idea of combining a series of flaws to end up with a result close to the target is..... problematic!
The Shure M series are examples, so are most of the empires, and the Audio Technica aluminium cantilever cartridges.
The things that define the frequency of the resonance are the proportions and shape of the cantilever, along with the rigidity and speed of sound (closely related!) through the material.
Harder materials tend to have faster speed of sound and higher resonant frequencies (also achieved with shorter cantilevers...) - so there are advantages to certain shapes (tubes, tapering) - but many advantages come with materials - diamond, ruby/sapphire, boron and beryllium are all examples.
In the search for improved linearity, one approach it to move all resonances up and out of the Audio range - cantilever materials are key to this.
Another aspect of this, is that apparently torsion/flex in a cantilever (which happens more with the less rigid materials.... like aluminium) tend to lead to various forms of distortion - including the Euphonic second harmonic.
Here we start to divide into the usual subjectivist vs objectivist camps, and the reproducer-archivist vs musician/stereo-as-musical-instrument camps.
I fall relatively firmly into the objectivist and reproducer-archivist camps. So my goal is to reproduce the original master recording as best I can....
Thereafter if I want to add euphonic distortion to it (and distortion is by definition anything that was not in, or differentiates from, the original master!) I can use equalisation and other forms of sound tailoring to achieve it.
Excellent cartridges like the AT440MLa have cantilever resonances impacting on the sound at frequencies of around 10kHz - the tapered aluminium cantilever and its damping have been designed to control the resonance to best effect - but these styli do not achieve the level of quality that the ATN150MLX stylus does - substantially because of its boron cantilever (it has of course the same proportions, but the damping is varied somewhat) - so the MLx has its resonance peak above 20kHz (not far above though) and although it does impact on the audible range down to perhaps 15kHz, the impact is slight... and the cartridge sounds substantially the better for it.
Also knowing the material does not tell us about the shape/structure of the material.
Technics made boron tubes using a vapor deposition method, probably similar to the methods used by Shure and AT for their Beryllium tube cantilevers... the Technics literature of the time claimed that for a cantilever of the same shape and proportions, their Boron tube was superior to ruby/sapphire or diamond cantilevers. (in terms of raising the resonance to a higher frequency and increasing torsional rigidity)
So speaking theoretically the "exotic" materials have the edge....
Speaking practically in the real world - implementation is everything! - Digital implemented right is superior in every way to vinyl analogue as a recording and reproduction medium... but there are so very many digital systems that sound terrible!
And so many analogue systems that rise above their imperfections to sound great.
I admit to being on a search for a holy grail.... or at least a small collection of cartridges that I will settle down with for a number of years....
I do love the sound of the Aluminium cantilevered ADC SuperXLM shibata, and the beryllium cantilever AT20ss.
But I am still seeking cartridges that move the resonance totally out of the 20-20 range - and I have not found one yet. (maybe when I find it, I will discover it makes no difference, and the grass was always greener on this side of the fence...)
To summaries my (as usual) verbose posting.... the desirable qualities in a cantilever include torsional rigidity and higher resonance frequency, as a result aluminium is a less desirable material - in shorthand terms you can rank cantilevers by material Aluminium being the lowest rank, then Titanium (and perhaps carbon fibre?), and then the exotic materials.
Also cantilevers can be ranked by solid (lower) and hollow (higher) as well as straight (lower) and tapered (higher).
It does give us a handy way of looking at a cartridges specifications "sound unheard" and make some sort of judgement as to where it might rank in the cartridge sound quality continuum.
Essential given that many of us have no hope of hearing any of these cartridges without purchasing them.
So some of my criteria (flawed as they may be) in my search for the Holy Cartridge....
1) A cantilever that has a decent chance of placing the resonance around an octave beyond the audible range or higher
2) Low inductance (so as to also remove the electrical resonance)
3) a Body either designed for good damping or that can easily be modded/adjusted to improve its damping.
4) High tracking capability
5) Flat frequency response
And I prefer removeable styli - if additional rigidity is required in the stylus mounting, it can be achieved with a tiny amount of plasticine or blue-tack. - I do like those cartridges that screw the stylus mounting in (Technics 100/205 and TK9/10) for max rigidity while maintaining exchangeability.
Raul - my comments with regards to the AT13/14/15/20 and the TK1/3/5/7 - was related to the construction of their rather heavier metal bodies, as opposed to the closely related AT10/11/12 cartridges
AT was clearly doing something similar to what CA have done with their cartridges.
The differing stylus mounts also impact on the stylus/body vibration environment, with the signets having the better design for vibration control. - Which is not to say that a particular exemplar might not have a problem.... as I mentioned earlier, experiments with one or two thin threads of plasticine or blue-tack may make a substantial difference to some cartridges...
Best fitted between two rigid surfaces and in a very thin layer to maximise shear effec which is a valuable damper... between stylus and body is just about perfect. A tiny amount between cartridge and headshell may also help in some cases (more experimentation needed here...)
bye for now
David |
Cantilever material. There are many 'strange' statements
about this theme. Consider : 'aluminum is inferior in comparison with boron, ruby , beryllium ',etc. To my mind a statement about physical property of some material should not be contradictory. Say:' copper conducts and does not conduct electricity'.
Regarding the aluminum cantilever we have Rauls statement
that he persisted on aluminum in his new 'star' and changed
only the stylus. He seems to be in a (very) good company with Takeda san who swears by aluminum . His Miyabi Standard and Miyabi 47 are highly praised carts.
J.Carr stated in some if his post that he does not like ruby cantilever qua sound. Does he imply that ruby is inferior to, say, boron? Some other designer called Peter
seems to be very fond about the same, uh, material. I assume btw that sapphire is the same as ruby except for the colour. Well I think that one should not ascribe such contradicting properties to the material thing in casu but instead refer
to his own tastes and valuation. Otherwise the innocent physical object will at the same time have and not have some quality.
Regards, |
Regards, Raul: Thanks for your comments. BUT: I'm firmly convinced there's a concern with your TK7 example. It takes a fairly vigorous thump directly on the headshell to get even a mild response through the rig here, microphonics as a problem simply dosn't exist with the one I have. If there is a concern with yours it's a shame. It really is a nice cart, mine compares very favorably with the rewarding Azden YM-P50VL and yes, there is some evidence of bass hangover but this can be (and should be) addressed with isolation/damping practices. Not the most defining cart but it does have an open character with a subtle but still powerful "organic" presence that invites continued listening. Analytical carts can easily become fatigueing and are not numerous on my list of daily drivers, critical listening qualities in a pickup and casual enjoyment are not always concurrent. Otherwise I do appreciate what you're expressing for the benefit of those who follow this thread.
Unaware but not surprised that some studios manipulate digital recordings to emulate analog qualities. Have a fairly adequate Rega Saturn CDP here, it's one I can listen to for more than 20 or so minutes without becoming restless. Designed by Rega to intentionally soften transients in order to emulate the analog "sound". Runs a little fast, lots of PRAT, it's a Rega ;).
Still waiting for your promised comments on the TOTL AT's. Might be a good time to revisit the Shure ML 140HE for comparison too? And the very rare Astrion, "OldADC" reveals each was individually hand tuned.
Peace, |
Dear Timeltel: I'm sorry but IMHO you are wrong on the Signet subject: it is to easy to compare the 20SS plastic assembly and the Signet ones and " see " why the Signets have more resonances and no I don't think my Signets are " defective " but that my system has more resolution that's different.
My cartridge comparisons are not the type ( as yours. ) that tweaked " one cartrridge to see if is more competitive, normally I do nothing other than a near " right " set up and that's all. Try to tweak " every single cartridge is a " endless history " even with 3-4 cartridges but with 100+ is out of question.
The Sinet/AT subject is " old " hystory that I decide to forget because there is nothing more to learn when there are a lot of other cartridge alternatives looking for us. I touched in my last posts because some one else " touch " it and I'm only refereing to but not because I have more interest on those average/mediocre cartridges against other top top performers. I don't know why you don't want to advance and stay sticky over there IMHO you are better than that and deserve something better to speak for.
+++++ " I expect you already know this? " +++++
if you are refering of what AT stated: that's what I always supported and support and give advise about with out knowing what AT thought about. If you are refering to the CD influence sure it has an influence in the same way that tube sound had an influence in some SS electronic designs.
Timeltel, do you know that at recording studio level exist plug-inns to mimic the analog distortions/colorations that enginners on digital recordings use it to fulfil customer expectations?, " stupid audio world " we have.
Regrads and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Regards, Raul: Pre-digital influence and some relative events. Once, during a casual dinning affair, a young father at a nearby table placed a napkin on his head. His daughters, one amused and the other somewhat taken aback, asked why he did this. "Well, if enough people see me do this often enough, they'll think it's how it should be done". I believe he was a good father.
With vintage carts, there is the neutrality of Shure, the borderline euphonics of Empire and the attention to mid/upper definition frequently heard in AT carts. These are generalities. With the advent of the CD, a relative uniformity of playback was achieved and when enough people had heard this it came to be believed this was the way it should be done. I have no doubt the influence of digital sources and playback gear have influenced listener's expectations and manufacturors have correspondingly adjusted to listener expectations, as they have always done. From an AT pamplet of the late 70's: "--we remain convinced that subjective testing and evaluation are just as important as objective testing. Neither listening nor testing alone is enough, in determining the real performance of any cartridge". Current market demands will be served and CD's have definitely had an impact on the performance most listeners anticipate in a transducer. I expect you already know this?
Relative to comments made in a previous post: Some while ago an AT 150MLx was offered for sale with the qualification that the stylus, "for some reason", would not stay firmly on the cart. It's probable that the assembly had been removed repeatedly for stylus cleaning and it had worn to the extent it would no longer remain locked in position, AT carts will do that. A ATN15Xe stylus I recently acquired exibited significant microphonics and played with excessively grainy mids and excessive distortion. When the tonearm was touched at any point including the counterweight, an audible rasp was heard through the system. Examination of the stylus revealed an excess of white thread sealant applied to the compliance screw, the sealant had overflowed and prevented proper seating of the stylus asssembly. Removing this excess allowed the stylus carrier to seat and the problems were eliminated.
Microphonics and distortions were the faults found with the TK7 example you "tested". There is no doubt in my mind your example is defective and when it is said "-- TK5/7 you can " see " the difference and where came some resonances in the lesser products, we have to remember that all these cartridges are build in reference to a price point", there is blatant disregard for the fact that the TK7 "price point" was equivilent to the TOTL product from AT, at that time and with inflation adjustment, now.
The TK7 is not the pinacle of MM carts but it can be a very enjoyable performer. It is the equivilent of the AT20SLa and much better than the experience you had with your example. Stick some tape or blue-tack under the stylus carrier and try it again on a low/low med. mass TA, you might be surprised.
Peace, |
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " pre-digital influence carts, " +++++
I don't know what you mean with that but IMHO there are great cartridge designs before and after digital era.
Digital starts with many quality performance problems but if there is one area where I learn from digital and how a frequency range most performs that area was BASS-Low Bass. Till today IMHO there is no single analog system that can even the digital quality performance level in that frequency range area, so I learned from digital and as a fact I'm still learning on this medium as a MUSIC reproducer/tool.
Astrion, now that your " reference information " touched maybe it is time to hear it, I think I have not months but years that I don't " touch " my Astrion as the Shure 140.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Dlaloum: It appears that almost " float " around resonances/distortions that comes from different product inside/sources and in different kind of it.
The Virtuoso has some design characteristics that helps a lot, additional with what you posted there are:
+++++ " +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Cartridge Highlights External Design Characteristics:
The cartridge came with removable stylus guard which is a good point because we have not to be worried about cartridge stylus guard resonances/colorations/distortion that affect the cartridge signal quality performance level.
The cartridge fortunately came with non-removable stylus that is a good characteristic too due that here again the cartridge does not add didtortions/colorations because the normal plastic stylus removable assembly.
I'm not in love whith its " looking body design " but all in all it is not an important issue for me. What it is important is that the cartridge design body ( metal/wood. ) does not shows resonances/distortions I can detect.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
these characteristics are not shared at the same level for the Signets you name it but for the 9/10 and if you check the plastic stylus assembly of the 20 SS against the AT13 or TK5/7 you can " see " the difference and where came some resonances in the lesser products, we have to remember that all these cartridges are build in reference to a price point and as cartridge designs goes up on that price point as better control on those resonances not only by design but because better build materials.
In the last months your work that you are so gentle to share in this thread has a heavy weight on resonances/distortions because you know that's is in these resonances/distortions where performance differences belongs.
The cantilever is a critical subject about. The LPs were cut with a head with no-cantilever so things are that why not do the same with cartridges on playback.
Dynavector maybe has the shorter cantilever in a cantilevered cartridge and that was the 13D: 1.3cm and we have the non-cantilever designs as Ikeda/Decca or Victor.
If we know that cantilever maybe makes more " harm " than what it helps a solution is non-cantilever designs. But till today Ikeda/Decca had an average successful because it is not an easy task to design/build/execution the " perfect " non-cantilever cartridge that " works ". That's why the cantilever build material as the it self cantilever design is so critical and important.
++ " A reflection of engineering reality? or a reflection of the state of play in the late 70's / early 80's? " +++++
Both but I could think more oriented on what was happening in those days: MM/MI cartridges with high compliance was the " norm/rule ", tonearms designers made their designs for that kind of cartridges.
Take note something weird: the majority of the low mass tonearms were designs coming from USA/Europe and from Japan only Grace that did it in big " volume " sales with Stax and Technics with a lot lower sales.
Now, a matched mass tonearm with cartridge is not enough, you mentioned tonearm damping and I agree with you this subject is critical too to handle resonances/distortions and to avoid self resonances/distortions that's why for several years many of us are " supporting " tonearm removable headshell designs where we can choose different headshells with different build materials that modify resonances/distortions.
Now, it is not only that we know it all that but thet in each one audio system we can be aware of those resonances/distortions and on its changes when we try to damp it or simple we want to avoid those resonances/distortions in favor of accurate and neutral quality performance level.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
