I am in complete agreement with Nandric re the subjects of nature vs. nurture and of how we hear; with some qualifications.
I think that his use of Chinese Opera as an example of how nurture comes into play is a very good one; and one that I can relate to. Because of what I do for a living I have to (am forced to?) spend time listening to musical styles that would otherwise not interest me. In the case of Chinese Opera, and in spite of the fact that I am an avid opera fan in general, I had always found this music very difficult and, at best, grating to my aesthetic sensibilities. I would periodically have the opportunity to, reluctantly, listen to some of this music, and the only thing that kept me from running out of the room was the simple knowledge that there is value in all ethnic musics and that dislike of any one was usually a reflection of my lack of understanding of the culture. About ten years ago I had the opportunity to spend a few weeks in China. Well, after being immersed in the culture, eating the food food as it is meant to be, learning a little bit about its customs, and most importantly it's language (which has an important connection to the music of all cultures) the music suddenly took on a different meaning. I no longer feel the need to run out of the room.
Re the mechanics of "hearing": obviously we all have somewhat individual hearing apparatus. Individual, from the standpoint of having somewhat unique physical characteristics which will necessarily affect things like frequency response perception. But, all of our hearing mechanisms are ESSENTIALLY the same; albeit, with somewhat different sensitivities in specific areas. Most importantly, as concerns how this relates to music listening and audiophilia in general, those differences are irrelevant; assuming a reasonable amount of functionality, of course. And this is why using live music as a reference is so important; and is unfortunate how often it is dismissed. If my hearing has a deficiency (dip) in it's response at around 10k (for example), then that same deficiency will be there wether we are listening to our stereo or to a live performance. It follows then that if we relate what we hear to the live music experience, then those differences become irrelevant. IMO, of course. |
Nandric, Your illogical responses are tedious, and I doubt if others are still interested. Looks like I opened a can of worms, but once opened there is little alternative but to deal with the mess. *'I have refuted those statements' or 'those statements are OBVIOUSLY fals' is not much of an argument. Imagine one ear medical specialist in China. If every single Chinese has different hearing capability there would be no way to state any 'general rule or statement' about hearing there. To be true in your interpretation he would need to examine all Chinese before he can make any general statement about their hearing capability.*
1) I already refuted those statements in previous posts. 2) ALL (your word) Chinese do not have the same hearing capability, just as ALL of us do not hear the same. That does not mean there are no generalizations that can be made about hearing such as average hearing loss for a particular age group.
Regarding your more recent statement, just because you don't have cancer yet, doesn't mean you won't contract that disease if you continue smoking. Even if you quit you might be unfortunate and still get cancer because of previous smoking. There are often exceptions to a medical correlation such as smoking and cancer. That does not mean the correlation is false. Your mistake is misapplying the rules of logic, and smoking for 60 years. Hopefully, you quit, which should increase your prospect for greater longevity. If you want to continue this conversation maybe you should send me an email.
Raul already posted about the 50ANV tracking ability, or lack of. How many hrs do you have on it? I suspect the compliance is too high for the weight, or the suspension needs a long time to loosen. Regards |
Dear Fleib, From your use of the expression 'logical' it follows that you are totaly innocente of any logical knowledge. You probable never heard about quantification logic. This follows from your comment about smoking and cancer. I wrote that 'according to quantification logic' my case would refute the causal connection made by medical researchers. But they use statistical not logical evidence. What is 'statisticaly significant' is, uh, important for them not the reasoning like 'for all x Fx&Gx'from quantification logic. That is to say that each member of the given set satisfy the conditions Fx & Gx. If just one member does not satisfy those conditions then the whole statement (aka universal statement) is false. In our ordinary language this kind of reasoning is also not used. With 'all' people mean 'most' , 'what is usualy the case','exceptions confirm the rule' etc. Your further 'arguments' that I still can get cancer probable even after my death is pathetic. So because you assume, according to your 'logic', that I deny this medical evedice you add on to your own further 'arguments' without realization that I deed not deny the medical evidence at all. The context was 'what is usualy the case', the 'normal hearing capability', etc. You are so focused on 'hearing differences' that you lost my main point (nurture versus nature) which Frogman had no difficulty at all to recognize . Obviously because he knows what I was talking about while you missed the whole point.
Regards,
|
Dear Nandric, We're in agreement about your nurture vs nature thesis, no problem with that, unfortunately that's not what I was addressing. In English, the use of the plain language word "all", is a precise and distinct quantifier from the word "most". This is not a nuance of semantics, the words have different meanings. In rereading your posts I see that we're probably in basic agreement about hearing differences, but the application of formal logic to a plain language discourse serves to complicate misunderstanding. As you say, there is no counterpart for the inverted A (all), that means most.
I've previously stated that sometimes I misunderstand what Raul is saying, just as you misunderstood what I was saying about smoking. The notion of contracting cancer after death might be funny if the subject matter wasn't so tragic. I apologise for misunderstanding what you meant in any of the disputed statements. It's obvious to me that the tower of Babel is responsible for the confusion. Let this be the last of it. Regards, |
DGOB,
All I am suggesting is that if you enjoy the Acutex M420 and what it is doing there is more to to be heard. In my system this cart gets driven to clipping very quickly. The specd output of 3.2Mv is sounding more like 7Mv. In a similar fashion amplifier tube 5751 is 30% the gain of a normal 12AX7 (yet was one of Stevie Ray Vaughn's favorite tubes) and allows you to hear other components colorations more clearly. If you find yourself hamfisted at the soldering iron or non parlay DIY here is another even less expensive solution allowing you to lower the noise floor, get a little more headroom and hear more of what this M420 has to offer:
http://www.goldenjacks.com/
-20db of gain at the volume pots. |
Dear Indieroehre: No, we can get and can't hear " 100% neutrality " ( not even in a master tape ), this is only a " perfect target ".
What I went to explain is that ( everything the same ) when we achieve: accuracy, low/cero distortions and neutrality what we will hear will like it.
A very good experience that IMHO we need to have is to attend at a recording studio and live the whole recording experience, this is perhaps the more learning experience we can have after the live music experiences. This helps a lot to understand what we are hearing in our home audio system.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Hi friends and special Nandric as owner of Glanz mf series. I have a nos Glanz 31l here. I hear only a quiet tone from both sides. I changed cables , headshells, tonearms, put it on several TT's, I have no idea. I set in the stylus till it snapped. what else can I do. stylus ist top. I have no idea anymore. I have no other Glanz mf body or astatic to check it. at the part where stylus get contact to body, there is something like aluminium folia. it is pushed back a little bit, there I see the end of the copper wire. I think this is not normal. as someone tried to put replacement from front instead of from above and pushed the material away. I can send pics. If someone wants to help me for example with a picture from the contact area please email to jekyll2000@web.de
regards. Knut |
Dear Frogman,
".....If my hearing has a deficiency (dip) in it's response at around 10k (for example), then that same deficiency will be there wether we are listening to our stereo or to a live performance. It follows then that if we relate what we hear to the live music experience, then those differences become irrelevant. IMO, of course."
Bingo!
In addition...I can no longer cite the text where I first read this, but in the end human hearing is considered a psychological phenomenon because we must interpret what we hear. Hence, in the end our auditory perceptions are subjective, not absolute.
Jim |
Travbrow , Sometimes refinement can definitely be overrated, but if you get a chance to hear the Acutex 315/320, do so. All the boogy of the 312 plus added texture.
Tube, you rebel. :-) |
Dear Raul, I was reading above your remarks about the B&O MMC1 and 2. I own an MMC1. I am deep in thought about ways in which to strengthen its structure, especially when used in a conventional headshell. I think we are only able retrieve 60% to 80% of what those cartridges (and the MMC20CL) could really do, were it not for the contraptions used to mount them in a headshell. Too many connectors, too little rigidity. Do you have any ideas? |
Hi Acman 3, The designer/producer of this frightening linear 'Terminator' bought from me the Acutex 420 as well the 312. He was impressed with both. The 312 can still be get by the same Italian seller btw. |
Dear Lew, Axel told me that he was (former) dealer for the B&O carts and 'cose'still has some parts in his stock. But according to him those mounts are difficult to get and are expensive. As far as I know Peter Ledermann produce them and probable can do something for you. He need to solve the same problem, I would think, by his 'recreations' of the MMC series.
Regards, |
Dean man, Frege struggled his whole life against psychologism in logic ( back than 'the art of reasoning') and stated that everyone has his own pain while nobody can feel the pain of one other. Wittgenstein reposted : than we can't talk about pain with each other. Not to mention medical profession (Lew I have pain in my soul). Ergo: we can't talk about music, carts, or whatever? But what then with Frogman's culture and 'my' nurture? |
Dear Indieroehre, Alas I do not own the whole Glanz series. Well the Glanz 5, 31 l and 31 E. I also bought the stylus for the Astatic MF 300 which will fit all the 'corpuses' (thanks Lew) but is meant for the MF 300 or Glanz 31 E. I very recently made some 'barter transaction' with my comrade Don such that for his Precept 220 without stylus I promissed to him the 'whole Ganz 31E' with the mentioned MF stylus as added offer. He may have more of those styli very soon but I am not allowed to say how. Anyway you have a possible solution for your problem. I know that Lew will advice against but you can check your cart with a cheap digital Voltmeter. If the coils are ok the only thing you need is a new stylus (from Don). Don I hope you will not think of me as a traitor?
Regards, |
Dear Dean_man,
at first I was mystified by your, seemingly, contradictory comments. You seemed to be agreeing with my premise; then, in your second paragraph contradicted it. I realize now that you misinterpreted what I said. Please correct me if not the case.
When I said that "those differences become irrelevant", I referred to the differences between the hearing capabilities or sensitivities of various listeners; not, the differences between the sound of our stereos and of live music. My point is simply that the more one relates what we hear from our stereos to the sound of live, the LESS subjective our auditory experiences become.
I have said it many times, and IMO it is not a question of better/worse or have to/don't have to: It is fine to keep all of these discussions about the sound of our precious stereos to simply what it is we prefer and like the most. But, as soon as we open that huge can-o-worms by making comments about how this or that is better, is more or less accurate, etc., we have to follow it by asking "compared to what?". The sound of live is the only valid reference. Yes, not all live sound is the same. But, the gulf between the sound of live and that of the best stereos is so huge, and there are so many and important common threads within all the varieties of live sound that it remains the only reference. No, I don't believe it is subjective. Now, being able to express ourselves and describe in a way that others can relate to is another matter altogether. |
Hi Tubed1,
Massive thanks for the feedback. I'll read and consider the suggestions properly as soon as I have a chance (pressed for time at the moment). I really look forward to comprehending and attempting the changes.
As always... |
Dear Frogman, It is called 'mental map' or 'orientation' but there are huge disatvantages against concepts and their 'opposite' construction by our mental orientation. So we qaurell about 'subjective' versus 'objective'; 'materialistic' versus 'idealistic' points of view. But concepts are substituted for sentences or statements or propositions as the basic units for any logical, sematical or linqustic investigation or analysis. Consider conjunction between sentences or propositions. Without any negation of individual psychology, preferences or whatever individual, we have our native language, culture, rules of behaviour, own poets, writers, warriors, heros and even the national footbal representation of which we all are assumed to be proud. So obviously there is no cotradiction between our 'subjective part' and our collective cultural, etc, part.I.e, it is not one OR the other as by concepts but one AND the other as by the conjunction of sentences.
Regards,
|
Nandric, You are a good and thoughtful comrade. You did not reveal my soon to acquire styli source so you are still held in high regard. I will know soon if I am rewarded with riches. If I do, I will contact Indieroehre. Regards Don |
Dear Nicola, Thank you for your comment about SoundSmith. But perhaps you misunderstood me. I have all the proper B&O hardware to mount my MMC1 in a conventional headshell. My lament is that said hardware "sucks", as Frege might have put it, if he were ever to have made a definitive statement. There are too many electrical contacts in the signal path, and the mounting components are made of, shall we say, cheap plastic. In the modern era of titanium-bodied cartridges and the like, the B&O hardware amounts to a joke. So far as I know, Mr. Ledermann can supply a replacement piece (when he has them) for the B&O adapter (for $50!!!!), but I don't think it is any more rigid than the original. What's needed is a complete re-thinking of the adapter design and then to re-make it of truly rigid non-resonant materials. |
Hi Nandric,
"Ergo: we can't talk about music, carts, or whatever? ?"
Of course we can talk about all of those things and exchange points of view and experiences and opinions!
In adding to the post by Frogman I was simply trying to point out (and apparently not as successfully as I would have liked), that human hearing is by its nature an interpreted and subjective thing.
No hidden meaning intended! |
Dear Frogman,
"...having somewhat unique physical characteristics which will necessarily affect things like frequency response perception."
And,
"...Most importantly, as concerns how this relates to music listening and audiophilia in general, those differences are irrelevant; assuming a reasonable amount of functionality, of course. "
I was agreeing with you, not trying to start a fuss :) |
Dear Dean_man,
My apology for misinterpreting your comments.
Regards. |
Indieroehre,
There is a Astatic MF300 up for bid on ebay. It is my understanding that the Glanz and the Astatic line of cartridges were the same. It sounds like from your description, that you have a good stylus but need a body. With the 300 body,you will give up a couple of db's of separation which I doubt you would even notice. Other than that, the spec. sheet for the entire line of Glanz (or Astatic), is the same. This statement is based on page 11 & 12 (specification pages), of the manual that can be found on Vinylengine, Glanz MF Series instruction/owners manual download. Regards, Don |
Dear Nandric, yes I measured it. Zero. Coils are dead. if you have a mfg body you don't need please let me know. Thanks. Regards. Knut |
Indieroehre,
While on the Vinylenginge web site, also look up Astatic MF 200 instruction/owner manual download. You might laugh when you start to read and notice the wording and pictures in the Astatic manual is the same as what is in the Glanz manual that you just read. Do yourself a favor and get the MF 300. Put your stylus on it and just enjoy the fact your Glanz is back! Regards, Don |
Dear Dean man, The statement after 'Ergo' was the conclusion by Wittgenstein from Frege's thesis. I assume on the contrary that we already enjoy our sharing of information , individual experiences and opininions. This however does not imply consensus about individual valuations of whatever. And we are assumed to share the same hobby which, uh, imply some kind of 'common love affair'. The case with Wagner, Lew and me is the 'exception which confirms the rule'? I would think that we in the West have so much choice among composers and music kinds that we are so 'spoilt' that we too easilly dismis some composers or music kinds. As Frogman discovered in China one should be cereful with his own prejudice. BTW Lew is much more influenced by Twain then his mother regarding Wagner (grin). I alas forget his quotation of Twain.
Regards, |
Frogman, no prolem st all. Thank you for making those important points about perception.
Regards, Jim |
Dear comrade & Indieroehre, One of the problems by such huge thread is how to find the earlier post. The advantage however is that one can post the same answer again. As I already posted 'somewhere' in this thread the Astatic and Glanz were 'simple' importers suggesting by their brand name to be more than that. Mitachi Corp. from Japan, the inventor of the Moving Flux (MF)technique (or technology?) produced the same carts for both. The so called 'generator' and body are the same but I compared only few of them. So I am sure that Astatic MF 100,200 and 300 as well as the Glanz 71,51 and 31 have the same generator and body. The difference is between styli caused by what Astatic and Glanz ordered by Mitachi. So while MF 100 and 200 got Shibata stylus and MF 300 Elliptical, by Glanz there was choice between line contact and elliptical for all mentioned models. I and Vetterone were not able to hear any difference between MF 200 (Raul's former darling) and Glanz 31 L (Glanz thread , owned by Dgob). On ebay however the difference can be huge. I sold my MF 200 for $375 while I got the Glanz 31 L (from Italy !!) for 40 euro. This may be called the 'force of knowing'. So dear Indieoehre you will understand my reluctance to say if my Glanz 31 L is for sell(grin). I think that I was already very kind for my comrade but such conduct can lead by repetition to Cyprus scenario( grin). BTW Raul had a very strong inclination to deny my findings and that is why WE in Holland say: 'love makes one blind'.
Regards, |
Dear Nandric: IMHO no one can deny your findings, what your ears perceive is what is mperceived. What any one can is to be in disagrenment with you.
Now, that again we are talking of Astatic I have to test that " marvelous " and unique MF 2000 that because the Precept, the ANV, the Pioneer 550, the X-1, the Phoenix and the like I did not give the time that Iknow the MF 2000 deserves. I will try to do it by this weekend.
In theory the Astatic MF-2000 is the " holy grail " of all Astatic/Glanz cartridges, we will see.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear griffithds: I made a very brief test with that Mission Solitaire and if I remember did not like it what I heard but fact is that I never gave it the time and fine tunning any cartridge deserves, some time in the future I will try again.
I remember that I bought a Jico SAS stylus replacement that in theory fits that Mission, the Sumiko Pearl, the Garrot one and I think the Grace F9 but I never tested any thing about.
I would like to hear your experiences with the Solitaire ( when you have it. ) that is a rare cartridge finding ( and for that bargain price it almost does not matters how the cartridge performs. ), we don't see it often on ebay.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Sorry, it is not the Astatic MF-2000 but MF-2500.
R. |
If the winner of that eBay´s JVC X-1 is an Agoner please tell us its performance quality ? Raul, Your wooden clamp improves sound with your mat with the same material but is too light to flatten concave records. My ORACLE clamp does not improve sound with the Reso-Mat but weights 233 grams and flattens concave records. I understand that many Reso owners (probably all) agree with me. As always, thank you both. |
Dear Harold-no-the-barrel: I don't use the lightly clamp to flatten records but only to change the resonance frequency in the laquer/stylus/mat damping it.
I don't know the original X-1 MK1 but my X-1 with MK2 stylus is outstanding and thios could be a misunderstood: it is overwhelming in any single cartridge performance characteristic. Btw, I paid for that MK2 stylus in NOS condition: 300.00 Euros and don't disapoint me in anyway. I'm still in the fine tunning steps because I want to " fix "/achieve something I " know " I can find out.
I will compare against the MK1 stylus version performance when arrive this second X-1 sample from UK. So stay tunned.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Don, dear Nandric, thank you for so much help in my situation. I think you felt my sadness. It was my third try with Glanz. All three came with a damage. Two went back to seller. This one I keep because of nos stylus. Now I have hope again to find Glanz body. I'll only have to wait. But to give up? No. So thanks again. Another good reason to be in this community.regards. Knut |
Dear friends, meanwhile I test an old guest here. The B&O SP-12 with elliptical tip. It is in the same league as the Precept pc220. It involves hole body, has full bass management, fantastic midrange, brutal dynamics and perfect timing. I feel I draw Raul out with my statement. " you have to check your system and so on". But just a moment. Amps are the same but Precept plays in Mission tonearm with Garrard 401, B&O on TT-71 with 7045. All cartridges I mounted on the Jvc combination played from this time in first division. So I'll will change the Precept over to the JVC. But I wait for wooden headshell. I will tell you if Precept beats the B&O. Then I also have the Pc440 stylus still in its box. But until then SP-12 is my new champion. Regards. |
Dear Raul, You remember Dgob's obsesion with those Glanz 5 and 7? His Glanz thread was the most remarcable in our forum; all question asked and all answers were from one and the same person. He wrote a kind of poems for both like a young writer not able to chose between Silvia and Maria. It could be the case that your MF 2500 is a version of those but without the headshell. Like your beloved Technics 205 mk 4 which was also made in both versions?
Regards, |
Indieroehre,
There is only one bid on the Glanz. I will assume that the bid is yours. I do not want to tell you how to bid, but I will say this, ask yourself "just how bad" to you want that Glanz. Then enter your highest bid amount accordingly. Regards, and good luck! Don |
Nandric: No, it is not. The MF-2500 specs are diferent and the builded year(s) was before. Seems to me this 2500 is " unique " in the Astatic line.
Btw, the difference for the better is bigger that what you think with the stand alone cartridges against the performance with the integrated headshells " brothers ", no doubt about and please don't insist about.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Indieroehre: I own samples of some B6O series cartridge models but no one from the oldest one SP you are experienced. I always was tempted to buy one and never did it, it is something that now that you mentioned maybe is time to do it.
I have a lot of respect for the B&O designs: first rate ones.
regards and enjoy the music, R. |
I'm fortunate enough to own a Technics EPC-U205CMK3 cartridge (the variant for normal headshell mounting). I simply love & adore this wonderful little MM cartridge. I also own 2 highly rated MC cartridges - Denon DL-304 & Ortofon MC Jubilee (used via CineMag CMQEE-3440a SUT) but to these ears the EPC205 is simply better and a more satisfying listen.
It has been fitted with the superb SAS stylus from JICO Japan. How nice a company like this exists. I can't say for sure but I feel pretty certain that this EPC205/Jico combo can't be bettered by todays best MM offerings either (2M Black, MP500 etc.). So I'm happy to say that I've found my cartridge for the future.
It's mounted in a complete SL-1000MkII package - SP-10MkII drive & EPA-100 arm (even with the original headshell) in lovely and heavy "obsidian" plinth. Together with the cartridge this is all complete and original 1978 Technics package (apart from the stylus obviously).
The MC cartridges may be more "hi-fi" in some ways but they destract and dismantle the music and once the Technics MM is fitted again everything just falls into place and the ears and brain can relax again and enjoy the music.
Just wanted to share my thoughts. :) |
Krenzler, thanks for mentioning you Technics EPC-u205cmk3 with the Jico SAS. I never liked my Mk3 with the Jico, so maybe there is a problem with my stylus. I do love the 205mk3 with it's stock stylus. What resistance are you listening at ? I always found the MK3 with Jico sas to be to bright sounding, but may try another, just to get the technics working again. |
Dear Raul, You change the resonance frequency of the mat/vinyl/cart combination to achieve better sound to please your taste, correct me if I´m wrong.
I think differently: I do not want to change anything in frequency response & dynamic response. In fact I have never wanted to a hear sound that pleases me. I want to know the real sound that lurks deep in the groove. The real signal and nothing is more interesting, don´t you think too. I just want to get rid of the resonances that reflect from vinyl back to cartridge. Oh yes they always do, unfortunately. The Reso-Mat does exactly that: it does not change any response, it does not emphasis nor diminish the signal from record. And that is the wonder of Vic´s Reso-Mat: it does not change the signal itself at all but allows resonances vanish into air and not reflect back to cart. Most things in mechanics are simple, also this. I have posted this earlier: enter the Reso-Mat and the amouth of quantity & quality in vinyl play is breathtaking: no other tweak in 25+ years has been so "colossal". Not even close. This revolutionary idea from the swinging 1960´s the Transcriptors platter, its modern implementation the Reso-Mat is the most important invention in vinyl play after the direct drive, IMHO. That why I call the maker Vic the Magician. He is the real genius in modern research & deveploment in our beloved business. One of the very very few. And Poul Ladegaar, the inventor of modern tangential air bearing tonearm. Of course.
I can hardly wait for your report of the JVC X-1.
As always, thank you. |
Dear Don, in the moment I have no cart in my watchlist. I wait for the one right Glanz moment. I just work on diy wood headshell and try not think of Glanz cartridges whole day. But it is not easy to keep relaxed. Regards |
Dear Raul, imho from older production only B&o SP-12 is worth a try. Then of course 6000, mc20en, cl , MMC1/2. Regards |
Hi Acman3.
I've never heard the original stylus so I can't compare. My only option for the future will be the SAS stylus. But I don't find it bright in any way - not in my setup.
It's loaded at standard 47k ohm so nothing out of the ordinary there. Could it be perhaps that your overall capacitive loading is higher (bringing resonance down into audible frequency)? My Graham Slee Reflex phono is supposedly at 100pF and together with the arm cable my guess is somewhere not far from (Technics max recommended) 200pF altogether.
The EPC205 has relatively low internal inductance of 240mH - not as low as the Grados but lower than most MMs at the 500mH mark (and certainly the 2M Black which is at 630mH).
http://www.hagtech.com/loading.html
http://translate.google.dk/translate?sl=ja&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Faudio-heritage.jp%2FTECHNICS%2Fetc%2Fepc-205cmk3.html
My speakers are Tannoy 15" Monitor Golds (from the 60's) in big hulking 9 cubic feet Lockwood Major cabinets. These will certainly not be as bright and "spotlit" sounding as many modern more "hi-fi" sounding slim speakers. Could be a factor too? |
Dear Krenzler: Yes, that Technics 205MK3 is really good and the MK4 even better. Its overall performance is very near the EPC 100CMK4. Lucky you own that 205.
I never tested with the Jico/SAS stylus, good that you have success with because I read it in other forums where some persons ( as Acman3 ) were not so lucky with where other are very satisfied like you. Is dificult to say why those differences about.
++++ " The MC cartridges may be more "hi-fi" in some ways but they destract and dismantle the music and once the Technics MM is fitted again everything just falls into place and the ears and brain can relax again and enjoy the music. " +++++
that's an MM/MI characteristic but the problem IMHO is not that the LOMC " maybe more hi-fi " but that those cartridges are a lot more demanding with some " extreme " needs that are not easy accomplish it by tonearms/phono stages and when those LOMC cartridges needs are not fulfilled then we could think are in the hi-fi side and maybe that's what we could here but the culprit IMHO does not came/comes from the cartridge it self but for what is surrounded under playback.
The LOMC alternative is very good too and as the MM/MI one has its own demands that we have to fulfil for the cartridges can shows at its best.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Acman3: +++++ " just to get the technics working again... " +++++
that means the Technics stylus is out of work?, if it's in this way maybe could be a good option too to re-tip it additional to give more playback time to your JICO/SAS.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Mission Solitaire, (Raul, per your request)
I scored 2 cartridges that week. The Mission Solitaire ($45), and a Nagaoka MP11 Boron ($41). There is know doubt, the Nagaoka is a winner! The Mission, well, I'm not so sure. First, I also own the Garrott P77, the Grace F9e and the Jico SAS stylus that you (Raul), mentioned in your post above. The Jico SAS does fit into the Grace but the shaft is too long. Almost double in length when compared to the Grace. It is also too long for the Mission in addition to being to big in diameter. But in the Garrott, well both fit and performance are amazing. Transforms the Garrott into what reminds me of the AT 155LC. As far as the Mission Solitaire, I ended up setting the tracking force at 1.9 grams with the VTA flat. I know absolutely nothing about the Mission Solitaire, so everything I will say will be based only on what I'm hearing. It seems to be a great tracker, with no problem with the dreaded "sssss" or inner groove distortions. What brothers me is that the sparkle seems to be gone from all performances. The high frequencies are there but the sparkling overtones are not. I tried it in both my main full range floor standing speakers and my mini-monitors, with and without the sub. I was not that fond of the Mission in the main system. The cartridge came across as if I had an equalizer in the system and had applied a little bass boost while also rolling off the upper frequencies. The cartridge sounded best with the mini-monitors (without the sub woofer), even though it still had the rolled off sparkle of the high frequencies. It was a more balance sound with the roll off being at both extremes. If I had to compare it to some other cartridge, it would be a Shure M91ED, or even a Denon 103R. Just a good middle of the road cartridge. The words "work horse" comes to mind. It does have great pace and rhythm though (that boogie factor). I wondered if perhaps the real problem isn't with this cartridge, but just that I have spent to much time lately with really great cartridges . The Precept 220/550ML, the ADC ZLM, AT180ooc, Signet TK10ML, Technics U205C MK4. The Mission Solitaire just isn't at that level. After spending some time listening to several records, it really does start to sound good though. It kind of grows on you. It's all what you get use to I guess. I know I have used the word rolled-off but in addition, there's more to it than that. It's more in line with what you would hear with the Denon 103's. The Denon's conical stylus glosses over the high fequencies thereby eliminating some of that sparkle. Considering the performance level that I had been comparing the Mission to, I decided to un-mount 3 of the 5 cartridges (I only have 5 arm wands), and in their place, mount a Pickering XV-15/750E, a Ortofon OM20 super, and a Grado G1+/8MZ. I wanted to see how the Mission would compare at this lower performance level. I was rather surprised at how similar the Mission sounds to them from about mid-range down. Going the other way, mid-range thou the high frequencies, the Mission just falls flat. There seems to be a gentle slope from about 10K all the way out to what ever. It's just not as refined/detailed as the Ortofon, Pickering, or the Grado. So where does that leave the Mission Solitaire? If I had to rate the last four cartridges in a 1 to 4 comparison, it would be 1) the Pickering, 2) the Ortofon, 3) the Grado, and 4) the Mission Solitaire. I detect slight mid-range distortion (lack of clarity), with the Mission that is just not there with the other 3 cartridges. I'm not talking about tracking distortions, but distortions of resolution. I thought it just might be a worn stylus on the Mission, I did spend some time looking at its stylus under a hand held 60X microscope. At that level, I could see nothing that would make me suspect a worn stylus. The stylus was quite clean, the cantilever was straight, and the suspension is in excellent shape. The other 3 are known to have low hour usage, so given the condition of the stylus and the suspension, leads me to believe perhaps low hours are also on the Mission. The cartridge strikes me as a above average entry level cartridge rather than a mid-level cartridge in need of a stylus replacement. I then went looking in my arsenal for something even of a lower performance level. What I found was the ADC QLM 32 MKIII. After comparing those two, well, the Mission still comes in 2nd place. The Mission Solitaire is a great cartridge for what I paid for it ($45), but I doubt if it will ever find its way back mounted on one of my arm wands. I own far to many other cartridges that I would rather spend time with. This is one of those cartridges that's from our past, and should remain there! Regards, Don |
Dear Don , I also owned the soiltaire. I tried to use the same stylii as you did. The did not fit into the Mission . So I don't believe the Grace, Garrott, Mission generators are the same. This statement we can find in other forum. So what, Mission solitaire stayed two weeks, for me it has nothing I want from a good cartridge. So I sold it. But at same time I bought a Nagaoka MP11boron as you did. With my Schick tonearm is sounds fantastic. Perfect with this high mass arm. Fine at low end, superb HF, magic voice performance. The Stilton MP11 boron betters it because of better material for the body. And Stilton used a special 3-point connection for stylus holder to cartridge body. Also worth to look for. Regards. Knut |
Wikipedia knows nothing about Poul Ladegaard ! What a shame ! Well, nothing new really. This is not the first time when world ignores its true pioneers and intellectuals... and certainly not the last.
If I had better writing skills I would write a poem about Poul the Inventor.
Nice holidays to all |