Timeltel, thanks much for all your insight.
I have a Signet TK3ea and a TK7ea, but no TK5ea. I just removed the TK3ea/155LC combo from play and am missing it already. I have another cart mounted for evaluation. The ability of the Signetmutt to resolve information is rather outstanding. I do find it a tiny bit laid back in the midrange. I also have a Signet 5.0 basic and wondered if there are any other styli possibilities with that one. Thanks in advance. |
Halcro, Yeah, but you have to listen to Pines of Rome for the 10,000th time. That's too high a price to pay for unraveling anything. |
Regards, Halcro: Four coils, hand wound from pole to pin. Like a recriprical steam engine, works on the push/pull, never stops to take a breath (c'est moi, c'est moi) ;-).
Lew, A/B'ing between the Acutex & Sigmutt can't say either is better. The Acutex a joyful Bach to the Siggie's confident Beethoven. It's possible to distinguish between them but both are so capable it shouldn't matter to any but the most discriminating & that ain't me. "Twin brothers from different mothers". Again, thanks for the kind thoughts.
Dlaloum: David, can you tell us more about this phase thing?
Gotta' go, retrieve my loved-for-thirty-two-years first generation 1980 RX-7, stem to stern mechanical bebuild & a little plastic surgery, a two year project as of last week. If the new Wankel will crank, magic eight ball says day-trip in the near future. How 'bout that for a time warp, from carts to chariots in just four paragraphs.
Peace, |
I guess this means the Signet midline models are better than the top of the line moodels?I have the TK9e and heard it with the orignal stylus and two different AT stylus.I like it but I have other cartridges that are better in my set up.
Anybody try a Signet TK9LC?I think I should have bought the TK9LC stylus when I had a chance,got a fake "TK10MLIII" stylus instead which was actually just an AT23,thanks Adelcom.net(Bluz Bros)
The "holy grail" of MM/MI cartridges(AKG P100)is now listed for sale here at Audiogon,out of my price range though. |
Let me just add something about the Signet TK5ea which, whilst beautifully described by Timeltel, does something better than almost any other cartridge I've heard.
Massed strings......so difficult for systems to convey the sweetness, transparency and vibrato of the real thing especially when they reach their upper octaves as in the Franz Schmidt Intermezzo on Erato.
The TK5ea accomplishes this in a way that most LOMCs I've heard can only dream of.
And the soundstage?.......again as Timeltel tells it......expansive and deep.
This beauty is a happy match in my Micro Seiki MA505s on the Nude TT81. |
Dear Professor Timeltel, The TK5/155LC offered impact and light-speed attack in all ranges, soundstage is immersive. There is a clarity and accuracy offered unmatched by any of the cartridges in my collection of near fourty. Soundstage and imageing are spot on. Your appetising description inspired me to remove the TK3/155LC and install the TK5ea with it's own stylus (I found little difference with the 155LC when I listened some 3 weeks ago) and I must say you 'nailed' it in your excellent comparisons. Not only does it do all you say it does, but on complex climactic orchestral, it is unfazed and unmatched in my experience, in its composure dissecting the finale to Reiner's RCA Pines of Rome. A true thoroubred........I'll try it again with the 155LC. Meanwhile keep those dogs hanging around. Cheers Henry |
Relax. You are not the one who gave the incorrect estimate of Miller effect. I have been stewing on that all day. It just goes to show that my own knowledge is a mile wide and an inch deep and tenuously retained in my brain. I hate giving out bad info on the internet; too much of that is done by others. Should have re-read about Miller before posting. |
Regards, Lew(m): Thanks for the comments, you're being gracious again. A model of modesty, too.
I'll see your bid and raise you one Voltaire. The French wit mentioned an individual who "demonstrates his ignorance" by having an answer for everything (c'est moi, c'est moi, I blush to disclose, I'm far to noble to lie, that man in whom these qualities bloom, c'est moi, c'est moi, it's I).
My creed: "All undeserved honors and unwanted currency accepted, no questions asked".
Peace, |
Jlin, thanks for the fine explanation of miller effect. Here is another one showing 12ax7 having a total of 151.1pF.
http://www.aikenamps.com/MillerCapacitance.html
Brad |
Hmm with all this Signet info flying around, does anyone here have any specs or other information on the Signet Tk6Ep?
This is the same format p-mount body as the AT102/112/122/132/142/152.... and accepts the same styli as the "2" series and the AT130/140/150 etc... series.
I just received a AT440MLa donor cartridge - the stylus from which is intended for the Signet.... would be nice to have more info on the Signet though!
On another topic..... (or back to the main topic)...
I have been reading about phase response.... MC's overall have apparently far less phase issues than MM/MI.
Some have written that to ensure ideal phase response within the audible range, the cartridge should have useful response out to 200KHz (!?!)
Has anyone measured phase response of various cartridges? How would one measure this? (it would need to be a phase/frequency graph I think...)
There may be a case to be made for many MC's versus MM's that they have far closer to ideal phase response...
MM's designed for Quad may be the best phase performing MM's due to extended F/R...
Just poking about curiously in my usual way
bye for now
David |
Dear Timeltel, You said a mouthful. I probably would not hear any of that nuance. I am more than willing to try the other cartridge, if one comes up. However, I am too cynical and perhaps hard of hearing to make such exact statements about any phono cartridge. I would just say X sounds better to me than Y. Bravo! But don't forget; the phono stage, the tonearm, and the turntable mat, not to mention even the cartridge screws and how tight they are, were determinants of your results, along with the cartridges themselves. Seriously though, you are obviously a well trained listener and a good writer as well. By the way, the bass response improved most in association with "break-in" of the Acutex. For the first several hours it was congested. Also with break-in came more bloom and air, which is to be expected. |
Dgob,
I personally think it makes sense to keep one's TTs away from air-borne resonance in any case, but this could be one place where the mass-loading would help to overwhelm air-borne vibration if there was no way to avoid some influence. The Japanese engineers who designed tables in the late 70s and early 80s generally took airborne vibration into consideration (Denon and Exclusive in particular seem to have paid attention to that; and I think Micro's attention to that is obvious); their general method of combatting it was mass, special dustcovers (at the top end of the chain), and for Denon and others, work on mats and platter suspension (Denon's dual-platter construction on the DP80/75 and DP100 at a minimum, perhaps on others too) was meant to deal with airborne resonance influences). |
Regards, Lew(m), Halcro: A three dog night, inside and out. An Esquimo term, the colder, the more canines piled on the pallet. Inside the domicile, the three dogs were three styli tried in rotation with a Signet TK3ea and 5ea cartridge. Cartridge output voltage 5.0mV, inductance 550 ohm.
Coil windings for the TK5ea cartridge are 6N's pure hand wound copper, transients are noticably cleaner than with the 5N pure production level coils in the TK3ea cartridge. This was evident with all three styli. The nude 0.3 X 0.7 TKn5ME stylus was faster in following groove modulations than the 140LC. The 140 stylus sounded slightly warmer but overhang was noticably greater. As might be expected, the very fine 155LC/beryl. cantilever excelled in retrieval of low level detail and in attack and duration of transients. Bass bloom was not evident, clarity throughout the audible range was more than just good.
This is, however, about Lew's seduction by the Acutex LPM 320-111STR. I'll try to avoid superlatives but this will be difficult. This Acutex was made available in 1980 for a suggested $200, over $500 in today's dollars. An IM design with a two coil tri-pole generator, the third pole is just ahead of the pivot block and acts as a neutral to eliminate excess current, thereby reducing crosstalk between channels. Clever and it works. The "STR" stylus is modified tri-radial Shibata from Ogura Jewel Ind., Japan. Acutex states it's design enables secondary harmonics or overtones to 45k, tip mass of the nude 0.3 X 1.6 X 0.5mil stylus on it's titanium cantilever is 0.5 mg. Output voltage is 3.5mv, inductance, 1200 ohm. Fr. resp. is an astonishing .75 db.
Three LP's were cycled, once for each of the styli used with the Signet carts. Side A for the TK3ea, side B for the TK5ea. And again, both sides with the Acutex. These are original releases, Ricky Lee Jones for the very hot female voice, Alan Parson's "Tales of Mystery and Imagination" for the quality of Parson's engineering and R. Sterling's mastering, these are 100% analogue recordings. Manheim Steamroller's Fresh Aire V1 (Orpheus) is digital, the London Symphony is carefully miked and electronics are tastefully integrated. Cello solos were delightfully woody, the rasp of the bow was cleanly rendered and centered in the soundstage, so realistic one could imagine the aroma of warm wood and rosin. Nine part female harmonys laid over three part male vocals were almost ethereal, the introduction of whirling tubes, harp and dolphins was enchanting. Orpheus' near seduction by the Sirens becomes a virtual experience. Lew mentioned piano. The effect of hammers on the higher strings was heard, sostenuto of the lower notes preserved. Timbre and harmonics: secondary harmonics and overtones, an important component of the cartridges' character, are positively charismatic.
Relax, Lew, the end is in sight. In an overall comparison both the TK5'155LC and Acutex 320 are superior. The Acutex excelled in harmonics and it's ability to sustain resonant interaction in vocals and insturmentation. Consequently there is a hint of bloom, a faint suggestion of overhang in the bass. Malleted, strung, brass and woodwind insturments glissened. Hf's detailed, no edges.
The TK5/155LC offered impact and light-speed attack in all ranges, soundstage is immersive. There is a clarity and accuracy offered unmatched by any of the cartridges in my collection of near fourty. Soundstage and imageing are spot on.
Major differences can be attributed to the deliberate enhancment of harmonics by Acutex through the tri-magnet system, the slight softening of the signal by the titanium cantilever, the modest 3.5mv output and the balancing of these factors through running impedance up to 1200 ohms for additional emphasis in the mids through lower hf's, upper hf's need no electrical assistance.
Accuracy and technical acheivment are the TK5/155LC's forte, the fine nude LC stylus, beryllium cantilever and 550ohm inductance are supported by the muscular 5.0mv output and four coil engine. There are differences between the two cartridges but it is not in a negative ratio, one could easily choose either and get off the cartridge-go-round without regret.
Thanks, Lew, and:
Peace |
Jlin, Forgot to consider the gain factor. I think of "Miller" as a reference to the capacitance per se, not the product of Cm times gain. Thanks for pointing out my error in assessing the total capacitance at the input. As to the bit about increasing load C, I have a headache...
Timeltel, Like Halcro, I was LOL-ing. I found a place in the US that will sell you a brass cylinder in several different diameters and almost any length you desire. I would start with that. Maybe 3-4" diameter and whatever height is needed based on the height of the platter. Lets say 6 inches. Then I would drill and tap a threaded hole in the center of the cylinder, and I would fasten a flat piece of brass that was appropriately drilled out to accept my tonearm of choice, cantilevered out from the brass cylinder, so as to allow space for tonearms that must go below the surface of an armboard and so one could fine tune pivot to spindle distance without having to try to move the brass cylinder, once it was approximately correctly situated, also to allow one to use different tonearms. (Quick calculation says a 4" diameter by 6" high brass cylinder would weigh ~22 lbs or 10 kg) I would put some sort of feet on the bottom of the brass cylinder, which would be drilled and tapped to accept 3 such, maybe Stillpoints(?) Fortunately for me, I have my perfectionist semi-retired machinist friend who will no doubt be thrilled to do this with me using his incredible shop tools. I have not mounted the EPA500; none of my present plinths will accept it due to its huge diameter base (needs a 63mm hole). Perhaps that's the tonearm to mate with a no-plinth Denon DP80 using my brass tower. If tt and arm pod both sit on a really rock solid nonresonant shelf (go find that), it should work OK. Suffice to say it would make music. |
T_bone,
Your system (isolation included) and the music you must be getting through it sounds fantastic and I am myself now a convert to pneumatic suspension - at least under TT's which is where I have tried it. The funny thing is that popular reasoning is that such isolation suffers the effects of air-borne vibrations but that just does not seem true to real experience. Marvellous!
Happy listening |
Lewm,
For a triode the input capacitance is the capacitance of the grid to plate, which is typically a few pf, MULTIPLIED by the gain of the triode stage (actually gain +1) - this is the Miller effect. For a 12AX7 tube the grid to plate capacitance is specified as 1.7 pf, and for the RCA manual the input tube gain is around 60x, which means the input capacitance the cartridge would see if it was directly connected to the tube would be at least 104 pf. For a 6DJ8 the gain is typically around 30x, the grid-plate capacitance is specified as 1.4 pf so the input capacitance is around 44 pf. In my DIY phono stage which has a 6L7 input tube the input capacitance calculates out to around 130-140 pf, and that is what it measures using an impedance bridge measuring a live circuit. You cannot measure it using a capacitance meter with the preamp turned off.
To understand the Miller capacitance effect, consider this: the grid and plate form a miniature capacitance because they actually are little metal plates in a vacuum (I know the grid is perforated but you get the idea). Suppose with the tube turned off its capacitance is = c. Now suppose if you put a charge = c on this tiny capacitor the voltage between the grid and plate measures v with the tube off. Now turn the tube on. Suppose it has an amplification factor A. Then every time you change the grid voltage by a voltage v, the grid to plate voltage changes by v*(A+1). The +1 is because as the grid moves one volt negative the plate becomes A volts more positive. But since the grid and plate form a little capacitor, this means that in order to have this voltage change, the charge on this grid-plate capacitor has to change by c*(A+1). So now, to the grid, the grid-plate capacitor looks like it is (A+1) times bigger than when the tube was off. THAT is the Miller effect. And you're right, cascode and pentode stages are much less affected by the Miller effect, but many tube stages are simple triodes.
In terms of frequency response of a phono cartridge, disregarding mechanical resonances, the cartridge can be modeled as a resistor and coil in series driving a resistor and capacitor (the phono input) in parallel. Increasing the phono input resistor increases the peak of the LC resonance and that can extend the frequency response below the resonance, however the frequency at which the peak occurs is basically determined by L and C, and increasing C moves the peak farther downwards. You can see the basic behavior in the 6/07 review of the Shure M97xe cartridge on the TNT website when loaded by differing capacitances :
http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/shure_m97xe_e.html
You can see that as the capacitance increases, the point where the high frequencies roll off (above the LC peak) progressively decreases with increasing capacitance from 250 to 620 pf, even while it results in some flattening of the response below the response peak. Since the Shure has a relatively high inductance it is more visible than might be the case with other MMs that have a lower inductance. However, this will eventually happen with any MM cartridge if the capacitance is high enough, it is just a question of how much is too much. The Grado cartridges, for example, are relatively low inductance and less susceptible to this effect than most other MM/MI brands. |
Dear Timeltel, Henry, you didn't think I was alluding to you? I was laughing too hard to consider it? You weren't?.......surely? But your own 'Nude Turntable Project' sounds good to me........especially with lots of dogs around? :-) Cheers Henry |
Regards, Lew(m): I recall from perhaps fourty years ago the narration by an audiophile who kept his "best stylus" carefully stored and used it only on special occasion. Your 320STR may be one of these exceptional styli. No experience with the Acutex integrated headshell, I do remember your agony when your first example came apart while being removed from the shell for cleaning. Coil wire seperated at the pin? Perhap an obliging jeweler can take a look at it, he'll have both the tools and technique. Exploded view of the cartridge at TTNeedles.com for reference.
You've not said much about your EPA-500 TA. I'd wager you've considered it for a "Copernican" (TM) application, the "Heresy" model available in kit form soon. As a discerning audiophile, I'm sure you're waiting for the release of the lexan "Whirlitzer" with the classic stroboscopic red, yellow and blue LED's? For the DIY'rs, there are plans for the "CMU" (concrete music unit), soup can & masonry bits not included.
Excuse me Lew (Henry, you didn't think I was alluding to you?), back to fairly serious. I'm curious enough to try nudeing a back-up SP-25 with an EPA-500 arm. Considering an "L" shaped wooden pod, drilled & weighted with lead shot. Encompass a corner of the deck, iso/vibrapods to register to & isolate from. Have the OEM jig for Pvt-Spndl distance and the correct hole saw, several handsfull of spikes. I understand the rationale & imagine this quick/simple affair will be insightful. If it weren't seven degrees F. out there, a three dog night for sure.
Lew, I've been so pleased with the FrankenSignets I've not listened to the Acutex for several months. Due to your praise of the Acutex I'll do an overdue exchange this evening, a pleasurable prospect.
For those intrigued by your well justified enthusiasm for the cartridge, the Acutex LPM body is offered on "that auction site" about every six weeks. The rock 'n roll 310E and more detailed 312STR styli are still available. AFAIK, the 315-320 styli (NOS), like Elvis, have left the building.
Peace, |
Dear Jlin, You wrote, "Triode phono stages typically have 50-150 pf of Miller effect capacitance." That seems VERY high for Miller value for any small signal tube I know about. To check myself, I just looked up Miller capacitance of a 12AX7, a commonly used phono input tube. The sum of all input capacitances for 12AX7 is less than 10pF. Also, Miller is not an issue with pentodes, as you suggest, or with a cascode built from two triodes (which is one reason why many like the cascode as a phono input topology). Also, I would mildly take issue with your statement that "too high a capacitance can cause roll-off in the high frequencies". This is not always the case, because the load C interacts with the inductance of the cartridge itself and with load R. Due to resonance between that L and C, sometimes one can extend hf response by adding C and fiddling with R. It's counter-intuitive, I know, and something I just recently learned from one of the other guys lurking in this thread. |
Dgob,
A few of my TTs have the isolation built in (Denon DP100, Exclusive P3). The Technics SP-10Mk3 stock came with similar footers. I have a number of magnetic flotation footers from Yamamoto and Sony and have used those under many tables. Currently, one set is under an L-07D. I have also put lab-use air tables underneath TTs and think the world of them in terms of performance to cost ratio (I buy them used off auction from people who resell lab equipment). All in all, other than room treatment (the ugly kind), I think good pneumatic isolation is the best bang for buck upgrade anyone can make for an already decent analog sound reproduction system. The lower the resonant frequency the better (you can get very low through the structural attributes of the isolation system you use, or you can achieve something a bit similar by going to the heavy end of the loading range of your footers (i.e. if your footer does 3-6kg apiece, go for 5-6kg effective load).
That said, I have not yet seen anyone come up with a test of a good plinthed table vs the same table unplinthed. Most of the commentary so far has been "unplinthed is great" (which I see no reason to deny). Philosophically, I am very sympathetic to the Micro/Kenwood/Exclusive/Sony(PS-X9) method of keeping the bearing-armmount relationship as rigid as possible, though as long as an outboard armpod were as immovable as possible, and mounted on the same base/plinth as the part supporting the bearing, and both were very heavy (armpod and the thing supporting the bearing), you'd be accomplishing pretty much the same thing. |
Dear Timeltel, I tried to add this question in editing my post above, but somehow could not add the needed sentences: Have you (or has anyone) tried a Saturn V headshell with your Acutex's? Raul said he thought the cartridge sounded better in the standard headshell adapter vs in the Saturn V. I have been very pleased with 320 in its adapter, but I am very tempted to try out the Saturn V, in order to form my own opinion. The Acutex literature touts this as the optimal way to go. I am a little afraid of trying it, because my first LPM body came in a Saturn V. When I tried to separate the two, the LPM body fell apart, leaving half of itself inside the Saturn V and thus destroying the usefulness of both. Probably the two had been mated for decades such that they were bonded together by electrolysis. I had to buy another LPM off eBay and then found another Saturn V as well. This time I will use a little Walker Audio contact enhancer, the greasy-ness of which should allow easy separation of the LPM from the Saturn V, should I decide I do not like the latter.
The 320 is breaking in and getting even better than it was at first listen, as you correctly predicted. |
Dear Timeltel,
I guess my goals are different from yours and some others. Once I find something good, I tend to want to keep it in my system. I am not really in this for the adventure. So I will eventually try the 315, but with some reluctance. Also, my present MM phono stage does not have the capability to vary load R or load C, except with a soldering iron. I have been looking for weeks for such a flexible MM stage at an affordable price, and have yet to find it. I may build it, as mentioned elsewhere. I am not sure I meant to say that I KNOW that the cantilever has its own effect on sound; I did mean to say that it MUST have an effect, but far be it from me to ferret that out. In your previous treatise on cantilevers, I thought you ranked titanium somewhere in the middle among desirable cantilever materials, in terms of known physical properties. For me, there's too much else going on ever to do a controlled experiment on the sound of a cantilever.
The Parasound amp gives a quite different quality from the Atma-sphere. You would not think so, but actually the Atma-sphere gives a better more detailed bass response, because it is quite happy driving the very high impedance of the low end of an ESL. OTOH, transistor amps probably do not like driving the bass into a 50-60 ohm load at very low audio frequencies. From the low midrange up, the Parasound is excellent. It's a wonderful amplifier for its cost. |
T_bone,
On the perceptions of pitch, it is too hard to say. I know that A,J,M, Houtsma's 'Pitch and Timbre: Definition, Meaning and Use' paper sets out the grounds for the following conclusions:
"The main conclusions from the material presented in this paper are:
"1. Because of their subjective nature, the parameters pitch and timbre should never be presented as independent variables in perception studies. Doing so would amount to describing one unknown in terms of other unknowns.
"2. The roles of the attributes pitch and timbre in the perception of speech, music and environment sounds are very similar.
"3. In music, any study of pros and cons of certain temperaments or tone scales should include a consideration of the spectral composition of the sounds used to realize the music.
"Linking timbre perception too exclusively with auditory object recognition would be asking for repeating the history of categorical perception in speech."
However, the frequency consistencies that occur due to better isolation should obviously impact on both pitch and timbre and maybe that is why, as you suggest, I perceive a noted improvement. |
T-bone,
I tried the Technics with and without a plinth and with various makes of armboard. I also tried the footers on my Acoustic Signature Mambo (here I used another, smaller set of AT pneumatic footers). However, I did not try the footers on the plinthed deck as it had a complex system of isolation.
On all instances the footers made a 'dramatic' difference to the performance of the TT's. I'm certain it is due to resonance reduction. I'd just say that the sound seems freed when the bare Technics is sat on the footers and the 3D quality of the musicians and the sense of air between performers is very obviously improved. Given the high charges that currently affect the acquistion of a decent plinth for the Technics, I think this is a great option to achieve amazing results with very little outlay - maybe in keeping with one of the earlier themes of this thread.
Are you using this or a similar approach? |
Hxt1.
You should try your MMs again with a lower capacitance or no added capacitance at all. Most MMs do not need 300-350 pf and sound better w/ lower capacitance. Too high a capacitance can cause roll-off in the high frequencies, which can lead to the effects you are complaining of.
Also, don't forget that your tonearm cable is adding another 80-150 pf (usually) to whatever cap you soldered across the phono input resistor. For example, my Incognito wired Rega measures about 80 pf, whereas a Grace 707 cable measured about 100 pf and an old ADC tonearm about 185 pf. The input stage can also add capacitance due to Miller effect, although the Eros uses a pentode input stage which is supposed to have much less Miller capacitance than a triode stage with the same gain. Triode phono stages typically have 50-150 pf of Miller effect capacitance. |
Dgob, and others who have used the systems,
How much of the difference comes from the plinthlessness and how much from the use of the Audio Technica footers? Did you try the footers underneath the plinthed SP-10Mk2 as well against the unplinthed SP-10Mk2?
Any thoughts as to why unplinthing it would make you feel as if pitch would become 'more perfect'? IME, I think that all of those things - composure, detail, timbre, etc all arise from the added detail of reduced resonance 'noise.'
I personally believe that some kind of pneumatic isolation system is one of the easiest ways to make almost any turntable sound better. |
"Hxt1: You mentioned Signet cartridges. Although parts for these were supplied by Audio Technica, the TK1ea/3ea/5ea coils are wound differently, are of a lower output impedance and consequently don't have the AT "house sound" of forward midrange and hf's. You might try one with either an LC or Shibata stylus (and on a good cantilever, of course) before you give up on MM cartridges. I also wonder, as you had a good report for the Shure V15 which does well at 400-500pF capacitance, are you able to adjust capacitance or loading? Also, the Azden YMP-50c has a conical stylus and is said to be not quite the performer the well regarded YMP-50VL (vital line contact) is. Same body, different stylus.
Thanks, Timeltel, A little bird told me, that the Shure liked around 300-350pf, and that is what I loaded it at. I personally built my phono preamp, a Bottlehead Eros, so yes, indeed the capacitance, and loading can be altered with a little bit of soldering.
The 'c' designation on the Azden cart. does indeed inticate that it sports a conical stylus, I was arare of that going in...... And you can see in my last post, that In my opinion, it compares favourably to the denon Dl103 is sound and performance. I still have a Grace f9-e here, awaiting a rebuild, so I definitely haven't given up on MM's.... I am simply trying to find an MM that can give me everything I get(and more)! from my 103r..... without havinf to spend $1000! I really do think that there is something good going on here with these MM's, considering a $50 Azden performs at the same level as a Denon dl103 with stepup transformer!
I think If I could find a good Technics, Empire, etc. MM, at a reasonable price, I could get rid of the 103r and cinemags altogether! After all, my Phonopreamp was designed as a MM preamp, so it would only make sense to ultimately run an MM cart. through it!
The main problem I'm experiencing , i think, is a lack of 'drive' from the MM's.... the cinemag seems to goose the output to such a degree that I rareley ever ned to turn the volume past halfway. When I am running MM's, I need to get the volume up to 3/4 to get the same volume, introducing more noise to the overall picture.
I hope this makes sense? Cheers, Harv. |
Hi All,
Just a quick aside but I've been playing around with my Technics SP10 Mk2 and its isolation. I placed a 20mm solid ash armboard on the right side and sat the deck on the Audio Technica Precision footers. Nothing else, apart from removing the Symposium Ultra platform and letting the footers rest on the shelf itself with the deck on top. Why bring it up on this thread?
Well, Raul suggested that the Technics on top of the height adjustable pneumatic suspension/footers surpasses any plinthed option and that you need to hear this to appreciate the importance of isolation to your TT and analogue setup. He is correct!
Some of the most obvious changes that it brings IMO are perfect pitch, a huge (stable and accurate) sound stage, added composure to even the most complex passages, and increases in detail and timbre.
The impact of this is that I am relistening to my cartridges and finding more to commend and appreciate. I can whole heartedly recommend this for those with the opportunity. |
Regards, Lew(m): Please re-read, titanium has the lowest weight by mass as compared to either berillium or boron. It's rigidity exceeds that of alu. and it effectively damps resonances. I do hear, as you note, a discernable difference in the way the various materials influence the sound of the cartridge. A rough estimation might be that the stylus determines the character and the cantilever the quality. Other opinions are, as always, welcome.
It's apparent the Acutex LPM 320 continues to please, I'm still waiting for any comments when you compare the 315 stylus. When you do, suggest you advance VTF one or two tenths gm and increase cap. & res., compliance is slightly lower than for the 320 stylus. BTW, how goes it with the Parasound?
Hxt1: You mentioned Signet cartridges. Although parts for these were supplied by Audio Technica, the TK1ea/3ea/5ea coils are wound differently, are of a lower output impedance and consequently don't have the AT "house sound" of forward midrange and hf's. You might try one with either an LC or Shibata stylus (and on a good cantilever, of course) before you give up on MM cartridges. I also wonder, as you had a good report for the Shure V15 which does well at 400-500pF capacitance, are you able to adjust capacitance or loading? Also, the Azden YMP-50c has a conical stylus and is said to be not quite the performer the well regarded YMP-50VL (vital line contact) is. Same body, different stylus.
Peace, |
Hi Lewm, I have a modded rega arm and a Lenco, slate plinth. |
Hxt1, What tt and tonearm? Thanks. |
Not to say that the cantilever material is not important, but isn't it unlikely to be important in terms of moving mass, since no matter what it is made of, it will constitute a very tiny fraction of the moving mass of any cartridge of any type? For example, or to illustrate my point, my Acutex has a titanium cantilever, deemed by Timeltel to be mediocre in terms of low mass, but the Acutex has very low moving mass by virtue of its other design parameters and the materials chosen and by the mere fact that MI cartridges have inherently lower moving mass than do MC ones, despite all the hype that would have us think otherwise. (I cite for my source Peter Lederman and others.) Plus, Acutex 320 has compliance = 40!!! That titanium cantilever is not hurting much in that regard. I am not saying that the choice of material for the cantilever does not affect "sound" but that it is a minor player in determining total moving mass. I guess Timeltel agrees(?)
On another topic, did you see where Robert E Green reviewed the new Townsend turntable in TAS using an AKG P8ES vdH II cartridge, which he loved and laments is NLA? Of course, he is a longstanding proponent of MM cartridges whom I used to think of as "quaint", not to say "antique". Now of course, he has become brilliant in my eyes, except he also liked the Amadeus and I am not much of a fan of Well Tempered tts. Lucky for me, I own one of those AKGs thanks to Raul. Thanks, R. |
Dear Hxt1: Good that now you are enjoying better than ever your system through that Denon cartridge, this is all about and what many of os are looking for every single day.
Anyway, I think you had " good times "/fun with the MM/MI alternative while last.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Someone nudge me when this gets fun again?
So far, I have tried: Grace f9, and F-9e, Shure V15 MkIII w/jico sas, AT 8008 studio reference, Azden yp50c, I even got an MC, a Dynavector Karat 23 r!
And I am back to my baby denon 103r with SS ruby cantilever and isoteknic aluminum body. None of the other carts really do what this one does, dynamics, and transparency... immediacy... realism.
I bought a selection of caps, and loaded my phonostage accordingly, (Bottlehead Eros) While some of the MM's were definitely enjoyable (The Shure with the jico came closest) None of them could really compare to my Denon.
I think the synergy between the Denon, Cinemags, and Eros is just so correct that it is going to take something special to give me that WOW factor.
I see Empires and Technics are $1000 now.... So, I don't think I will be trying either of those, Maybe a Stanton? Signet?
The Azden, remoinded me of my stock DL103, and definitely gave nothing up to it.... it's a keeper. Everything else has been sold on, and I have a grace f9 awaiting retip/repair by either myself (yikes)! or soundsmith.
I was imagining I would have been happily selling of my 103r and cinemags by now, one less link in the chain so to speak, but not yet. |
Regards, Halcro, Dlaloum: "so David is onto something here?". Great posts Dlaloum.
An experienced "I fixed it until it broke" fumbler's firm impression of the subject:
Absolutely, maybe, in an apple-oranges way. Isolated parts performance and integrated parts performance are not always the same. It's the old parts/sum-chicken/egg thing.
An abreviated parable, the scorpion and the fox: Ol' Scorp asked Fox "carry me across the stream on your back". "But you'll sting me", sez Fox. "Promise, I won't", said Scorpy. Fox agreed, but halfway across it's: "You've stung me, now I'll die and you'll drown, why?". Scorpy: "Because it's my nature".
A cantilever is the vehicle carrying the stylus. The nature of both must be considered in getting to where you want to be.
---------------------------------------"Distorterata"-----------------------------------
If you compare cantilevers with others, you may become vain or bitter; for always there will be greater and lesser performers than yours. Enjoy your stylus as well as your cantilever. Believe in your own ears, however the tinitus; it is a real possession in the changing favorites of the audio rags. Apologies, Max Ehrmann.
Subjective existentialism bs aside, take every factor into account and above all, don't get stung.
Peace, |
Dear Dlaloum/Halcro: +++++ " Forgetting a moment about the Exotic line contact stylus - I think the biggest difference may not be the stylus at all, it may be the far more sophisticated and light weight cantilever. " ++++
++++ " I think one of the biggest gains that the exotic MC's get is to do with their exotic cantilevers - you can get Shibata, LC or MicroRidge/Fineline for a range of MM's and MI's - and all at around $100 - but usually on fairly coarse cantilevers... therefore heavy, and due to excess mass, slow moving .." ++++++
yes, there is a " point " here or maybe more than one.
Now that I'm on the cartridge design project I'm reading and mading several tests on that subject and I find that things are more complex that only " ligther cantilevers ".
Yes, a low cantilever effective mass could help to improve cartridge tracking but the cantilever is only a sub-system ( along stylus and cantilever suspension. ) inside the cartridge. What I mean is that the cantilever per se can't tell us almost nothing about tracking but how good was the cartridge design and cartridge execution design.
By coincidence I just posted on this thread something about:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1295265205&openflup&8&4#8
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1295265205&openflup&12&4#12
I own this original LP and yes there are other MM/MI cartridges that can track it like Empire that has bulky and not " exotic " cantilevers and high compliance.
I can't remember if any today LOMC cartridge other that the Denon could track those shot 1812 Telarc cannons.
I tested the XV-1 and can't do it, no Koetsu ( I own. ) can, the Colibri neither I never try on this track the A-90 that's a very good LOMC tracker.
In general that track is reserved for very good MM/MI that are coupled in the right tonearm.
Other that my experiences on the subject with the MC2000, the 1984 reviewer of this Ortofon cartridge reported that the cartridge tracked with out trouble, the cartridge was mounted on an EPA-250 using the EPA-500 base and all in a SP-10MK2.
Yes, cantilever is extremely important and at least at the same importance level than the stylus shape if not higher.
The cantilever is a " demon/diable " that we have to deal very carefully with. An old solution is to design a non-cantilevered cartridge but this has its own trade-offs that I'm not satisfied with due what I heard and experienced on this kind of cartridge designs.
Btw, Dlaloum I re-cantilevered some of my MM/MI cartridges through VandenHUL services and I understand Dgob too with good results.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Resonance frequency is the product of tonearm effective mass, cartridge compliance and, for the purposes of this discussion, cantilever design. Aaha dear Professor.....so David is onto something here? |
Regards, Halcro: Did someone call my name? IIRC, beryllium, boron and titanium (in that order) offer the greatest strength-to-mass ratio of materials frequently used in cantilever construction. Boron, beryllium and then titanium for damping qualities. For a pipe of similar dimensions, titanium, beryllium and then boron are of increasing mass. Because of the difficulties encountered in production, beryllium and boron are typically fabricated as rods rather than tubes, it was the vapor deposited beryllium tubes that presented the notorius health risks. Aluminum and it's alloys, even with a tube that appears bulky can be deceptively light and rigid.
The concern with cantilever resonance is the resonance of the moving mass and it's tortional modulus (spring). Boing!. Beryllium's rigidity compares with phosphor bronze but it has a much higher Rockwell hardness, this metal is tough without being brittle. Since resonances tend to extend beyond the duration of the signal, a reasonable means of dealing with this is to reduce mass with nude diamonds (boundary resonances can occur with bonded diamonds, differences in mass may be insignificant) and lighter and more rigid materials in the cantilever. This will move cantilever resonance to a higher frequency and make it easier to deal with. Compliance, inductance and impedance in cartridges with response above 40k must be carefully considered, I can't recall off-hand one with output above 3mV. Real or imagined, none of this deals with resonant feedback or harmonic influence from a cantilever tie wire. ADC's Peter Prichard thought it a factor.
Resonance frequency is not one for compliance, one for cantilever and one for arm unless considered separately. Resonance frequency is the product of tonearm effective mass, cartridge compliance and, for the purposes of this discussion, cantilever design. This seems to confirm Rauls' advice: "What you see is what you get". Maybe it was Flip Wilson who said that?
Peace, |
Lew, I'd have to agree with others saying that something was not right. A properly set-up UNIverse will have absolutely no issues with bass. In general, I find the UNIverse's treble extension to be quite good as well.
Now back to your regularly-scheduled thread. |
Dear Halcro,
The ZYX was set up by a consummate professional, but I am prepared to believe what you say, because the low midrange response on down to low bass was that sorely lacking. However, I am able to rule out the amplifiers and speakers as culprits, and I strongly doubt that a turntable can have that big an effect on tonal balance. Plus it was a very very fine turntable with an enormous heavy platter. Two possibilities: (1) The room is very small; we could have been sitting in a null point; and (2) Perhaps a little more negative VTA would have helped.
Thuchan, Your point is well taken; I/we should not be talking about an MC cartridge here, let alone a current (not vintage) one. How about this: I then went on home to my house where I was once again thrilled by the Acutex LPM320STRIII on a mere Lenco; the cartridge seems to be breaking in and getting even better. |
Dear Halcro,
starting a thread means supporting and taking care in a way Raul did and does with this thread in its very best way. I am not able to do so. Of course we should not open a MC thread on Raul`s platform. It is not fair and also not the place to do. I will therefore not answer regarding MC-questions. I just wanted to keep us all sensitive in a critical way. |
Lewm, Also, the bass response was sorely lacking That Universe was not set up correctly or there were other anomalies in the system because I can assure you that a properly performing Universe has all the bass you will ever need? |
David,
Very interesting point about the cantilever material affecting the composure of the stylus?
I wonder whether Professor Timeltel has any thoughts on this?
The compliance of the cartridge I don't think has, as when I move the FR-6SE (same compliance as XV1s) onto the FR-66s arm, I think it keeps it's composure as all my other MMs seem to do? |
This is really an amazing thread. |
Halcro, I heard a ZYX UNIverse for the first time in my life the other day, in a system where I knew the speakers and amplifiers but not the tonearm and record player. However, both of the latter were present day state of the art quality. (I estimate over $20,000 total cost.) We played familiar LPs that I brought over to the audition. Needless to say I could not discern among the relative contributions of the three elements of the analogue system (cartridge, tonearm, turntable), but assuming tonearm and turntable should be neutral, my impression of the ZYX was that it is a bit "edgy" for my tastes. Prolonged listening became almost irritating, yet the detail in the low treble was incredible at times. Also, the bass response was sorely lacking, which could have been due to many other factors not under my control. But I agree with your basic premise: There are many interesting vintage MCs out there that would be fun to discuss. You could start another thread....
I remember back in the 70's listening to the Supex 900 when it first arrived on the scene, thru a Mark Levinson/John Curl pre-preamplifier. I was not amazed or overwhelmed and it took a decade or more after that before I adopted an MC cartridge into my system. |
lewm - link to VE where I posted the graphs http://www.vinylengine.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6674&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=240
Raul - as usual thank you for your ongoing insight...
I have digressed a little the last few days in refurbishing my JVC TT, putting 2.5kg of plasticine inside it, and I am in the process of finalising a new platform for my 2 main tables, using Ikea Lack tables + sorbothane, spikes, and/or ball bearing stands... the end combination is yet to be decided on as not all the gear has been delivered yet for testing and implementing.
I also resoldered the captive leads on the JVC - finally getting its capacitance down to around 100pf. (Using BlueJeans LC1 Cable)
Also ongoing testing and experiments with my Digital Phono stage configuration.... but I will return to the cartridge tuning side of things shortly!
Halcro - I've noticed the same type of phenomenon ("loses it's composure on very complex high energy and loud passages") both with my HOMC's (Benz/Empire MC1 & Sony XL-MC104) - I've also used "big" symphonic music frequently as a system test.... lots of speakers can't reproduce it effectively, and start getting "muddled" - also can happen when an amp starts pushing its limits....
But previously my HOMC's were sitting on an ultra low mass 4g tonearm - the results may be very different in the JVC's tonearm. (which is one of the reasons I got it)
I really wonder whether the issue is not in fact related to low compliance and tracking capability... (ie the weaknesses of low compliance ?) - Of course when talking tracking capability we are talking cantilever construction, effective mass etc....
I started doing some measurements of a "basic" eliptical stylus in my Shure 1000e vs a SAS stylus.
Forgetting a moment about the Exotic line contact stylus - I think the biggest difference may not be the stylus at all, it may be the far more sophisticated and light weight cantilever. ( at some stage I will get back to that comparison and report...)
It leads me to wonder whether rather than spending big bucks on some of the name brand styli (TOTL LC's from AT etc..) for some of my cartridges, I might be better off sending a stylus to Soundsmith (US) or Expert (UK) for a cantilever + stylus upgrade.
I think one of the biggest gains that the exotic MC's get is to do with their exotic cantilevers - you can get Shibata, LC or MicroRidge/Fineline for a range of MM's and MI's - and all at around $100 - but usually on fairly coarse cantilevers... therefore heavy, and due to excess mass, slow moving ... not nimble enough.
Has anyone on here taken a good MM and had it re-cantilevered with a soundsmith Ruby cantilever?
bye for now
David |
Thucan,
I fully appreciate your position: crazy as it might seem to most! What's your favourite MC and have you ever heard the Technics EPC 100c Mk4 MM?
Cheers |
Thanks, Thuchan. I think this hobby and the obsession with its crazy minutiae should be fun above all. The opinions can be intensely felt, however. The best part for me is the pleasure of getting to be in contact with interesting people (such as yourself and the others here) with widely varying backgrounds and preferences, from all over the world. Some day, when I am again in Munich...
LIke Dgob, I find your collection of phono gear to be jaw-dropping. I myself am overwhelmed with "only" 3 turntables and about 4 tonearms in play (so far). (Three more turntables and several tonearms await me.) This is thanks to Raul and this thread, and to my recently acquired fascination with vintage turntables and tonearms. I can only imagine what you go through just to figure out what to play with on any given day. It's a nice problem to have. |
Dear Thuchan,
If you could start a thread about MCs it would be most interesting.
I think we need a critical examination of the in-field experiences of owners just as we have in this thread on MMs?
At the moment I'm listening happily to the ZYX Universe in the FR-66s on the Raven AC-3 and it's sounding as well as some of the top MMs in my collection.
It still loses it's composure on very complex high energy and loud passages in a way that the MMs do not.
To me there is 'break-up' of distortion which tends to remind me of the limits of LOMCs?
Perhaps a new thread will shed some light on other LOMCs which minimise this weakness?
Cheers
Henry |
Thanks Dgob. Some people say I am crazy. I like to be crazy regarding music and musical systems. Music is one of my best friends (:-).
Lewm, I am sometimes ironical as you are too. I also told it Raul who started this impressive thread there will be not such thread by me. Being more on the side of MCs I have some wonderful impressions with MM carts too. Nevertheless we should stay critical in both directions :-) :-) :-) - one of the three smileys this time is dedicated to you - but in a good meaning |
