Dear all, Seneca was the first to postulate:'rationale enim animal est homo'. I think that our answer to Seneca would be :' dear Seneca being rational is fine but not all the time'. With 'our' I am refering to our members. Ie those who buy all these carts. But why should the producers, uh,produce carts with such compliance that nobody can use them? This,at least to me,is an anigma. Regards, |
Downunder, The Continuum arms (Cobra & Copperhead) are also unipivots like the Phantom.
Perhaps the term 'horrid' was a bit strong. In the Phantom arm my MM cartridges sound as 'good' as the expensive ZYX Universe and Dynavector XV1s. It is only in comparison to the Copperhead that the term 'horrid' was used in relation to the Phantom. But guess what?........with the Empire 1000ZE/X in the Copperhead, both the Universe in the DaVinci and the XV1s in the Phantom sound equally 'horrid' in comparison. I simply cannot listen to MC cartridges any more. Raul, you simply MUST get a Copperhead to hear all your wonderful MM cartridges.
Strangely enough Downunder, I can't play my Azden cartridge in ANY of my arms due to "a mist of RF and other associated crap" just as you seem to experience with the Phantom? |
Aolsala,
I wont rehearse what Timeltel has already so graciously expressed. I would suggest that my familiarity with Pritchard does not lead me to the personal relationship that you enjoyed with him and, possibly, this explains why I would not accept your black-and-white proclamations that everything that came after him on the XLM line was inferior. I repeat, "very trusted" listeners (who have heard most or all of the ADC's) still proclaim the Super XLM MkII as the supreme cartridge among their range.
Please do continue to share your views, as with most things in life, we are free to choose that which we find useful and dismiss that which we do not: a use of our critical faculties that I have oft promoted here and elsewhere! |
Halcro
At least you can actually hear MM cartridges on your Phantom. Mine gets covered in a mist of RF and other associated crap.
I would luv to hear them sound horrid :-)
Is one reason maybe due to the Phantom being a unipivot tonearm. MC's sound a lot better in my Naim ARO than do MM's, and that is a unipivot.
Whereas on my Exclusive P3/P10 and Ortofon tonearm, they sound a lot better.
|
Dear Aolsala: I think you are suffering a misapprehension. The thread is about MM/MI/IM/MC cartridges. We are fortunate to have so many from the past to rediscover, age discrimination does not exist here. Please make appropriate contributions as you are able. If you know of a MM cartridge worthy of consideration (such as the Grado Sig-111 you mentioned) then tell us WHY, we'll enjoy the input.
I do not believe there are many neophytes among the posters to this thread, you may find yourself viewed by your contemporaries as "preaching to the choir" and most are much more interested in which is better and WHY.
ADC cartridges have been a subject of exploration for only two weeks, Peter Prichard is also a relatively new name to the exchanges. Next week there may be much said about Grace cartridges, those who have the correct information might enveigh us with the entire history of Shinagawa Musen, or perhaps someone will reveal that Piezo of Japan contracted cartridges and styli for Empire, Azden and Acutex.
Please consider your past few posts. In one, you state as an absolute fact that vintage cartridges cannot begin to compare with modern, material and technological advances exclude them from consideration. You then proceed to identify specific tonearms and speakers from decades past as competitive with those of today. As such, I find your statements opinionated, inconsistent and most importantly, unsubstantiated. And, you have the social graces of a bulldozer. This is of course, IMO, usual disclaimers, etc.
|
Dear Raul, Your Cooperhead tonearm experiences confirm the importance that the whole tonearm design has on a cartridge quality performance. I appreciate the validity of your advice which is why I've strived to acquire the very best arms I could afford but why does the arm design appear to be more critical with MM/MI cartridges than LOMCs? Is there more 'hidden' potential in these wonderful cartridges than in the current LOMCs (as this whole Forum Topic of yours seems to indicate) or do I have the wrong arms for the Moving Coils? And whilst I have read about Low Mass and High Mass arms and their compatibility with High Compliance and Low Compliance cartridges, I have never seen anything about the arm mass at the Pivot Point which is the critical design point in Continuum's philosophy? If you look at the mass around the Pivot Point on the Phantom II, you will see it is enormous in relation to the mass of the rest of the arm and indeed all my MM/MI cartridges sound horrid in the Phantom yet LOMCs do not? Continuum seems to know something that most arm designers appear to ignore? |
Quote In the other side I don't care what Harry say about ( no I don't need the review, thank you. ) I know what I'm saying. What he said/heard many years ago had the influence of an audio system that IMHO was not comparable to today systems and more important to my today system, period.
Btw, if you think ( like you posted ) that the tonearm effective mass is the determinant factor on a cartridge quality performance then IMHO you need an update on the overall cartridge/tonearm subject. I don't want to open a new window about, only an opinion.
UNQUOTE
You mean to tell me that the Infinity Speakers (IRS, QRS, SERVOS) and the Quad electrostatics and the other very fine speakers when the cartridges you discussed were reviewe are not excellent. Let me tell you, with todays electronics, cables and tonearms and tables those speakers are still superb sounding. No. I do not agree Pierson was comparing cartridges with cartridges, lemons with lemons and apples with apples. Some sounded better some sounded worse and some truly dreadful.
Tonearms with very low mass have nothing to do with the sound quality they are capable. I am talking about having low mass capability and excellent sonic performances. You have to have both ingredients. Low mass for the high compliance cartridges is just not enough. Otherwise certain tonearms would have been great with the cartridges mentioned. Witness the ADC LMF-1 and LMF-2 they just were poor in sonic qualities compared to the Black Widow or Vestigal tonearms or even to the Grace 707.
Purity and transparency of sound quality is of utmost importance. A tonearm can have medium or high mass and be superior sonically wth the right cartridges. The materials of the tonearm and the excution of the design are key ingredients. I am not stating that tonearm mass is an end to itself.
The high compliance cartridge need a low mass tonearm and also a superb sounding tonearm (TWO INGREDIENTS WHICH ARE NOT ACHIEVABLE FULLY!!!) |
Raul,
What tracking force did you track your ADC-25?? What was the tonearm you used with? This cartridge had to be used a tracking force of no more than 0.7 grams not a tenth more!!! The pickup could track practically anything at 0.5 grams. If you used it with an incompatible arm at 1.5 grams you were doomed and the sound would be bloated, ill defined, congested and the suspension would be damaged.
None of the reviewers knew how to handle this cartridge properly. Did you also know that the spherical stylus was design to properly play "Dynagroove" RCA records which were bass compensated? |
If you are trying to find a Peter Pritchard design for the Super XLM or Super XLM II -- there is no such animal. Peter could not produce in the laboratory a suitable successor to the XLM II. It was never produced. Period. I know, I use to talk to him a lot of ver the phone in those days. However, BSR when they bought the Company introduces a Super XLM and maybe a Mk II as well. They are not the same type of "XLM" sound unfortunately and I do not recommend them.
You can tell by the boxand packaging. |
Regards, Montepilot--
Exactly.
Many thanks for your kind response (and refraining from calling me, umm, "special").
Enjoy your P-76. |
It seems all of you guys are after vintage cartridges. So be it. Enjoy them. I started back in the early 60s with all these cartridges and have quite a few in my collections. They are just relics gathering dust. Truly the cartridges have evolved due to better quality materials. They are great conversation pieces however.
I can summarize this in one sentence:
" TO EACH ITS OWN"
If you have accurate transducers: ribbon, electrostatics, plasma - you will hear all the problems with these vintage cartridges. If you really know the sound of unamplified music then you better go and move forward.
All those cartridges were very fine in their day. However, Raul does not mention what low mass tonearm he used with his ADC-25 which he sold. And in any case, just maybe the qualities he finds in those other cartridges agree more to his tastes. Not me. I find a lot of colorations which are trully unacceptable to state of the art performances.
Cartridges in the late 70s and early 80s are truly better than anything in the 60s. I am sorry but speak with any engineer in cartridge design and he will agree.
Going back to the Astrion and all these other attempts. ADC's Peter Pritchard sold the Company to BSR not BSA. The designers at BSR tried upon improving his ideas but unfortunately to these ears these attemps were frivolous. I certainly do not like any of the XLM III, ZLM, etc... as supposedly improved by the BSR people. The Astrion was an attempt at going the right direction, unfortunately it is not a complete triumph. Just compare this cartridge (and I can prove it side by side any time) to the Grado Signature III and you will hear what I mean. One has to compare these things, not talk about them.
By the way, The Sonus Dimension 5 was a very nice cartridge designed by Peter. Peter had the qualities of an engineer who "listened" BSR certainly did not. |
Timeltel,
You wrote: >>While clarity, transients and definition are detectably diminished, the lesser stylii seem (to me) to have the effect of burnishing the music, avoidance of long term listening fatigue is enhanced and I'm less involved with critiqueing the equipment.<<
I had a similar experience with my Sumiko Andante P-76. I still like this cartridge very much and will return to it. It does not excite in the usual way that makes some cartridges exciting. Such as sharp tingling transient snap, bass that feels like a punch in the chest etc. etc. Yet it does have good clarity and transient snap, but they don't yell TAKE NOTICE OF ME!
It is somewhat analogous to watching sports highlights which are exciting in every quick scene verses watching the whole game where there are exciting moments occasionally.
Like you I enjoyed listening to my music without critiquening it's audiophile qualities with the P-76. My Empire D4000/III has all the audiophile qualities, yet it does not diminish my enjoyment of the P-76.
Your post just reminded me I need to remount and enjoy it again.
Cheers, |
Regards, Raul, Dgob:
Dgob, I'm sure you'll find your Point 4 worth your investment, congradulations and let us know your impression of the cartridge.
Raul, I've seen but not heard the Astrion, it is indeed a beautiful work. The packaging is indicative of the pride the maker took in his product. I was tempted to obtain the Astrion stylus but refrained for a reason some might consider self-defeating. This relates to a comment read long ago in which the author stated that some "audiophiles" concluded that it was possible to utilize a cartridge that was so analytical the level of detail and separation presented became a distraction to enjoyment of the selected music.
This is under no circumstance an indictment of the Astrion, which I understand is a wonderful cartridge and one I've not heard. It is a reflection of my own taste and experience, the Astrion is an unknown to me. I continue to enjoy the Acutex LPM 320-111STR, a cartridge that offers remarkable extension in the hf's and precise transitions throughout the audible range. I listen to the 320 for perhaps 15 minutes, then exchange it for the 315-111STR bonded stylus. I'm becoming familiar with the Shure ML 140HE, a delectably neutral cartridge. Also precise, extended and free of detectable distortion or unwanted resonance. A recent find was a NOS stylus for the ML120HE, just a small step down from the highly polished MASCAR nude tip of the 140HE. In both examples the lesser quality stylus softens any perception of "edgyness". While clarity, transients and definition are detectably diminished, the lesser stylii seem (to me) to have the effect of burnishing the music, avoidance of long term listening fatigue is enhanced and I'm less involved with critiqueing the equipment. I'm quite aware performance is diminished, when I wish to listen critically the better quality styli are implemented. Please don't think I'm suggesting one should intentionally seek out "second best" but I'm curious if any who read this might have similar thoughts. Just as a leisurely drive on a soft day can be as rewarding as driving a high-performance machine in a spirited manner, there are times when I find "full throttle audio" tireing.
You've hinted at another topic suitable for "discussion". In the early '90's, it seemed cartridge design had become influenced by the sterility of CD's and the unique qualities of infinite harmonic interaction and the vitality of analog were sacrificed in a misguided attempt to compete with the "perfect sound" of digital. As a consequence, and in spite of the advances made in technology and application of materials, the cartridges I give consideration to are typically those developed between 1970 and 1990. It is probable that my expectations are tuned (contaminated) by long term exposure to vintage equipment and transducers, but then it isn't called the "golden age of audio" for no reason. This is in no way intended to be provocative but again, I would be interested in reading the opinions of others regarding the correctness of performance of these then TOTL relics as compared to contemporary pickups, of which there are several (Aolsala, Grado is one) of note.
Raul, I'm grateful for your continued support of this thread, it is a valuable platform for the exchange of knowledge, application and experience. |
Dear friends: This is very good option for headshell wires:
http://cgi.ebay.com/PCOCC-headshell-leads-Audio-technica-/360188540805?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item53dce8f785#ht_1849wt_1003
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Timeltel: I own too a ZLM stylus and I like it but maybe for the sapphire cantilever I prefer this one in the Astrion.
As I posted in the begin with the thread in those old times a cartridge manufacturer really had a " furious " competency for the customers and this made that all those MM/MI great designers put all each one skills on the cartridge design and cartridge building. No one era/time IMHO was so " prolific " in quality performance with so many cartridges showing, even today , its greatness.
I can't find any today cartridge design ( MM/MI/MC ) that really can compete with the best MM/MI vintage ones that are several cartridges not two or three.
Btw, the Astrion packing is just gorgeus: manual, screwdriver, screws/nuts, stylus brush, FR test diagrams/charts and the inside box where the Astrion comes is an acrylic block with big letters saying: ASTRION, just beautiful. As I say the cartridge competency was really " heavy " and the cartridge packing was very important too. Unfortunatelly today we are loosing something of this " manufacturer proud " attitude.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Timeltel,
Excellent recount. I share your fascination with the variety of responses and experiences. I had said this before but... I believe the ADC's prove the importance of listening for one's self. I found it irrefutable that some of the older XML's were superior to the later ones in my system and for my hearing and expectations - particularly regarding timbre. I have a range of untested ones that I'll be giving a run out eventually.
What is there to lose when you consider it cost me $5 for a slightly used ADC Point 4 from an estate sale?
Happy days. |
Aolsala,
Many thanks for your feedback: much food for thought. I do use the lightest of the Morch arms with my ADC's and would hasten to confirm your view regarding matching the earlier XLM's. On a related point, and to keep engaging your experience.
Although not a Prichard product, do you know the history of the Super XLM MkII? I ask because it has been listened to by very trusted listeners who hail it as a near unobtainable king slayer, as it were. I own one that needs some attention and I always enjoy knowing the background of these old heroes. Any information greatly appreciated. |
Raul,
Thanks for the information: it did make interesting reading. I think I have sufficient ADC's to forego the 25 and 26. The XLM and Super MkII seem (statistically and according to other listeners' opinions) far higher performers and I eventually need to get around to getting truly acquainted with these gems.
As always |
Greetings, Aolsola. Regards, Raul.
Great information about ADC cartridges recently, and perhaps more importantly, justifiable opinion expressed by knowledgeable others. Does it get any better?
The Astrion is apparently a transitional cartridge, the designer (posting at AK) indicates it was a move away from the XLM series for which he had redesigned the failure prone pivot block shortly after Peter Prichard had left ADC. A few of his comments: "The Astrion was an evolution (away from the extremely high compliance cartridges). The ZLM attempt(ed) to recapture the combined warmth and sparkle of the XLM II --- the Astrion was conceived to solve the perceived lack of stiffness in the ZLM's tapered tube cantilever. The lawyers wouldn't let us use beryllium because of the toxicity hazard so I ended up going with a laser slotted single crystal sapphire with the modified elliptical diamond bonded in the laser slot", and: "A ZLM was the best tapered tube stylus we ever built with the same diamond as the Astrion and the same hand assembly. Only real difference was the sapphire cantilever in the Astrion".
Other comments regarding the XLM reflect your (Aolsala) concern regarding tonearm matching: "OldADC" (username) admits admiration for the Black Widow and recommended it for the XLM/XLM-11 cartridges even though the B. W. was in competition with ADC's LMF low mass tonearms. If I have it right, XLM-111's were a BSA product, Prichard was busy with Sonus by then. Later styli (BSA) were made in Japan, original ADC's were of USA manufacture. A quote from elsewhere: "the tas guys had already been gaga over the adc25 and wary of its delicacy or rather lack of robustness of durability. when the XLM came in the scene, they jumped on it".
Other esoteria to share: All ADC bodies with a similar configuration will accept all similar stylii: A ZLM will exchange with the Astrion, a XLM, QLM, K-8, RSZ, RSX, RXL, etc. Turntableneedles has a good offering of NOS stylii and although the XLM-11 seems universally admired, I've selected a ZLM stylus for assessing the two working ADC bodies I own through happenstance.
Aolsala, I wonder if you might be aquainted with "OldADC", he was with ADC from the late '70's into the early '80's, he gives Eric as his first name. I hope some of this is usefull. |
Dear Halcro: Your Cooperhead tonearm experiences confirm the importance that the whole tonearm design has on a cartridge quality performance. Here your tonearm designer was talking on the tonearm pivot bearing and you can add the whole Coopperhead build materials, geometry and even internal wiring.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Silvio: I use it with the right tonearm, so don't worry about.
+++++ " Sorry but the Astrion had considerable design problems and I did attest to it. " +++++
that was not what the ADC designer Eric posted. Read the Timeltel link about.
In the other side I don't care what Harry say about ( no I don't need the review, thank you. ) I know what I'm saying. What he said/heard many years ago had the influence of an audio system that IMHO was not comparable to today systems and more important to my today system, period.
Btw, if you think ( like you posted ) that the tonearm effective mass is the determinant factor on a cartridge quality performance then IMHO you need an update on the overall cartridge/tonearm subject. I don't want to open a new window about, only an opinion.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Please sorry for the misprint. I meant the BEST ADC cartridge prior to the XLM (not after like I stated) was the ADC-25. The XLM does sound better but only because it is more liquid in its high frequencies, the ADC-25 a bit flatter but very smooth.
Both cartridges need low mass arms and very low capacitance in the tonearm leads. I have used ADC 25 on several low mass arms and there is a great degree of difference because of the tonearm involved. Do not judge a book by its cover!
Happy listening. |
Please note that the ADC-25 was a fine sounding cartridge. The XLM was even more liquid. You need a very low mass arm otherwise you are defeating the purpose entirely. None, and I mean none of the arms made today are compatible with these pickups with the exception of the low mass Morch tonearm, certain tangential arms and the Black Widow and Formula 4 or Vestigal arms.
Point 4 was fine for its day but in comparison with the better pickups (there have been improvements in cartridge designs since 1964!!!) the IM distortion is a bit elevated.
Sound quality of a Grado F-1+ circa 1974 for example trounced the ADC.
If you still need a vintage cartridge because of collectability that is fine but please do understand sound quality has improved throughout the years! |
The ADC 25 must be played on a very very low mass tonearm otherwise you will defeat its purpose. Its compliance was 120X10-6 cm dyne vertically and 56X10-6c, dyne horizontally. You cannot use your wonderful high mass tonearms. Impossible. You will defeat its suspension. Try a Black Widow, or a very light mass Morch. Incidentally the ADC XLM III was not made by Pritchard and was substantially inferior to the original XLM. Again, read Harry Pearson of the Absolute Sound and I concur with him.
Sorry but the Astrion had considerable design problems and I did attest to it. Harry was right all along. I will be more than happy to send you the copy of the review.
Again, it depends for what you are listening for.
Regards
SILVIO |
Dear Dgob: The 25 was part of the 26 and 27 cartridge family, here you can read about the 26 ( that I owned several years ago. ) that was very similar than the 25 and maybe could help you:
http://www.vinylengine.com/library/adc/26.shtml
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Querido Silvio: +++++ " The ADC-25 was the superior cartridge. " +++++
Like a year ago I bought two 25 ( auction was for two 25s. ) in NOS. I test both for a while and after that I put on sale on ebay. I can't find nothing that tell me that I have to keep one of them. In the past I owned the 26 but I can't remember its real performance.
In the ADC line my XLM 3 improved, the Astrion or TRX IMHO are far superior to that 25.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Aolsala,
Many thanks for your kind and very helpful response. I've got the conical version but will also order the elliptical for those mono moments. I look forward to giving the Point 4 a run out as soon as time permits. Just a quick query regarding your preference for the ADC 25.
The scant information on performance that I can find suggests that the Point 4 and (more dramatically) the Super XLM MkII are far higher quality performers. Could you provide/correct the data sources regarding the comparitive frequency range, channel separation and channel balance of the 25?
Again, my gratitude |
Interesting comments about current and past tonearm designs and their suitability for MM/MI cartridges. I find that differences with LOMC cartridges between my 3 primary arms (Phantom II, DaVinci Grandezza 12" Ref and Continuum Copperhead) are quite subtle. With MM cartridges like my Garrott P77, Ortofon M20FL and Empire 1000ZE/X, the transformation when mounted on the Copperhead arm is little short of staggering. The Copperhead is described as "LOW MASS PIVOT DESIGN - No additional mass is placed over the pivot to improve the responsiveness of the bearing system. The Copperhead is free of the inertial energy storage found in high mass bearing systems." Up till now I have been reticent in posting my impressions as there is almost no-one else out there with a Copperhead or Cobra arm to validate my findings (and those that are out there almost certainly have not mounted any vintage MM/MI cartridges thereupon).
This may change shortly with Tuchan having both Cobra and Copperhead arms and mounting his first MM (although I believe it may be the Decca London which does not seem to rate in Raul's ranking system?) |
Raul
That is very interesting web site. As you said, good opporunity to buy one and then buy the factory NOS stylus for the AT24/25 from one of the stylus web sites Raul mnetioned previously. |
Thanks, Silvio. As an owner of a Grado TLZ purchased about 25 years ago and resurrected from storage thanks to this thread, I have been struggling to get the best out of it (again). If I recall correctly back when the TLZ was my one and only cartridge, I owned an Alfason HR-something tonearm. Right now, I am trying to play it on a Dynavector DV505 in a Dynavector headshell. Perhaps this is too much mass and I need to find a lighter weight shell, at the very least. Any further ideas would be appreciated. The tone is good, but there is a bit of distortion that suggests the suspension might have stiffened up over time. I hate to increase VTF too much for fear of damaging my LPs. I am using 1.6g at the moment. |
Silvio, fascinating observations to the effect that some classic high-compliance MM/MI designs were ahead of their time in terms of then-available tonearms, and may not play well on even top current tone arms conceived principally for MC. This elevates the discussion of MM vs. MC into rarified air. |
There was some quality control problems at ADC during Pritchards reign but it did not apply to the original XLM cartridge only to the MK IIs. Incidentally the ones that say MK II Improved or MKII Super were made by BSR Company which later acquired the Induced Magnet pricinciple. There was never a SUPER XLM. Peter wouldn't release It was far too compliant and there were no tonearms at the time that could be used. It was announced but never came out in the market.
The best ADC cartridge after the XLM was the Model 25 which sported three different styli tips, back in 1969 sold for the extremely expensive price of $100.00 |
Tonearm design has continually improved markedly. However the very best low mass tonearms have not been superseded too much, with exceptions such as the Morch tonearms. The Infinity Black Widow tonearm and the Mayware Formula 4 and Grace 717s were excellent for high compliance cartridges.
A properly modified Rabco SL-8E with a balsa tonearm or cork can properly play the high compliance cartridges successfully. Unfortunately the high mass tonearms of today are great but for moving cartrdiges. |
The cartridge you bought was made in 1964. It was available in two versions, a Point 4 conical (the smallet tip on the side of this Earth, .0004 mil and a .003 x .007 mil elliptical). The conical had to be played with Stereo records only otherwise it would bottom the grooves of the mono and distroy them. Make sure you ahve then the elliptical otherwise you can only play stereo records.
The sound quality was ages better than the Shures of those years except the Grado cartridges. Joe had the Professional $75.00 cartridge which was truly superb in its own way as well. The ADC had to be played in a low mass arm and THERE WERE NONE IN EXCISTENCE IN THOSE DAYS. Only his arm, the ADC tonearm which was made of wood was able to partly negotiate its very high compliance.
Excellent pick up but there were problems with tortional distortion products and the tracking was severly limited because it did exhibit a peak around 16khz. The ADC-25 was the superior cartridge. I have a brand new one here with three interchaneable stili. |
Mu estimado Silvio: Nice to hear from you again.
I know your commitment for Grado. I have a lot of respect for Grado and what was and still is his great contribution to the grow up of the analog high end. As a fact I owned and own Grado cartridges and headphones.
Welcome a board!
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Downunder: Good that you heard it again. I agree with you on the high quality performance of these Audio Technica At 25/24.
I don't heard for some time my AT-24 but for what I remember and maybe that comes with a eliptycal stylus against the Shibata AT-20SS my thought is that the 20SS has more " true live feeling ".
For those with interest on these AT cartridges is important to know that the AT 24 is the same AT 25 with out integrated headshell design.
This is a source for both cartridges ( NOS ) where they ad that the cartridges comes with Shibata stylus and seems to me that that was a mistake because the original stylus and the only one I know was elipthycal one, anyway a very rare opportunity to put our hands on these AT true gems:
http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4160
http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4161
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dgarrestson,
Not to butt in or stop Silvio's response but I believe the collapsing ADC's only applied to the original XLM1 and Super XLM MkII and only relates to a challenge of tonearm matching. With a BW or something newer (maybe a Morch green dot or the like), and careful handling there should be no problem. The early ADC's really are sonically special and you can (as I recently did) find the NOS replacement stylus for the Super on eBay.
Excuse my brief intervention and I hope it helps |
Dear Silvio, It would certainly be interesting to revisit those old TAS reviews. As best I can determine, little to none of that archive material is accessible now and is perhaps more difficult to locate than the cartridges themselves.
Whatever one's opinion of vintage cartridges, could it be true that tone arm design has evolved and that today there are better matches for evaluation of NOS cartridges?
With respect to ADC cartridges, I have been avoiding these due to comments that the suspensions on some XLM models were from inception subject to early failure. Any thoughts on this?
|
Timeltel,
Many thanks for your kind pointer. I'll have to join that forum when time permits.
Cheers |
Aolsala,
You are undoubtedly a great addition here and I'll jump on your kind offer.
I recently bought an ADC Point 4 and the seller 'believed' it to be "special", although he know very little about it himeself. Sadly, I couldn't find anything of further substance about it. Could you fill in the huge blanks here with any information on its history and/or performance?
Many thanks in anticipation |
Hi Raul,
Hope you are well!! Silvio from Tampa here. Long time.
If any of you in this thread needs some down to earth advice on the Grado cartridges I will be more than happy to anwer them. I have owned the Grado Signature cartridges since the original Signature 1 which retailed back in 1976 at the very expensive price of $275.00 --- the very best moving iron cartridge then and still something to marvel after all these years. I do speak with authority since I have been a consultant for Grado Laboratories for a number of years.
Part of my collection of Signatures include over 36 samples of them. From Signature 1 through the 7 (white body ones) and Signature 8 through the later and best of the Siggies - the XTZ. Each one is a cult item in itself.
Please note that I do now want to hurt other people's feelings here in what they like or not. I speak with authority as a consumate advocate to the music. I listen almost exclusively to classical music and I own over 24,000 LP records. If any of you are familiar with the Absolute Sound of 1970s through the 1980s please read Harry Pearson, John Nork, Pat Donleycott, Bob Reina, and host of others who conclusiverly selected the Signaturee as the most natural true to the musical instrument phono cartridges ever producted. They did comparison of cartridges back in 1976 and all the other MMs did have resonance and tortional problems with peaky high end and a lot of IM distortion, some better than others.
The rest of all these MM/MI mentioned are all from mediocre sound to very good indeed, some better than others and in many cases more musical than many Moving Coils of today out there.
Please note however that the Moving Magnets and Moving Irons have continually evolved. But, here is the big but: other than Joe Grado perhaps only the late Peter Pritchard really had the spark of creativity to design trully musical cartridges. Peter's best cartridges were the ADC XLM, XLM II, the earlier model 25 (with 3 interchangeable styli) and the older Point 4 series. His ground breaking cartridge was the original ADC-1. None of the other competitors could even get the tonality of the instruments, the depth information and soundstaging that the ADC and the Grado cartridges had.
I am speaking of experience with over 45 years in this cartridge history undertaking. Owned all the Ortofon MMs, MicroAcoustics and Stantons. Again, please refer to the Absolute Sound where in those days -- at least -- they really had good ears! Today is just mediocrity in the extreme and mass market ripoff to entice the innocent.
The problems with the Grado cartrides have always been the wrong kind of arms. I just do not want to go fully in detail here since I can speak about this and fill a book.
Nonetheless if any of you need some advice on the old Signature series cartridges do not hesitate to contact me.
By the way, yes, the newest Statement Reference is superb at the low output of 0.5 mv -- the better the tonearm the better the sound. Just use no more than 1.5 grams in tracking force and "ZERO" antiskating for best possible sound. The tonality of the instruments is correct with clean and natural string sound from all your beloved LPs.... If you want HI-FI artifacts and the type of music you listen demands the colorations then go another route!
Happy listening. |
Wayne I first used it in a Naim ARO, then moved it to Exclusive P3 with S armwand. not sure if it is low mass, but sounds a lot better. |
Wayne, for awhile now on my Trans-Fi linear arm I have been lightening parts to reduce horizontal and vertical mass. The effect on high-compliance MM/MI cartridges has always be favorable, and the arm now has what I believe to be the lightest moving mass of any linear arm. |
Dgarretson and Downunder, I understand the Jico Shibata stylus made for this 881 body is supposed to be awesome, at least I am told. I had also gotten some good info from KABUSA concerning this cart and stylus differences and issues.
I assume you are using your 881's in low mass tonearms ? |
I have to recant my initial negative thoughts of the Audio Technica AT25. Intially I must have got the setup wrong, probably in the damping fluid of the P3.
This MM cart is superb and as pure and relaxed sounding as any MM cartridge I have heard. It still has a lot of transparency and detail. At this point this cart might be around the top of MM's with the Technics EPC100C.
If you see one around, buy the AT25.
cheers |
Dear Headsnappin: I think that the AT 15XE can works with the ATN20SS stylus replacement.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Thanks again, Raul. I do have a bit of a stable of carts I've not gone through yet. My system was taken apart for a while but will report as time allows. They are the P76, Azden ypm50vl (?), the Empires 1000GT, 1000Ze/X, and the 4000d/III gold. |
Regards, Raul, Dgob:
For those seeking information concerning ADC cartridges,
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=305018&page=3
The gentleman who designed the Astrion cartridge and the LMF carbon fiber tonearm is currently posting and states he is agreeable to answering questions. |
Dear Headsnappin: It is in the review but here again: 20SLa, 20Sa, 15SS,15SLa and 15Sa.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Does anyone know which bodies will work with the AT20SS stylus? |