Oh boy, where to start? There's lots of misinformation and/or apples/oranges comparisons the last 10 posts. We're presented with specs that ignore the generator and price comparisons that span 20 or 40 years. When I was a little kid gasoline was $0.25/gallon. As Miles would say, So What.
A .2 x .7 mil elliptical has the smallest contact area of any stylus. It's a tiny oval. The .2 mil minor radius means it's also very slim and can track high frequencies like a banshee. There were a couple of CD-4 carts that used .2 elliptical. The problem is lack of vertical contact area, and all things being equal it will wear the fastest.
.2mil = 5.08um - thinner than shibata. Shibata has greater vertical contact area. It's thin enough for high frequencies and will tend to miss less from tracing or worn records. It's also cut with different facets on the front and back. That gives it a curved contact area as the record spins past and the "romantic" sound. It's actually a softening of high frequencies. More later, |
Fleib
"There's lots of misinformation and/or apples/oranges comparisons the last 10 posts. We're presented with specs that ignore the generator and price comparisons that span 20 or 40 years. When I was a little kid gasoline was $0.25/gallon. As Miles would say, So What."
Please explain where is misinformation?
BTW The name of this thread itself is about Apples (MM) / Oranges (MC).
I did checked the prices for top MMs mentioned in this thread, some of them goes for up to $600-1400 used on ebay, some modern MM goes for $750 new. And some unknown MMs goes (sometimes) cheaper on auctions where nobody bidding on them (like Glanz, Astatic this week). In general some legendary MM are in the same category as some nice used MC (let's say $500-700). As someone mentioned before the increasing prices on good MM connected to this thread too.
I don't know who pay full price for new "high piced" MCs (say $3000) when they can be purchased here for half price (say $1500) with low hrs on it. But those are quality new MCs with modern Micro Ridge stylus with 2000 hrs life minimum. |
Meanwhile i remember someone mentioned rare Technics model EPC-102SP. It's hard to find any information about this SP model, but it was described as the cartridge to play SP records (with special stylus profile) without mentioning that SP is actually not just a singles, but a 78 RPM SINGLES (you know LP, EP, SP). I assume this is a MONO cartridge for 78 rmp vinyl only! It's headshell integrated model, but not for standard tonearm because it looks like Ortofon Type "A" headshell (all others from technics are standard like "B" type with 52mm overhang).
http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_085627.jpg http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_0152354.jpg
I decided to post it here since the Technics EPC-100cmk4, 100cMK3 and 205cMK4 were mentioned here. To make it easy to understand for someone who looking for old Technics pickups.
The Technics EPC-102-SP is not designed for 33/45 rpm stereo 7' inch singles (i would like to have MM cartridge designed for 45s), but designed for old 78 rpm 10' inch singles (SP records).
http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_09288.jpg
So this is another rare MM design for broadcast tonearms and in comparison to standard EPC series it looks like this:
http://yosigaki.s214.xrea.com/heppoko7.jpg
Long time one seller on a'gon advised this model to me when i was looking for a pickup dedicated to play singles (45 rpm, 7' inchers). He was wrong and i was a bit naive to dream about 45s dedicated pickup.
Source: http://audiooyazi.exblog.jp/d2009-11-21
|
Hello Chakster, You're talking about a modern 7" 45rpm record with a 1.5" center hole? Those are stereo microgroove pressings and normally played with a stereo pickup. If you have older mono versions you could play them with a conventional mono pickup. The only 45 dedicated cart I know of reside in juke boxes, but maybe there is?
If you're playing some vintage recordings you might want to use a slightly bigger stylus. Mono tips vary from modern advanced sizes and .6 - .7 spherical, up to about 1 mil. A very old or used record might sound better with the larger tip.
78rpm styli are 3 mil and inappropriate for microgrooves. Regards,
|
Judging a cartridge from incomplete specs is like pissing in the wind - might not be what you had in mind. The 155LC has the same basic motor as the modern 440/120 or the 160ML. There's no arguing with opinion or value judgments, but don't try to pass it off as fact.
This 490mH generator isn't always loved when coupled with a tapered aluminum cantilever and a nude square shank ML, but in a deluxe body with a boron/ML or with a beryllium/LC, it might be a favorite. There also could be some generator modifications or "improvements" like laminations or stronger magnets, but everything old is better than new?
The 50ANV has a 350mH (150MLX) motor, the lowest inductance for an A/T MM today. Lower inductance means greater potential for transparency and extension. It's also harder to load. A/T first used titanium (body) in '89 with the ART1, a cart that set the industry on its ear. At $1200 list it competed directly with Clearaudio and Benz and outperformed them IMO. The ART2000 looks like an OC and has similar specs - .4mV, 12 ohms, boron/ML, 8g body. Is this different from an OC9II ?
Some express love for the Ortofon MC2000/3000. Were these coreless designs manufactured by Ortofon or Audio Technica? Strange that AT had identical models, they must have been the OEM.
What's the inflation rate for the past 30 years, 300% ?
No 2 phono carts of the same model are identical. Hand made MC's tend to be less so. Some companies QC is better than others. You pay your money and take your chances, but don't fool yourself thinking yours sounds just like all the others of the same model. |
Sorry, I meant 150ANV the MM. The 50ANV is still available and might be a good investment. It's now < $1.5K and seems to have slightly better specs than ART7. |
Chakster,
Quoate: ''I'd like to check top Glanz/Astatic, Garrott, Signet/AT line people advised on here, but do you think they really can compete with top of the line MCs ? It's hard to believe.''
I own examples of each of these. The simple answer to your question is "YES".
I have not discovered a M/M cartridge that is better than my 'best' M/C. But that is not the question. You aske if they can compete. If I had to say where in the ranking would the better M/M cartridges get placed if the were to be combined with the ratings of the better M/C's, I would place the M/M's in the upper middle of the entire list. A few, like the AT 180ML or the Signet TK 10 MKII (as examples), even a little higher. Regards, |
Chakster,
I have forgotten to mention a cartridge (M/M), that I own that does compete with my "best" M/C. Let me be clear here. I am saying competes! This M/M is the London Decca Jubilee. In some regards it does better my best M/C's but there is no perfect cartridge. That is why some of us own so many! (grin) BTW: The Jubilee is #2 in London's lineup. I have only had the opportunity to hear London Decca's best. That is the "London Decca Reference". I intend to buy one when I can find one at the right price. Hum can be an issue with these so be prepared to try various grounding methods if you ever decide to buy one. It will put a smile on your face that is damn near impossible to remove! Regards, |
Fleib, i have a massive collection of vintage 45s (American original pressing with big hole) from the 50s, 60s, 70s and early 80s (Jazz, Soul, Rhythm'n'Blues, Latin ).
Most of them are stereo, some of them are stereo on one side and mono on the flip. Some of them are mono only.
I do not have any mono cartridges yet, never tried mono cartridges. maybe i should use my spare Shick tonearm for mono (if i will even buy Miyajima mono MC)
I use stereo cartridges and 45s sounds good, no problem if the pressing is good. Some of them sounds amazing BTW. My records are clean and VG+ or Mint- condition. Apart from my favorite hi-end needles (vintage Argent, new ZYX and AT) i have tried NOS broadcast MM Denon DL107 conical on EPA100 tonearm for 45s and it was OK for it's price, also MC Ortofon SPU slassic GM mk2 on Thomas Schick tonearm which i didn't like at all (and sold the cartridge).
I've noticed that for stereo 45s i preffer hi-end cartridges (MC), same that i use for LPs, my Technics MM cartridges also played 45s very well.
So i really doubt there is a dedicated cartridge for stereo 45s (7' inchers), but since the 45 groove is close to the spindle (like the last track on LPs) maybe STIVENSON'S protractor/alignment is better for 45s ?? |
Fleib, OC9II and ART2000 are slightly different:
Frequency Response: 15Hz-50kHz (OC9II) Frequency Response: 10Hz-50kHz (ART2000) *
Tracking Force: 1.25 - 1.75g (OC9II) Tracking Force: 1.7 -2.0g (ART2000) *
FULL SPECS OF ART2000 HERE: http://www.edsstuff.org/docs/atart2000.pdf |
Chakster, Best alignment for 7" 45's? Interesting question. The groove only spans about 30mm, roughly between 55 and 85mm from center spindle. Any conventional alignment will put the outer null off the record. Stevenson inner null - 60.325mm, Baerwald - 66mm, Loefgren B - 70.3mm. Stevenson or Baerwald?
Here's what I would do. 1) Go to Vinyl Engine and download a Chpratz protractor. Every self respecting turntablist should have one. It's just a calibrated straight line w/grid, but it comes in handy. 2) Buy or rig up a straight arm w/no offset like the ViV Rigid Float or similar. Don't want to spend $4K ? Find a straight arm with conventional headshell connection like Graham Robin or Stanton straight DJ arm. 3) Use regular SME type headshell(s). Mount the arm on a heavy pod or in such a way to get underhang null around 67mm. Set VTF and use no anti-skate.
You could easily swap carts and I'll bet it knocks your socks off. OR, use the Chpratz to find the best null. Regards, |
Flaib, are you serious when you advise "Stanton straight DJ arm." to user of REED 3P "12 tonearm ?
Or that was some vintage stanton tonearm that i don't know ? If you're talking about modern stanton short straight arm it is not only a very bad tonearm (like all modern products of stanton), but that kind of arms made for conical stylus profile only (or to kill the records) for those who call themself "turntablists" in the clubs. The ony one good dj product is Technics, but we're not talking about that kind of equimpent here.
I've seen ViV tonearm and i know some people are happy with it, but this is one of the ugliest tonearm that i know, especially headshell (sorry).
Anyway let's make it clear: 45 rpm (7' inch) invented by RCA in 1949 and later become a Radio Standard (apart from jukeboxes and club djs of course). I have many promotional 45s made especially for radio stations. Remember which tonearms did they used in Broadcast Studios in the 60s, 70s, 80s? Denon, SME, Technics, EMT just to name a few popular brands. Can't remember any straight tonearms without offset angle.
When i'm talking about Stivenson protractor i'm referring to his point that distortion in the end of the record is more important (this is where the 45s grove is as you stated correctly).
Acording to Van Den Hul interview MM cartridge is better to read high modulated 45 rpm groove.
|
Chapster, You have a 12" Reed ? Oh my, you must be the object of desire or envy of all the girls and boys. I guess it might be hard to separate humor from serious content, at least when we're discussing something as controversial as offset or not to offset. That is the question that coincides with 7" 45 alignment optimization.
Methinks it nobler to forgo offset here with such small groove span, but aesthetics dictate otherwise. You should seek out Robin. Gold plate it if you must, and you could always employ in the usual manner or sell it if you dislike it sans offset. The Chpratz protractor is real and invaluable when devising alternate alignments. I suspect Mr. Van den Hul's consideration was tracking/tracing ability, but you provide no explanation. If that is the case, things are a little different today with tracking ability. I would think 90um or greater would be more than sufficient.
Regards,
|
Flieb,
I believe I have read that interview that Charster refers to. I do get your humor! What is said in that review was the belief at 'that time'. Sort of like reading a report from some scholar back when the belief was that the World was flat! (grin) Just because some authority said it then, doesn't make it so today! |
Griffithds, you're right. Never had a problem to play 45s with MC on different tonearms. I lost any hope that somewhere can be a special cartridge dedicated for 45s. That's why i have mentioned rare 102SP which some people on agon identify as MM for Singles (in fact it was just for 78 rpm).
But tonearm alignment for 45rpm/7'inch singles still intriguing me.
Most of the rare 45s from independent labels (in the 60s/70s) never been issued in any other format and never been reissued in any format. |
Chakster,
Yes, I also have a few of those 45's. I own them but seldom play them. The getting up to turn them over or change them every 2 to 3 minutes (sometimes less than 2 minutes get a bit annoying. I thought about burning them to CD's but it is easier to just buy those old songs that are already recorded on a CD. Perhaps with this analog revival, someone will get the bright idea to do this type of reissue. |
Being a disc-jokey myself for the past 17 years, i love vintage 45s as the best format of vinyl to carry and play in the clubs. Just 3 min song but at least you got only what you're gonna spin, no additional tracks you don't like/need and no additional weight in the record bag/case. Pretty good format for traveling too (to bring 100 records for example).
LPs mostly for home listening in my case, anyway some of my favorite Latin tunes are LP only. I have a friends in Finland with Neumann SP-79 Master Console (with Neumann EQ’s, compressors and amplifiers), Neumann VMS-70 Cutting Lathe, Neumann SX-74 Cutter Head, Neumann SAL-74 Cutting Amps etc. Sometimes i just cut LP only tunes on 45 / 7 inch acetate (lathe).
Could be easy with digital, but i don't use digital and i don't like most of the digitally remastered reissues on vinyl. When i have ability to compare vintage original vs. digital remaster in most cases original is way better even if the vinyl surface is a bit worn. Probably because modern reissue labels (if it's not majors) doesn't care about proper mastering and cutting at the right place. Vintage 45s are just better recorded, mastered in analog way.
I'd like to check "direct to disc" mastering LPs, never heard them, hope i can find some jazz released with this technogy, i'm not into classical music. |
Chakster,
I own a couple of those 'direct to disc'. They are a step above standard analog but if you really want to hear the best there is in the analog format, try to spend some time with reel to reel master tapes. It honestly is hard for me to admit this, but it does put the sound of our records back into the dark ages. |
Reel to reel would be nice, but first i have to sell my soul to devil to make it more affordable in my area. Today i come across this article, maybe you have seen it before, this is an interesting quote:
"Kavi Alexander is monitoring disc production by comparing test pressings to the master tape. What cartridge is he using? Another moving magnet, this time the Technics EPC 100 MK IV. But he describes the Audio Technica ATML-170 as very similar, and very close to the actual sound of the tape. In this comparison, he says, virtually no moving coil does so well; most have seriously apparent colorations. "
Any thought about Audio-Technica ATML-170 ?
source: www.regonaudio.com/Stanton881AudioTechnicaATML70.html |
Fleib, et al. Some of these posts raise a question that has always lurked in the back of my mind: Do "specs" on a phono cartridge tell us anything about how one cartridge sounds compared to another? For many reasons, I have always assumed the answer is "no". The specs can tell us what voltage output to expect, roughly, and how to load the cartridge, but otherwise I never even think about comparing the published frequency response, channel separation, and distortion figures, to choose one cartridge vs another. The foremost reason for that is related to what Fleib pointed out; no two cartridges sound exactly alike, even if they are the same brand and model. |
Fleib pointed out: "no two cartridges sound exactly alike, even if they are the same brand and model."
It's a bit scary - no ? I hope you can't say the same about tonearms ? If they build in garage then maybe, but new hi-end products from one brand must be identical or nearly identical... when it's very hard to hear the difference. Otherwice it's not a hi-end production. If the quality is different from item to item then it's low quality production. Used items are different - i agree, but new items must be identical (i mean the sound for human ears, not specs on the paper). |
Lew, one possible exception regarding what "specs" tell us. Most MC cartridge specs show a rising high end, often above 15K. Some perceive that as added detail, others as objectionable brightness.
I believe that may be a basic difference between those who prefer MC and the many on this thread that found listening pleasure with MM or MI models. |
Lewm, a few years ago local distributor found a cache of NOS Denon 103D's in their warehouse. I went through all of them examining their supplied measured response graphs. None of them were the same, and I was able to pick one that had the most accurate response and best channel separation. The variance was quite noticeable between samples. |
Hi Lew, Certain specs can tell us something, especially within a context. How about MM/MI inductance? High inductance models tend to be mellow (Stanton 681 - 930mH) and lower inductance less so (881, 981 - 450mH). All 4-ch carts were low inductance for high frequency extension.
Within a line like AT we can often fill in the blanks if some specs are unknown. If an AT MM has 3.2Kohm impedance we know it has a 120/440/160/155/140 etc. type generator - 490mH. Output might vary by a mV or so due to magnet strength. That's the only difference between a 440ML OCC and a 440MLa. That could also tell us the type of stylus we might prefer on that model. An AT100E has almost identical specs as a 150MLX, so..... BTW, the design team that brought us the 50 and 150ANV and probably the ART7 and 9, redesigned the 350mH (150MLX) motor for the near budget 5V. It has 360mH and lower impedance.
Remember all the conjecture trying to figure out Clearaudio MM's ? I started a thread about that and since then CA scaled back the specs even more to where they're virtually identical to an AT95. At first some V2 models had greater output, but apparently that too is gone. The shocking thing about that thread was poster Kiddman: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1392385752&openfrom&1&4#1
Last year I posted a link to a magazine test (HFN?) of a Concerto. The tip was misaligned by something like 10° and the high end was absent. In all fairness, all their tests have high ends rolled at 15KHz, but this was a bit much. The reviewer said it was a rock cart. Funny name for a rock cart. I wonder what a good sample sounds like, but not enough to want one.
Regards,
|
05-25-15: Pryso Lew, one possible exception regarding what "specs" tell us. Most MC cartridge specs show a rising high end, often above 15K. Some perceive that as added detail, others as objectionable brightness.
I believe that may be a basic difference between those who prefer MC and the many on this thread that found listening pleasure with MM or MI models. Pryso - this is a gross generalisation and I think most participants in this thread are looking beyond that paradigm. In my case a have no aversion to MM's or MI's. I ran Shure V15V's in an Eminent Technology ET2 tonearm for a number of years and currently own a Glanz MFG61 and Victor X1 ( original with beryllium cantilever and shibata diamond ). I also own Dynavector Nova 13D, Koetsu Black, Denon 103D, Fidelity Research FR1mk3 & Ikeda Kiwame MC's. Both the Dynavector and Koetsu Black Goldline have a flat measured response and a lower published resonant peak than the Victor X1. In my system the Dynavector Nova 13D simply digs deeper than the Victor & Glanz - for example on massed choral work I hear clearly separated individual voices with variations in vocal tone and nuance on each voice, whereas the X1 simply does not have that level of resolution. The Koetsu Black is roughly on about a par with the X1, though a little smoother across the spectrum. In my view there are more serious challenges in amplifying moving coils - ringing in MC Transformers, Granularity in FET/Transistor MC gain stages and noise in all-tube MC gain stages. Similarly tonearms have a significant impact on the performance of individual cartridges. I have run most of my cartridges through multiple arms including Eminent Technology ET2, Naim Aro, FR64S & Dynavector 501 (all currently owned ) and SMEV, Alphason HR100, Zeta and a few others previously owned. I hear bigger differences between arms than between cartridges in the same arm in some cases. For MM's there are clearly big differences in perceived performance due to the impact of loading ( both capacitance & resistance) that many modern phono stages simply do not provide. In my view one can only get a semblance of understanding from a description on this thread of how a cartridge could sound if one can see arm/phono and the rest of the system, otherwise it is meaningless. Cartridge performance is very much a sum of the parts generated outcome. For the record I currently have running two turntables - Final Audio VTT1/Naim Aro/Dynavector Nova 13D ( this is my reference deck ) Platine Verdier (modded)/FR64S/Victor X1 & Koetsu Black Goldline in rotation. I also listen regularly to an Soundsmith Paua Moving Iron and Ortofon Rohmann MC, both are musically compelling and enjoyable to listen to. |
Dover, as far as i know all Denon carts are indeed different from sample to sample and that's why brands like Zu Audio sell hand selected (tuned) Denon mods. Anyway with a stock Denon price no one should complain. It's the cheapest mass production MC after all. But if the $5000 hiend MC from respected brands like Dynavector, Zyx whatever... would be different from sample to sample i would complain. This is a typical problem of DIY products made somewhere in the basement. |
Which Orsonic are you talking about? To my knowledge there are 3 kinds. For some strange reason they all have the same name: AV 101. But all 3 have different weight, strenght and construction. I own the heaviest kind and am, like Dover, very satisfy with its perormance. The nearest I know to the Arche made by our old friend Dertonarm. I even think that Dertonarm was inspired by the Orsonic for his own construction. |
Hi Dover, you make many good points.
My comment to Lew was indeed a "generalization" and was intended as such. Like you, and I'm sure many others here, I've found both good and bad among MM/MI as well as MC models over the years. I only mentioned the rising high end with many MCs because that has been discussed for so long.
Now your comments on the Koetsu Black Goldline caught my interest. I happen to have one among a collection of cartridges I picked up from a friend (and former dealer) who gave up on vinyl because of his age. I haven't installed it yet but your reference suggests I should move it to the head of the line. So thanks for that. |
Dear Nandric, Is it possible for you to weigh your heaviest Orsonic and let me/us know the result? I would be curious to know how it compares to my two AV101s. Let us know whether you weight with vs without the detachable yoke to which the cartridge is fastened. Thx.
Dear Fleib, i did concede that cartridge specs, most notably inductance and internal resistance are valuable for knowing how to load the cartridge properly, particularly as regards high inductance MMs. (I guess I did not say that last part in my earlier post.) But for pure sound quality (whatever that is), I never have paid much attention to stated frequency response, distortion, and channel separation specs (back in the day when such data were supplied with each cartridge). Whereas, Raul seemed to place a higher importance on such numbers. |
Lew, i don't onow if it helps but my Orsonic 11v weight 9.52 g. with two short cartridge mounting bolts and nuts, but without lead wires. This is the lightest Orsonic shell. |
Dear Lew, If my kitchen scale as well as my math are reliable then: 22-6 = 16g. I ever bought two of those MIT I carts and am more surprised by the cart weight (6g) then the Orsonic's. |
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Extremely-Rare-AKG-P100-Limited-Edition-MI-Cartridge-/252022528190?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3aadb698be
beware of foxtan |
Tubed 1, the pricing alone may serve as a caution to "beware".
But I wonder if you have any other reason to post your warning, such as bad business dealings? |
I noticed a AKG P100 box for $100. Much better deal! |
Hello, i'm back to this thread to ask for ADC Astrion now. The last auction for sealed nos ADC ASTRION on ebay ended @ AU $955 in June 2015 (wow)
The package looks great: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTg2WDY1OA==/z/B0YAAOSwBahVYteX/$_12.JPG
It's a bit shoking price for me as i have one NOS Astrion myself, but i don't have the right tonearm for this cartridge. It was in the Raul's list of interesting MM cartridges in the beginnings.
Any ADC ASTRION users here ?
Seems like it's a pretty RARE cartridge, top of the line ADC (Saphire cantilever etc). Comments by Eric who was the designer of the ADC in 1978-1982 here: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=305018&page=3
The designer of the previous model ADC TRX was Count Hisayoshi Nakatsuka (now ZYX owner). I wonder how is the ADC Astrion vs. ADC TRX ? |
Hello Chakster,
I recognize you moniker. Welcome back! I own the Sonus Dimension 5, the ADC Astrion, The ADC ZLM, and the ADC TRX 2. The TRX has a new Level 3 cantilever and stylus from Sound Smith. I woud rate then in this order. 1)TRX 2)Sonus Dimension 5 3) Both the ZLM and the Astrion. In some other system, the results could be different between 2 and 3 but not with #1 Hell of a cartridge with the Level 3 from S/S. Regards, |
Thanks Griffith Which tonearm do you use ? |
Hello Chakster,
I run two turntables and with different tone arms. The VPI Aires has the Graham 2.2. The JVC TT-81 has the JVC 7045. No preference regarding either one sonic wise. But I much prefer the JVC due to the cost of and ease of head shell changing. I only use the Sumiko/Jelco Magnesium head shells. Regards, |
Mounted my NOS ADC Astion few days ago to check it out in the second cheaper system on upgraded SL1210 (i have two of them) with grado preamps. Not sure if the cartridge need some more burn-in hrs, i put it on cardas burn-in LP for couple of nights. Anyway my used Technics EPC-100cMK3 cartridge creamed the new ADC Astrion. |
If you really want to hear what a good M/M cartridge can do then you need to buy a JVC X-1 MKII. Or you could get a JVC Z-1 and install Jico's SAS stylus in it. Either would have your Technics shaking in fear! (grin) |
No, i'm fine with my MC as the reference :) |
Chakster, "It's a bit shoking price for me as i have one NOS Astrion myself, but i don't have the right tonearm for this cartridge. It was in the Raul's list of interesting MM cartridges in the beginnings."
You were right the first time - don't have the right arm. Either does Griffithds unless his arm collection is more extensive than listed.
Raul was of the opinion that arm mass, bearing type, removable headshell or not, etc. didn't matter when mating to a cart. This was all based on resulting low frequency resonance and overall quality, like those are the only considerations. I think this mentality was adopted by most everyone posting here. Raul was wrong.
I'm not saying your comparison of the EPC100c MKIII to the Astrion would change, but you don't really know until you optimize the set up for each. What's the compliance of Astrion, 30 to 50cu?? I don't know but that wouldn't be unusual for ADC or Sonus. Pritchard's Sonus unipivot arm has eff mass of 4.1g - very low moment of inertia.
I've read about older ADC carts having dried up or semi functional suspensions, but if it tracks it probably needs more time. NOS means it's never been played and might require 50 hrs or more break in.
Regards,
|
Yeah, Fleib I use my cardas burn-in LP, cos i have no speakers in the second room (just headphones) where the Astrion mounted just on the sl1210 with silicon fluid damper. The cartridge was nos and i'm the first user. The deck was totally rewired with cardas and zu phono mission rca. It's a second system and i do not expect much. Once i brought this deck to main room and replaced my SP10 for a little while (with Reed 3p and Argent MC500 on it) i couldn't resist even 10 min of listening sl1210. Just proved myself it's a dark sounding turntable and not involving presentation compared to sp10 with Reed and Argent. Not sure which arm can change the sound of sl1210 to make this deck much better (i think it's just a waste of time and money).
ADC Astrion is probably good cartridge, my favorite Argent MC500 also comes with sapphire cantilever btw. I was very optimistic about ADC Astrion. Strange but in the scan of old review on vinyl engine they said even with 26g effective mass to earm the resonant frequency of Astion was 8Hz. They used it also on medium mass arms for review.
Not sure about Astrion compliance, but not as high as Sonus cartridges for sure! |
Chakster, I agree with you about the 1200. At least it runs at correct speed, even if the correction seems a bit abrupt. In the '80s many DJs brought in their decks for me to set up, and by invitation I went to a club to hear what it was all about. The SPL/bass was unbelievable. I had to stuff wet paper napkins in my ears. The 1200 seems perfect for that application. Not many decks without a 100 lb. plinth and some with one, could survive that environment, but the 1200 took it in stride.
With something like a turntable, you can't overcompensate with one parameter (damping) without affecting another, usually in a negative way. That is, if you're trying to reproduce the sound of live music. It's sort of like a belt drive with a heavy platter and inadequate drive train. It might have good deep bass, but sounds thick, slow and ponderous, not live, dead.
I have no experience with Astrion, but 8Hz w/26g arm suggests the exemplar is out of spec. VE lists VTF at 1.0 - 1.4g, Correct? Many top ADC have cu of 30 to 50. Perhaps the review was on a defective cart. That cart would have a cu around 12. Not likely.
BTW, some months ago KAB got a batch of NOS Astrions. Kevin was selling them for around $169 US. Some enterprising person probably resold them on fleabey - bargain hunters paradise!!
Regards, |
Everyone can download from my google drive ADC Astrion review (scan from the 80s magazine):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7SnhzDV__cCel9VT2ZpZTB1Y0U/view?usp=docslist_api
It's also on vinyl engine.
P.S. Kevin's little stock of Astrion sold out long time ago and his stuff does not contained original box, manual, individual test of the actual cartridge, tool etc (thats why ebay auction ended over $900). So that was from another source, a true nos collectible from the 80s. |
Just received a very nice Victor Z1s from jauce.com. A very interesting and useful resource but very fee intensive. Mounted the cartridge to make sure it was OK and it sounds great with the original NOS cartridge. Can't wait to receive the JICO SAS styli to hopefully upgrade it. |
Joined the Glanz club recently. It was the best find this year. Purchased locally from an old guy at the car service here in St.Petersburg for a very reasonable price in Mint condition. The man told me he owned 18 turntables and it was mounted on one of his Luxman delivered from Japan. This Glanz MFG 31L is the most musical MM cartridge i have ever heard. Mounted on ZYX LIVE-18 headshell in my second system. Simply amazing, this Muving Flux is really something. Can't beat my Argent MC500HS, but anyway the GLANZ MFG 31L is exceptional MM/MF in my opinion. |
For those keeping score at home, I believe that is the Astatic MF 200 equivalent. |
I too have a JVC/Victor Z1s on the way. This one has an upgraded stylus, an E. I have to thank Griffithds for an extended listen to both the X1 and Z1/SAS. Discussion of this is on Audio Circle, AT95 - Clearaudio thread. Results were promising for the X1, but I think a loose stylus compromised performance. I used some tack, but apparently not enough.
The SAS fit snugly on the Z1. I did use a tiny bit of damping on the body to prevent ringing, but not sure if it did anything. With SAS, this is a great MM IMO, not that it's perfect but what it does well it does very well and that's just about everything. It's fast and detailed with dynamics to die for. If you'll pardon a trite phrase, it brings the music to life.
Halcro pointed out that the SAS stylus VTF is 1.25 - 1.5g. I was tracking a bit heavier and reduced it to 1.4g with no mistracking. It seemed to get better. In an ultimate sense it might not be perfect with low level harmonics, but on the vast majority of my records (mostly acoustic jazz) nothing seemed amiss. In fact, the enjoyment factor tops the scale.
Regards, |
Welcome to the Victor 'cheer squad' Jbethree and Fleib. With the Professor, Griffithds and 'your truly' also belonging, it is not such an exclusive club anymore....and indeed, it needn't be as there seems to be hundreds of Z1 and X1 bodies in Japan available quite cheaply. Add the SAS stylus (possibly the most musical implant available today) and one has a cartridge which is every bit as incisive, emotional and mellifluous as the impossibly scarce Signet TK7LCa and Garrott P77/SAS. These four cartridges fight it out for 'playtime' chez-moi with the FR-7f/Lc LOMC on my Raven AC-2. The choices one must make...🙈👀 |