Yes, Acman3 Glanz 31L (line contact) equal to Astatic MF200 (shibata) according to Nandric experience. The MF200 raved by Raul before he discovered mega rare MF2500 (older and better model).
The Glanz top and very rare models: MF61 and MF71L If the 31L is so good i can expect 61 and 71 must be simply amazing. |
The Glanz top and very rare models: MF61 and MF71L If the 31L is so good i can expect 61 and 71 must be simply amazing. Not necessarily..... I had the 31L, 51L, 71L and M5 (integrated headshell) in my system all at the same time.... HERENot only was I underwhelmed by them all (considering the hype)...but the M5 was a mangy animal insistent upon excising any manner of realism and joy from the grooves it encountered. M5In the end I kept the 51L as sounding perhaps the best of the lot (albeit there was little audible differences between it and the 31L and 71L in my system). The left channel stopped operating after about 6 months of 'forced' ownership and luckily I don't miss it...💩 |
I have both the Glanz MFG61 and the Victor X1 with the original Beryllium cantilever/Shibata stylus. From my testing thus far the Glanz 61 is smoother in the top end and more refined than the Victor X1. I have not heard the Glanz Halcro refers to above and cannot comment on those. The X1 on my Platine Verdier/FR64S has a similar balance to my Koetsu Black, but is etched through the mids and a little brittle in the top end. The Koetsu sounds more relaxed and is more refined. The MFG61 mounted on a FR64S on my Final Audio VTT1 is much smoother and more refined than the X1, sounds like you are sitting a few rows further back in the hall. |
Everybody talking about SAS stylus as an upgrade over originals on several cartridges: Garrott, Victor/JVC, Shure, Technics and others. I have mentioned before that my experience with SAS is limited to the one made for Technics 205 series and to be honest i preffer the original stylys on Technics 205c mk4 and it was far more enjoyable than SAS. The only problem is to find original technics stylus in decent condition of suspension.
After this experience i'm not a fan of jico sas in my system.
As for the Glanz upper models i will report a bit later.
But with the cost of Glanz 31L in stock condition it is a winner at the moment. On Zyx Live-18 headshell it looks like they are made for each other, integraded very well. I will upload pictures later. |
Dover (and possibly others), is the MFG61 unusual in that it has a low compliance? Otherwise I have to wonder whether your impressions of its sound are "colored" by the fact that it is mismatched with the FR64S. I know Raul convinced many that the "rule" about matching compliance and effective mass is made to be broken, but I have to think there are some limits to the heresy he championed. Since all these judgements are subjective, it is nigh impossible to know where the limits apply, however. |
It would be nice if someone can email me Glanz MFG61 manual or any tech specs ? chakster45 on gmail
Lewm, this is not a low compliance cartridge, but higher compliance than 31L (which is a mid compliance itself). |
Lewm - short answer is I don't know because the Glanz MFG61 came in the original packaging minus the specs sheet. I ran the Glanz MFG61 in the FR64S with a light headshell and 170g counterweight to lower the effective mass as much as possible. Cantilever looked reasonably stable and centred in this set up. I also run the X1 with the 170g counterweight on the FR64S which was an improvement over the standard counterweight. If the Glanz MFG61 sounds better in a low mass arm than what I experienced then it would be an extraordinary cartridge. |
I brought up the question of arm mass numerous times on this thread. I'm unconcerned about low frequency resonance in the warp region, it either tracks or not, but I think there are SQ consequences using a high cu cart on a high mass arm.
VE has FR64S listed as 35g eff mass. Is this correct for the stock arm? I've heard the arm sound great with some moderate cu carts, but I wonder about high cu.
It could be no change using a high quality arm 1/5 the mass, but I suspect otherwise. Eff mass is the same as MOI (moment of inertia) and even with low bearing friction the mass seems to slow down response and make it sound different. What might be authoritative with one cart might sound thick with another? I think Raul was right concerning low frequency resonance, but that's not the only consideration. Peter Pritchard advocated 6.5Hz. Maybe this was for his 50cu carts, but the Sonus arm has 4.1g eff mass. MOI is extremely low. Hard to imagine how extreme mass wouldn't make a difference.
Regards, |
Could be wrong, but I did not think eff mass of FR64S was quite THAT high (35gm). I assumed it was in the 20-30gm range. Some of those data on VE are suspect, at best. Of course, one variable is the choice of headshell. I think the FR headshells can be quite heavy. So, maybe with the heaviest FR headshell, the eff mass of the FR64S could exceed 30gm. And if so, one can only imagine what is the eff mass of the FR66S, which some here have used with MMs. (I own an FR64S, but like Dover, I use it with a light-ish headshell. Only so far with a Koetsu.) |
Maybe it's a mistake. They have the 64FX listed as 20g eff mass. I thought they were the same except for internal wire. Perhaps that number should be for the 66?
I just hooked up my 980LZ - what a nice cart. Wish I had a better stylus for it. I suspect this would be a good candidate for stylus/cantilever upgrade, a Soundsmith level 2 or 3 might be just the ticket. Anybody try something like that? It will have to wait till I get the Z1 squared away. |
I thought the 64Fx was aluminium whilst the 64S is stainless steel.... |
Fleib,
I have both the 981LZS and the 981HZS. On the HZ I am using the D3500e stylus with excellent results (Stanton recommended replacement). I mention this because there is a NOS D3500e stylus for sale on flee/bay. Not cheap but it just might be the last NOS we'll see. Mine has very low hours of use so I will pass but in your case, I think I would go for it! Regards, Don |
Looks like our Italian friend is selling the Acutex 412 for $55. A very good price if you didn't get one a while back. |
Hi Don, Yes, I have a D3001e - .2 mil nude elliptical. Sounds good, outperforms a Jico D81 shibata. I'd rather try for something better. A .2 elliptical has the smallest contact area of any tip. All things being equal, will wear out fastest. I'm not thrilled with Stanton QC anyway and not sure about Pickering.
I can't help thinking this cart can deliver more. I already have the Pickering stylus holder, maybe it will improve with a ruby LC or micro.
Ever see David Dlaloum's web site? Check out the Pickering 7500 - same as 980LZ: https://sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/turt/cartridge-comparison-list/pickering-xlz-7500-s
Regards, |
Acman3
Hi Danny, I bought an Acutex 312IIISTR from the Italian seller. My friend and I were both highly impressed with the sound of such an inexpensive cartridge even in its day. Do you think the 412 is better? I have the Acutex 420, which is a little dry and analytical when compared to my very musical 320.
BTW my SAS for the Z1 is in LA customs, so it should arrive this week.
John |
John, I personally like the Acutex 312 more than the 412, but saw the Acutex 412 for such a low price and thought I would point it out. They are both pretty good.
I remember some liked the Acutex 412 better than the 312, but if you didn't like the 420, I would suspect you wouldn't enjoy the Acutex 412, but...... |
Regards, Jbethree: A comparison of the LPM 312 and 412 illustrates the qualities one might expect when describing typical qualities of a moving iron relative to a comparable moving magnet cartridge. In spite of being MM (as are all the 4xx series) the 412 retains the width and depth of soundstage demonstrated by the 3xx tri-pole Acutexes (Acutexi?) but is somewhat brighter.
As Acman3 (hi, Danny!) wrote; "They are both pretty good.".
Peace, |
Mmmmmm Acutex. One wonders what other Tri-pole design cartridges are out there? I know there are others..... |
I've been using an Acutex LPM320STRIII (heretofore to be known only as "LPM320") for quite some time now on my Lenco with Dynavector DV505 tonearm. The Acutex alternates with a still original Grace Ruby. At first, the Grace had the edge, but lately, after putting many more hours on the LPM320, which was NOS when I first mounted it, it has really blossomed. It now competes with the Ruby, but that I think is in part due to the fact that the Ruby is heading for a new stylus. (I also have that other Grace Ruby with the new SS OCL stylus that sounds BAD; I need to send it back to SS.) Has anyone tried the rocket-ship mount on the Acutex LPM series? Raul declared it was a downgrade from the P-mount, but I have to try it some day, just because it's so cool looking. I've got an M320 too, just sitting.
My 980LZS, also purchased "used", seems to be deteriorating a bit, but I've got an NOS 981LZS to replace it. The old-timer 980 got whupped by an Ortofon MC2000 (ex one of our colleagues here) riding in my L07D. What a quaint old collector type I have become! |
Hola!
I have forgotten, are the 4xx and 3xx styli interchangeable using the same body? I think I remember they were not.
John |
The styli are not interchangeable, as the 3xx series are IM where as the 4xx are MM
I found the 412 in my system was grossly too bright, and there were harsh sibilances even with resistive loading tuned down. Tried dampening fluid and playing with anti-skate and alignment to no avail. It has a nice soundstage and character though |
Ok, it's 1st of october and i can name new cartridge of the month now.
Seriously the GLANZ FM-61 is probably the best find so far! Thanks to all contributors in this thread.
This one beat every MM/MI i have owned before (including Technics 100cmk3 and 205cmk4, ADC Astrion, Glanz 31L ... ). This GLANZ 61 Moving Flux design sound way different from nice Glanz 31L. The MF 61 (by MITACHI CO., LTD) is their rarest and best cartridge with ultimate highs (this extended highs remind me a bit of top of the line technics). This is my new favorite cartridge.
It's been said before on here about GLANZ 61 by others:
"The MFG-61 with its special tiny stylus tip and boron cantilever may very well be the finest of the GLANZ MF carts."
"The MFG61 is certainly in MY top five or six cartridges. Don't have a 71L, Glanz 5 or 7 to compare so I will try to describe its sound relative to the MF200/MFG31L. It is more refined than the MF200 (which I like a lot) and slightly faster. Better leading edge attack and decays. The highs from the 61 are more three dimensional than most any other cart I own. Don't think I have ever heard better reproduced cymbals. Vocal textures are heavenly. The bass is where the 61 is suspect, at least with the five or six hours I have put on it. The deep bass does not have the control I like to hear. Powerful but a little wooly. It was NOS when I received it so it deserves another 20 hours to be fair. For all I know it may have the distortions of a Salvador Dali painting but it sounds good to me." - Steve Dobbins |
Need a new stylus for my ancient ADC XLM mkII, bought new in the 70s with a Philips 312 TT. Hasn't been used in 35 years.
The ViVid line stylus from LPgear looks promising, believe it is made for them by Jico. Does anyone here have any experience with the ViVid line or LPgear?
Thanks, John |
I have dealt with LPgear on several occasions with no problems at all. Their Vivid Line is available for several different cartridges, one being the AT 95. I have transplanted that AT Vivid Line into a Clear Audio Virtuoso with excellent results. It does take careful set up to eliminate IGD (inner groove distortion), but once you find the sweet spot, you will be quite happy with the results. Well worth the money! Regards, |
Jbethree, LP Gear says the vivid line is from someone other than Jico. I'm guessing Nagaoka, said to be the largest manufacturer of styli in the world. The price of Jico shibata is now about $140 and Gear is replacing all the Jico shibata with vivid and they claim identical tip dimensions.
I have read a couple of complaints, but mostly raves. Turntable Needles might have a shibata if you decide on one of those. Regards, |
Some interesting read below from posts about our favorite stylus's.
muovimies said: ↑ AFAIK the actual manufacturer of Jico styli (at least the diamonds, perhaps the cantilever as well) is Namiki, what their relationship with Jico is I have no idea - it's possible that Jico is their subcompany for making the rest of the stylus assembly or marketing the aftermarket styli, or it could be Jico is a completely separate entity that just happens to source their stuff from Namiki. Namiki also makes the AT styli, and interestingly enough the last I checked Jico doesn't offer advanced styli for AT carts. Also the SAS looks very similar to the Audio Technica MicroLine stylus - it seems either it's identical or a variation of it. Namiki Jewel make (and originally designed in the 1980's) the SAS/ML/MR stylus tip - all pretty much the same thing, with different names by the companies Namiki supply it to. Microridge is Namiki's original name for it, SAS is Jico's name for it, and Microline is Audio Technica's name for it. Other companies including Dynavector, Grace, Lyra, Shure and a few others I've forgotten used Namiki's microridge name as well, but Namiki is the only company with the technology to make the most advanced ridge-type shapes. They almost certainly have agreements with cartridge manufacturers which buy their tips that they don't supply them to aftermarket manufacturers to make cheaper aftermarket styli for their cartridges, as it wasn't until Shure stopped making microridge styli (due mainly to their beryllium cantilevers no longer being available), that Jico offered SAS styli for the Shure V15's (III, IV, V and Vx) which had previously had Shure MR styli. Likewise, you'll notice that Jico doesn't offer SAS stylus options for AT cartridges which have ML tips - they're obviously prevented from making them by Namiki or AT, or both, since they have the technology, and the Namiki-made tips.
Namiki also made (and helped design with JVC) the Shibata tip for JVC (and others) in the 1970's. So it's almost certain that they make other stylus tip shapes as well as the advanced shapes.
muovimies said: ↑ Shibata is patented by another company, was it Victor / JVC if I recall correctly? I don't know how long patents like that are valid in Japan, but if they still have to pay for making it and using the name, that might explain the relatively high prices of Shibata styli. The "VividLine" dimensions seem very close to the original Shibata dimensions (VividLine 5x76µm vs Shibata 6x75µm) so I think it's possible the VividLine is a clone/variation of the Shibata shape that they don't have to pay any royalties for. There's also a 2nd variation of the Shibata stylus with a smaller major radius (something along the lines of 50µm) that is used at least by Ortofon in some of their cartridges. Yes, it was JVC, who designed (in conjuction with Namiki) the Shibata stylus for the CD-4 quadraphonic system they designed with RCA, and it was named after the JVC engineer responsible, Norio Shibata. While testing it, JVC discovered it had advantages for stereo reproduction as well, including lower distortion, lower stylus wear, and lower record wear, so they patented it.
That's the reason why many other cartridge manufacturers had to design similar extended line contact tips, to avoid paying higher prices to use the Shibata, so we had Hyperbolic (Shure), Hyperelliptical (both Nagaoka and Shure used that name), Parabolic (EEI/Elite Electronic Industries), Pramanik (B&O), Quadrahedron and Sterehedron (Pickering and Stanton), Van den Hul (A.J. van den Hul), PARabolic Oval Cone/Paroc (Dr Weinz). Ortofon have sourced stylus tips from a number of different suppliers over the years, including Fritz Gyger, van den Hul and Namiki (who made the Shibata).
muovimies said: ↑ Btw. I think there at least used to be another big company still making styli besides Namiki, I think it was probably Nagaoka since they also marketed a lot of replacement styli in the past - don't know if they still do in Japan. Probably they at least make their own diamond tips. Ok here's a quote from their website: As the main manufacturer of this kind in Japan, we produce diamond styli. The machining process involves first joining a diamond to a metallic titanium shank in a vacuum deposition furnace, then polishing the diamond to a circular cone and shaping the tip to a radius of 15 microns. Like a lot of companies which diverted into audio equipment manufacture, Nagaoka were originally a jewel company like Namiki, cutting jewels for watch bearings, and it was a natural progression into cutting diamond stylus tips, as a lot of the Swiss stylus masters (e.g. Fritz Gyger) did.
It was rare that cartridge manufacturers made all parts of their cartridges – most contracted out parts to specialists, and the only manufacturer who made everything in their cartridges was Nagaoka. In 1981 they made more than 70% of the styli on sale in Japan, despite only having a 5% share of the Japanese cartridge market (source Nagaoka’s International Operations Director, 1981). So the styli they made also appeared in many other Japanese cartridge brands, although of course they didn’t say who! So it’s a fair bet that they still make styli for other manufacturers too, although being a large company, audio isn’t the only thing they do.
Regards, |
Thanks Griffithds, very cool.
Where did you happen across this info? |
Acman3,
I discovered it on one of the forums that I visit quite some time ago. I do not remember which one but due to all the information contained within, I filed it away in a folder on my laptop under stylus! I do wonder why there was no mention of Denon/Highphonic in that discussion. They use on some of their cartridges a cantilever made of aluminium, magnesium, titanium, and Silicon Carbonate. I have often wondered who makes that one because I have found it to be an excellent cantilever. Andy of Needle Clinic, can provide that one also but has not revealed where he gets it. Hopefully there is someone who can chime in with some additional information to fill in some of the blanks! (grin) Regards, |
These Goldring 800 replacement styli are once again available. It's been quite awhile since this was the cartridge of the month but it is still a tremendous bargain combo. Not the last word in bass impact but it tracks like crazy, the imaging is high and deep with lots of air around the instruments. Just listened to 'Born to Run'. Bruce and the Big Man never sounded more real. It has a Shibata type diamond tip, made by Astatic.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GOLDRING-NEEDLE-D110ESE-FOR-CARTRIDGE-G-800-SUPER-E-USE-ASTATIC-GO-100-QD-/221886116799?hash=item33a97173bf
|
Griff, The company left out of that post is Ogura. They make the stylus/cantilever on many high end carts including ones from Lyra, Dynevector, etc. Most of their tips are generically called linetrace or micro types. They make a tip called pathfinder - might be the same as PA ?
Anyway, it seems Namiki, Ogura, and Nagaoka are the big 3. I think Nagaoka might make bonded styli exclusively. Even the boron MP300 has a bonded stylus and maybe the MP500 ? It could be that Jico gets SAS from Namiki (made to spec) and others from Nagaoka, but this is conjecture. They are jewel setters.
I read that the patent ran out on the microridge, but who else would tool up to make it? The shibata II was probably patented around the same time as microridge. With the resurgence, cart manufacturers might be scrambling for contracts? Patents usually don't stop an audio manufacturer anyhow. They just call it something else. Regards, |
Jbethree I had Axel install one of his last Beryllium/Shibata cantilever's on a Goldring G800. It is one of the cartridges that I will never sell. NEVER! That cartridge truly has a great generator. I might have to buy one of these Astatic's to keep (just in case). (grin) Thanks for the tip! Regards, |
Neo,
I have a Nagaoka MP50 Super which is a square shank nude mounted 'in' a Sapphire tube but this is not something currently being produced. I think Nagaoka is capable and does produce anything that the market requires, just not on their current line of cartridges. Your comments in regards to 'patents' is a good point. I bet with this new wave of vinyl interest, they are scrambling to just fill the contracts that they already had! Sort of makes me smile! (grin) |
Last night i have mounted Glanz MF61 on Reed 3P "12 and was blown away. Before i have tried Glanz in my second system on lighter arm, but with Reed (18g effective mass) it's much much better.
The only think is missing is the manual of this cartridge! Would be nice if someone can share (chakster45 on gmail).
|
Griffithds,
Four out of ten have sold since I made my post. I hope fellow forum members snap these up. I agree that the G800 has a great generator.
Best,
John |
Picked up two since your post. |
Jbethree, thanks for the notification about the availability of replacement styli for the Goldring 800. I've had an 800 body for a few years now, waiting.
I have thus far played only a few LPs with one of these Astatic NMR "Quad Diamond" styli, but am very glad I picked one up. At this very early point it sounds like a winner combination.
Thanks again. |
Dean_man,
I'm glad you're enjoying it. The bass is better than I originally thought but not the very best. Love the detail and separation. Wish the soundstage was somewhat wider but still well worth the money.
John |
|
^^^^My Post above is about the Astatic MF series.
I didn't realize that it would show the link to one of the photos in the title. |
Hello Ottoman78, I have a NOS MF-100 that I haven't listened to in awhile, as well as an SME 3012 as referenced in your photographed OEM doc. I'll mount it shortly for comparison to my current reference Ortofon MC2000 and AT ART7 MCs. |
Two carts for sale: http://www.ebay.com/itm/231749676413?rmvSB=true&afsrc=1&rmvSB=true
http://www.topclassaudio.com/web/eng/used_product_details.jsp?gid=7825 |
Dover, I sent you a pm through Audiogon. Did you get it? |
Dear friends: I can read that many of you are motivated enough for the JVC X1 cartridge.
lLewm posted that I never talk about but I did it years ago on this forum and what I posted was:
" I bought a JVC TT/tonearm that came with a JVC cartridge already mounted. When arrived and to my surprise that cartridge was/is the X! top of the line that sounds really good and that I was looking for for years and never get it. Was a surprise because cartridge when mounted we can read its model because it's in the cartridge top plate. Well, in those times I found out in Europe the last and only one in the world NOS MK2 stylus that Nandric made me the favor to bought it for me and this is the version I have.
The Z1 that I own too is really a very low level cartridge it does not matters that in theory both has same cartridge motor. Difference is night and day on quality performance. Same with the SAS stylus that I have.
Normally top/premium manufacturer cartridges ( same other model motors ) are truly different because its quality construction/materials and very tight tolerances even the stylus is different in quality because are hand selectd as the whole cartridg is, stylus is better polished than the other models.
My X1-MK2 is a serious challenge even to the Astatic 2500.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Well, in those times I found out in Europe the last and only one in the world NOS MK2 stylus
Perhaps mine is the illegitimate 'forgotten' one from Japan? http://i.imgur.com/DOtiqTR.jpgFrom where incidentally.....they were all made and sold initially 😜 |
Halcro, that is also the real deal. |
Some months ago I bought a Signet MR5.0 ML I really bought it for the beryllium/ML stylus, hoping it still has life. The MR5.0 series has a 490mH generator similar to a 440/120 or a 155, 160 etc. I lucked out on that one. The stylus sounds good on another body, but the old generator does not. It does not measure well either. My experience with the Victor carts is quite different from Raul. I've only tried one X1 on extended loan. It had an original beryllium/shibata I believe. The Z1/SAS dramatically outperformed it. It wasn't close. Maybe the X1 wasn't at its best or maybe Raul's Z1 performed like my MR5.0.
|
Dear Halcro: Yours is not the XI.MK2 but the IIE that was not the latest version and top of the line . Different models for sure.
Maybe you could fine another NOS MK2 like mine but I try very hard to find out another sample with out luck. Try it and if you are lucky a get one you will see and heard the differences on both models.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Fleib: Problem with vintage and even today cartridges is something that I think you posted: there is no two exactly the same.
Through the years in this thread I posted many times the differences on two same model samples in my system.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
A few years ago, Nandric scored a NOS X-1 MKII. It was I who purchased it for him from the Jauce auction site in Japan. It was therefor sent to me and I forwarded it to him. I spent quite a bit of time listening to it and did determine that it sounded better than my X-1 MKII. Mine obviously must of had much use. But when compared to the Z-1 SAS, the differences were not that apparent. I spent many hours trying to determine their differences. In the purest sense, the X-1 is slightly more open sounding. But overall, they are so close in performance to each other, that I had on several occasions, had to get up and go over the the turntable to see which of the JVC's ( whether it was the X-1 or the Z-1 SAS), that I had mounted. But finding a good X-1 is nearly impossible. Finding a replacement Beryllium cantilever actually is impossible. But finding a Z-1 is easy with an unlimited supply of SAS stylus's available from Jico. For me then, the decision as to which is the more desirable (the Z-1 SAS), becomes quite easy to decide. The X-1 has a Beryllium cantilever. Japan stopped manufacturing the Beryllium cantilevers due to environmental reasons. So JVC stopped producing the X-1 and came out with the Z-1 which has a Borron cantilever. Same generator, same stylus, but they removed the flip down stylus guard from the body. It became their new top of the line cartridge. So what you really are comparing between the two is the difference between the Beryllium/Shibata and Jico's Borron/MicroRidge. Regards, |
Dear friends: The Halcro sample has no Shibata stylus but eliptical one and its construction/specs are different because the X1 with shibata stylus was designed in that way for 4-channel that needs a wide open frequency response at the up part of the frequency spectrum. Exist real differences between the Z-1 and X-1 shibata stylus and where both were marketed with berylium cantilever in Japan? Yes and not only because the higher X-1 price but because true different performance that we can see and read here ( we can read that both models were not available in Canada and USA, at least according with the information. ): file:///C:/Users/Rub%C3%A9n/Downloads/ve_jvc_x1%20(4).pdf The Halcro version is totally different, even does not " say " JVC but Victor and does not has the 4-channel sign. JVC designed several MM cartridges ( more MC than MM ) and exist too the Z-4 models and the 4-MD models ( I own the top one on this series. ). As I posted I was and am lucky enough to get the X-1 and latter on the MK2. In the other side, the quality of all the SAS stylus replacement were manufactured to an specific price point ( IMHO not top quality. ) and many times with out to much knowledge of the cartridge overall charactheristics. You can read read here what's happening about and the experience of that Agoner is exactly the one I had with the same cartridge with dedicated SAS replacement: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/telarc-1812-revisited-2 Regards and enjoy the the music, R. |