Lewm, I guess you have to try the L-07D original arm at original "closed loop" place and compare to other tonearms. I got an impression from L-07D forum that secondary tonearm is not really an improvement, but everybody has to try and decide for himself. Even if you install another tonearm into closed loop (original) position it might give it different treatment than L-07D arm. Tricky subject, only trial and error will tell. |
Dear Lewm,
All I know for certain is the 1000 ZE came out a couple of years before the 1000 ZE/X. There is a High Fidelity magazine test on the 1000 ZE.
Perhaps the X version means Empire mounted the diamond nude onto the cantilever-- it seems like that technology was just coming into use at that time and also, Empire did advertise how the X had a nude-mount for its diamond (i.e., no brass cylinder between the diamond and cantilever, for less moving mass).
The two bodies appear to be the same, so I would expect one can put in even an ERD stylus and see what happens. I do not know if inside, the coils have the same inductance as the X version.
I do know there are no marks on the stylus assemblies which would identify different versions.
Best regards, Roy |
Addendum: Sorry, I should also have mentioned that I just bought an Empire off ebay that is also said to be a "1000ZE", NOS in its original box. The seller never has responded to my query regarding the "X" designation. So now I have two questions: Where does the X come from? How does the X designation relate to the discussion of factory original vs replacement styli that was initiated I think by Royj above? When I googled "1000ZE" all I could find were references to the 1000ZE/X. Moreover, the Empire factory manual available on Vinyl Engine, which shows all their products as of the late 1960s (I think), makes no mention at all of a 1000ZE; only the 1000ZE/X is shown. And finally, the cartridge I bought looks exactly like photos of the 1000ZE/X on VE, color scheme and all. The proof will be in the pudding when I finally receive the thing so I can look to see whether the X is engraved on the stylus assembly. |
Thank you Siniy, but if you read above you will see that I have been using the M20FL Super for most of my listening for at least the past month. I like it too and would agree with your verbal description. Perhaps you are suggesting I should try it in the L07D, and I do plan to do that when I finally get my motor and power supply back from Howard. I just had the platter buffed out, because there were some slight corrosion marks in the anodizing around the rim, and it looks like new. I have a secondary armboard for the L07D, from Vantage Audio, and cannot decide whether to mount a DV505 or my Triplanar on it. All my listening to the M20FL Super so far has been in the DV505 with factory headshell and mounted on my slate-plinth Lenco. It has been said that the factory tonearm weakens the L07D performance. Not that it is bad per se but just that it is not up to snuff with the rest of the package. What do you think? (Sorry, I do tend to wander OT.) |
Lewm, I found M20Fl Super to be very enjoyable on L-07D. More at home with natural sounds (jazz, classics, rock) than The Prodigy. It is quite polite with hard stuff, but not ridiculously so. Huge and enveloping sound stage. I've set the tonearm to lowest possible heights since M20FL is only 14.6 mm. It was almost a flat VTA. 1.5 g. VTF, anti skate is 1.5. Given its accessibility I recommend to try it in your system and decide if it fits you music and mood. |
Dear Lewm: +++++ " ut also this leaves the Empire 1000 as the finest sounding cartridge that Raul has ever heard in his system. (It's the only one that got a rank of 9, far as I can recall.) " +++++
well not exactly, other that the Sonus Dimension 5 I has more than 15 cartridges that I have to test again and that due its high quality performance potential I think could belong to that 9 range level and beyond it ( 10 or 10+. ), that's why I leave the 10 range empty. We will see.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
My Empire 1000 cartridge label reads 1000 ZE without the X. The stylus assembly is black and reads EMPIRE with the little round logo under it. The cantilever is rather broad with no real noticable taper to the eye. Compared to the cantilever in my Empire 4000 D/111, it looks large and clunky but it is very similar to the cantilever in my Empire 999VE with the older style tapered stylus assembly like on the 800 series. The cantilever on my later Empire 999VE/X with the stylus assembly like that of my Empire 1000 ZE is thinner and shorter. I have the original manual for the 999VE and the stylus replacement is S 999VE ERD Purple. NO X. Maybe Empire changed the cantilevers in later versions of a same model and added the X to designate that? Just tossing that out for some thought.
I found a copy of High Fidelity's 1974 test reports and the 1000 ZE/X was tested and reviewed. The interesting parts are: The Empires response cure looks far more like that of an amplifier than that of a "speaker." Speaker must be a typo because it goes on to say: It is flat within a couple of db over most of the audible range, even at the extremes it deviates by only 3db from the 1KHZ rsponse level. The curves shown here, incidentially, were made with a 300pf input capacitance, shunted by the normal 47,000 resistor. Those who read our report on the V15 Type 11 Improved will remember that a similar capacitance was required before that cartridge would perform up to it's full potential. Without the capacitance the 1000 ZE/X exhibited some 20KHZ resonance and a slight dip in response below that resonance and consequently fell a bit short of meeting it's response specifications. Compliance spec'ed at 35 lateral and 25 vertical. The stylus tip is listed as an elliptical 0.2 X 0.7 mil but in the lab it measured 0.3 X 0.7 mils. To track the most demanding CBS test cuts the VTF needed was 1 gram in the SME arm. ( no SME model mentioned) In home listening we finally settled on 0.75 gram using the arm on a Lenco L-75. Vertical angle measured by CBS Labs was 20 degrees. The listening test resulted in a "superb."
I can agree with the 300 pf or somewhat higher capacitance for the V-15 type ll because when I got mine new it sounded honky or nasal to me. I now remember finding the above report and reading it. I soldered 100pf caps across the preamp inputs and that nasal quality went away.
While I'm here and typing, I also found an original manual for the Ortofon M15 Super. Wasn't there some conjecture that maybe it's the same body as the M20FL and VMS20? The pic on the front looks like the M20FL except for the model designation on the stylus assembly. It was available in an elliptical or spherical. It's interest that the spes for both are the same except for the stylus tip size. Cartridge weight 5 grams, output at 1KHZ per cm/s 0.8 mv + - 1db, internal impedance 750 mh, recommended load impedance per channel 47Kohm, tracking angle 15 degrees, frequency response 20HZ to 20KHZ, frequency response + - 1db 20HZ to 10KHZ, channel separation at 1KHZ 25db, channel balance 2db, compliance horizontal 50 x 10-6, vertical 30X 10-6, trackability at 300HZ 1 gram tracking 80um, FIM distortion at 1 gram tracking < 1%, trackling force range 0.75 to 1.5 gram, recommended tracking force 1 gram, stylus tip radius elliptical 18/8 um, spherical 15 um. Replacement sylus D15E Super, D15 Super. |
Dear Timeltel: Do you already try a " high " VTA/SRA with that cartridge? how high? performance differences?
Thank's.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Timeltel,
You are right about several things: The original stylus is S-1000 ZE/X. The later stylus is S-1000 ZE/X-ERD. I was wrong when I wrote "EDR" instead.
Instead of trusting my memory, I now just took a look at my inventory. The new ERD stylus I have was still in its original Empire walnut box inside its cardboard box labeled "...ERD". I have six of those styli (some new, most of unknown hours) and one original, along with three bodies (I recall one body is dead on one channel).
The original stylus I see has a 30% longer! cantilever than the ERD-version. The original cantilever is also larger in diameter, more like what we see on a Shure or Sonus/ADC from that era. The ERD-version has a very-much thinner cantilever, very thin like the MP-50 or the B&O MMC 4000/6000- like only a whisker. Not tapered at all though, as with the Empire 4000-series cantilevers.
So, I must reverse my previous comments: the ERD-version should reveal more low level information than the original because it makes the end of the cantilever move farther in the magnetic field for a given groove modulation. That would also increase the cartridge's output over the old one, unless Empire also reduced the size of the magnetizeable piece at the end of that cantilever. And they probably did, to reduce the moving mass and to also fit on the end of the much smaller-diameter ERD cantilever. After all, the output was already high enough in the old version.
The ERD-version still may have a different VTA than the original because it is shorter in length. It should track better in the highs, from having less moving mass. Its compliance seems about the same as the original-- quite high. The diamond itself may be ever-so-slightly smaller in its base-diameter than the original stylus.
I might be able to provide close-up photos if someone sends me an email... In that photo link I posted above, the image is definitely of the original one if you would like to compare that to an ERD version. You can see its cantilever is a little 'fat'.
Can I compare the sound between the two? I will try sometime, but on the only original 1000 stylus I have, the cantilever no longer angles downwards nearly as far from its housing as it should-- I think it is on its way to full collapse (I bought it used).
Best regards, Roy |
We should all remember that 'a proper tracking force' should also center the magnetic armature (at the far end of the cantilever) in its magnetic field, no matter how the cartridge works.
This is best seen by looking at the side of the cartridge as it rests on the record. At some value inside the manufacturer's recommended tracking force range, we should expect to see the cantilever make a right angle with the front pole-piece of a moving coil cartridge, or in the case of a moving- or induced-magnet design, be parallel to the direction the brass sleeve around the cantilever assumes inside the cartridge body.
Best regards, Roy |
Thank you, Raul. I am glad to be here. And my thanks for the information on capacitance. Your values are what I expected, but I shall look for others to respond also, since it will be a little while longer before I can try.
Regarding any ranking of cartridges... for myself in the past, the best way to compare was to at first play perhaps only six records that I knew well, selected for clarity, image, tracking, bass, tone balance, VTA, dynamics, etc.
However after that, what has always counted the very most was to then just let other beloved LPs (not necessarily 'audiophile' ones) simply play under a cartridge, without paying any 'audiophile attention' to their sonic details- just going about my work while listening and enjoying.
After a few days or sometimes a full week of playing many different records, my subconscious always told me something more about the cartridge, most often about simply its overall musicality, and sometimes about its other strengths or failings. Once my subconscious finally let me know about 'something', then I could listen critically for 'that', which sometimes to a little more effort in finding how best to listen for 'that', using almost any record.
I think it is easy to not allow our subconscious minds to participate. This takes more time admittedly (and a calm lifestyle I would add). But I do believe this is at the heart of the problem for those who insist on quickly changing between components to compare, such as when using some DBT methods-- useful in some ways, but often less so than learning what the subconscious tells us.
Best regards, Roy Johnson Designer Green Mountain Audio
|
Greetings, All. Royj, I give homage to your level of involvment concerning this subject. Our posts crossed on the moderators' desk. My response to Axel is in regard to the S1000ZE/X-ERD, and is from information provided by Empire. The ERD designation extends to the 90EE/X at 15-25,000 freq. resp., replacement stylus S90E/X-ERD. It should be clarified for others who read this that the information you relate is concerning the EDR and this knowldege is new to me. Thank you.
|
Regards, Axel: Raul is correct, this is the code for the replacement stylus. "S" designates stylus, "E" for elliptical, "D" for diamond. Example: S909/X-RD is spherical, S1000ZE/X-ERD is a hand polished .2 x .7 mil. micro elliptical diamond. For the specified cartridge, freq. resp. 4-40,000, output 5.0 mv, VTF 1/4 to 1 1/2 gm., 15 deg. TA. JICO offers replacement styli. For your consideration, this data suggested HF blending might be enhanced by reducing tracking force and lowering the VTA. I enjoy mine at 0.8 gm downforce and with a slightly negative VTA to compensate for SRA deflection resulting from a previously greater (1 1/16 gm.) VTF. Detail and transients are improved but a consequential less remarkable bass may not be to your taste. |
Dear Lewm: Like a year and a half from now some people ask me ( posted in this thread. ) for a MM/MI cartridge ranking, even one or two of them really push in that direction, I decided that due that I have not enough experience on this " new " alternative and that I don't try yet many cartridges I can't make a cartridge performance ranking.
After all these two years/long, fun and learning process where I not only tested more cartridges but thank's to each one of you experiences/feedback in the thread I decide that maybe it is time to beguin with an enunciative cartridge performance ladder.
What makes me to choose a 10 range steps ladder was pecisely the complexity of the subject and the diversity of the cartridges ( I own more than 60 different ones and growing up!. ). As exist different levels on " bad " as exist different levels on " good " " very good " or whatever. Even with " only " ten steps I'm in problems with a more precise ranking.
As any ranking evaluation my choose can't leave everybody happy as can't leave everybody happy which cartridges I rank on which performance range step on that ranking ladder.
As I posted my ranking could help to some people and maybe can't help to other people: these facts are not on argueing.
Right now I'm on a detailed each step information and main step cartridge characteristics.
I have to say that this is my very first attemp on the subject and over the time I will try to make it more precise for can help to a wide range of people.
The cartridge ranking has all my experiences and knowledge on audio music I have, I'm not biased or have any kind of preferences other than MUSIC and as better is your system as near will be your own experience with that cartridge ranking.
This is only a point to start and through your own experiences along mine we all can help to enrich that quality performance ranking ladder.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Roy: Welcome aboard.
Your post is facinating for say the least and gives us a in deep information ( especially on the Empire subject. ) where we have so many doubts and that now we have the right answers, thank you for that.
I'm using only the cable capacitance to run my cartridges: 100-150pf but like you say this value is system dependent and we have to try and find out which value is best for each one of us.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Royj,
Wow and I am grateful for your presence. I will watch your discoveries and contributions with real interest.
I think this is the type of thing (first hand experience, humbleness and a willingness to continue to learn) that makes Audiogon a great site.
Thanks |
Axel
If you look at the manual on vinyl engine the replacement stylus is listed as S1000ZE/X-ERD.
So you have the correct one.
So is this the new Emperor ? |
I have both types of Empire 1000 ZE/X styli here. The Empire 1000 ZE/X original replacement stylus is marked as Raul says. The EDR (Extended Dynamic Range) version I see in front of me has a longer cantilever, which I presume allows it to swing wider amplitudes without the other end leaving the magnetic circuit's main region of focus (= Extended Dynamic Range). In the late 70's, I think it was easier for Empire to simply offer that EDR version as the 'right' replacement, as it was likely the same cantilever and elliptical stylus assembly as found on their Empire 4000 series-- they did not have to tool up to build any of the originals anymore. In the image at the following link, the cantilever's length matches the original Empire styli I have here (I do not know whether these people are selling an original Empire stylus assembly, nor if what they send you would be the EDR version): S-1000 ZE/XBecause the longer EDR cantilever's far end will move around in the magnetic circuit less on any stroke than the original stylus, that should reduce the output by perhaps 10%. I would not be surprised if the VTA is different. Mostly I see a potential for the EDR assembly to not allow the cartridge body to generate very small signals quite as well, since smaller motions are transduced less well by a magnetic circuit. I appreciate everyone's hard work in this matter, and I look forward to contributing as well. But I won't be able to compare the differences between the Empire styli for a while longer, nor my MP-50 and others, but I shall report back. The most likely turntable for this will be our Micro Seiki BL-91 with a "Platter Matter" mat and its MA-505II arm into a Croft Vita tube preamp. Part of the delay is that I must first change the load in the Croft from 47k to 100k, and of course, figure out what capacitance I have in the cables and input circuit. I have several headshells to try- magnesium ones from Micro and Nagaoka, and the ADCOM carbon-fiber one as well. I do highly recommend the Platter Matter mat, which come up on eBay from time to time-- mine is green/blue. Wash it with dish soap once it awhile, and it sticks to the LP's vinyl as if there was a vacuum system employed- dead but quite firm. Dampens aluminum platters well. Short background- I bought my first Empire 1000 ZE/X in 1971. Eventually it went to someone else as I began working full-time in the audio industry- first in retail, later in manufacturing, then back into retail, then into pro sound, then finally to manufacturing for now 20+ years. From 1971-1983, I had daily experience with almost every high-end cartridge out there, including those from A-T, B&O, Dynavector, Empire, Grado, Goldring, Nagaoka, Nagatron, Ortofon, Satin, Shure, Signet, Supex... Osawa was the importer for Nagaoka back then, and our consistent opinions of Nagaoka (Osawa-branded at first) in that retail store, was that the Nagaoka MP-11 was fine for most people, as it sounded good and did not tear up records, the MP-20 was much more clear, the MP-30 a little bit bright but even better, and the MP-50 very quick and detailed with only a small hint of brightness. But back then, although alignment, VTA, and capacitance were being set as we all do now, we did not have much opportunity to change loading to 100k. We typically used Thorens, H/K, and Micro Seiki turntables, usually into Mitsubishi, SAE and Harmon/Kardon preamps. In my own system at home, I first replaced the Empire with an ADC XLM in 1973 (I don't know why- the lure of having the 'latest technology' I think). In 1974, I changed to a Sonus Blue Gold (a better-sounding ADC I remember thinking), and then to a B&O MMC6000 in 1975 (because I thought its super-wide bandwidth would be important, but its sound seemed bland/polite). I followed that with a Goldring 900-SE in 1979 (great) and then switched to the MP-50 in 1980 (liked it a lot), followed by the original ADCOM XCLT in 1981 (really great). Finally in 1983, I switched to a Garrot Brothers-modified Panasonic strain-gauge cartridge (van den Hull stylus/boron cantilever) into a Jeff Rowland strain-gauge preamp (marvelous). The original stylus assembly of the Panasonic did not track loud high-frequencies, such as on the Harry James' Sheffield discs. I stayed with this latter setup until 1993, when I stopped using turntables on a daily basis (by then, at the factory - too much dust). Over the last few years, in anticipation of setting up the turntable for regular use again, I purchased a lightly used MP-50, an ADCOM XC-E, several complete Empire 1000 ZE/X cartridges (as there seemed to be some 'slop' in the way the stylus assembly fit into some bodies) and a couple of spare 1000 styli (hence seeing the ERD difference). I still have the Strain-Gauge system (which needs a new diamond) and a Signet medium-output moving coil, so there will be lots to listen to... I hope this information helps and I look forward to contributing later this Winter! Thanks to everyone participating in this thread. By the way, can anyone remind me what capacitance (total) they have come to prefer for the 1000 ZE/X and also for the MP-50 when running either into 100k? I know it would be personal taste in the long run. This is such a long thread in which to locate this information-- I would appreciate anyone's direct feedback to get me started! Best regards, Roy Johnson Designer Green Mountain Audio website |
Well, my cartridge says on the lable of the cartridge-body "Empire 1000ZE/X" on the outer paper packing (inner is a hardwood case) it says "S1000ZE/X-ERD"
Could it be the "-ERD" addition is just the code for the stylus which is supplied in addition to the one in the cart body itself? |
Dear Axelwahl: I have on hand the box where comes my original Empire stylus replacement that I'm using in that cartridge and I can read this:
" Replacement Stylus S 1000ZE/X Black "
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Jaspert: I have to test the 1080 again to be sure about. I will do it and let you know.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Axelwahl: I can't say it for sure because I never seen that ERD Empire cartridge but you can read here too that the stylus replacement is that: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/empire/1000-ze/x.shtml
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul, having looked at your posted stylus replacement link I see "replaces also 1000Z/EX-ERD" --- any idea if the -ERD is a different cart / body / performance to the 1000Z/EX? |
Dear Zhuweil231: Good.
You need to find the MF-100, it does not works fine in MF-200 body.
Here you can find a NOS stylus replacement for your 1000 Ze/x: http://www.adelcom.net/EmpireStylus1.htm
The 4000D/III is very good but I don't try it for a long time so I can't be sure its " today " performance especially against the 1000 ZE/x.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul. I am using M20E Super now on 3009S2IMP (preferred over MF-200). I am not sure if it worth to get a MF-100 stylus and fit on MF200 body. I also got empire 4000D/III and 1000ZE/X body with bad stylus. |
Dear Zhuweil231: Just by curiosity, I try to give you answers to almost all of your several posts in this thread regarding different cartridges performance: which of all those cartridges do you own?
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Downunder: I confirm and agree with each single word I posted that you are refering on your last post, I repeat I don't change any single word I posted
I'm still thinking in that way: ++++ " where I agree the top MM/MI has one step a head. " +++++
Over the whole thread I always speak of MM/MI alternative never like " the only one ". I speak that both alternatives are not perfect and due to that has their each own trade offs.
What do you want on a cartridge ranking? that I put the top LOMC cartridges below the 5 range level?, this is impossible and make no sense because all those LOMC that I name it has its each merits to be there where they are.
Downunder, I'm not a " deaf " man and can appreciate the quality performance of those LOMC cartridges as its drawbacks. That I prefer the MM/MI alternative quality performance does not means that I don't like the top LOMC alternative. I can live with any of those LOMC name it in my post but if I have on hand some top MM/MI ( that fortunatelly I have. ) then I prefer to enjoy the music through the MM/MI alternative, no single doubt about.
The Olympos and Formula One are the nearest LOMC performers to the very top MM/MI's.
So, IMHO there is no " inconsistency " in my words/posts, sure I can have mistakes or I can rectified on a cartridge performance but this does not means " contradicting ".
Downunder like you I'm not perfect.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
�Sorry guys, and with all due and real respect, Raul, I cannot buy this ranking of cartridges on a 1 to 10 scale. There are SO many variables involved that I think the best one could hope for in this type of discussion, among individuals who are scattered around the globe and who own such disparate audio systems, is "bad, OK, good, better, best". And we would argue all day even about those fuzzy distinctions. Not only does Downunder make a good point, but also this leaves the Empire 1000 as the finest sounding cartridge that Raul has ever heard in his system. (It's the only one that got a rank of 9, far as I can recall.) Perhaps this is the case.
By the way, what does the "ZE/X" mean at the end of the Empire model designation? |
Hi Raul
Either you are consistently contradicting youself or you agree with me about LOMC's being better sounding devices over the recently discussed and readily avalable MM's.
Raul quote
" No, the MC are not more " revealing " but has a higher distortions ( due too many factors like tracking distortion where the MM/MI are a lot better or its high frequency ringing, additional gain stages, etc, etc. ) and in audio systems that are more accurate those high distortions comes out. In a less accurate audio systems those distortions are hide through the less resolving and more " colored " system.
So, IMHO what Axelwhal, me and others are hearing is precisely that: are " nake " it the real LOMC quality performance where I agree the top MM/MI has one step a head.
Donwunder, for many many years the King ( LOMC cartridges ) was alone with no one and nothing that can/could challenge it. Ours audio systems and ears were totally equalized to LOMC ones, the audio system set up in all our home systems were made for an overall set up right on target for and only for: LOMC cartridges, even the phono stages almost all were designed to cope not the MM/MI needs but the specific ones for LOMC cartridges.
It is a huge merit that with all these big disadvantages the humble MM/MI cartridges performs so well. "
now we have your ranking
Raul quotes
" Dear friends: I forgot to post about the P77 ( that I try it again. ) and the MP-50. Well the P-77 is now on 6 range level along the 20E Super with the MP-50 border 6-7 range level.
I already receive some emails asking for LOMC ranging. My experiences and opinion is that the Lyra Olimpos and Allaerts Formula One belongs to 8 range level where the A90 and Coral are border line 7-8 range level, NO no single LOMC that I heard belongs to the 9 range level. The Xv-1 is clear a top 7 range level. "
You now seem to have two MC's I own - dyna XV-1 & A90 ahead of the MP-50 & M20FL. Something I have said consistently from the beginning of the journey.
enjoy the music. |
Now how would you rate the Empire 1080LT next to the 1000 Ze/x? |
Hi All,
I think individual scales/rankings of performance are always interesting. Many will remember Martin Colloms' practice of using the most expensive ancillaries in assessing and awarding rankings under his particular marking system.
Of course, Martin's decisions came down to his own hearing abilities and preferences. They could never address the distinct venues at which other listeners might have heard the same musicians perform differently. Such is the joy of real music and such is the pleasure of listening to other people's opinions.
I'm surre there's a cavaet in there somewhere!!
Enjoy |
Dear Halcro: Unfortunatelly there is no know source about: ebay, Agon or other net sites.
The Sonus Dimension 5 is extremely hard to find and the Empire 1000 Ze/x is a little more " easy " but not so easy.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: I forgot to post about the P77 ( that I try it again. ) and the MP-50. Well the P-77 is now on 6 range level along the 20E Super with the MP-50 border 6-7 range level.
I already receive some emails asking for LOMC ranging. My experiences and opinion is that the Lyra Olimpos and Allaerts Formula One belongs to 8 range level where the A90 and Coral are border line 7-8 range level, NO no single LOMC that I heard belongs to the 9 range level. The Xv-1 is clear a top 7 range level.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul,
Where can one buy the Empire 1000 Ze/x or the Sonus Dimension 5 cartridges?
Regards Henry |
Dear Raul., how's the Empire 4000D/III sound? |
Dear friends: I tested/try again my Empire 1000 Ze/x.
I mount it in my 10" AT 1503 in a Belldream magnesium headshell, with out stylus guard, no antiskating, no-add phono stage capacitance, 100K on impedance, 1.0grs on VTF and the VTA/SRA set up at/up 19mm over a level/even cartridge/record position ( till today this is the highest VTA/SRA that I used with any cartridge. ).
In this " new " stage/phase of testing cartridges this baby a long the Sonus Dimension 5 are stand alone at range 9 on a 1 to 10 range quality performance ladder ( I'm " building " this performance ladder each range characteristics. ), the main characteristic in that 9 range level is: efortless/seamless.
By comparison the Astatic MF-100 and B&O MMC2 are at 7 range level, the M20E Super at 6 range level and the 20FL Super at 5 range level. I leave empty the 8 and 10 range level because I have to try yet several other cartridges. The good sound in this performance ladder start at 3 range level. There is nothing absolute on this each range levels and cartridges over time and with new experiences on each one can change on range performance ladder level. The target is to have something that could give us a " general/enunciative " reference: it is not the Bible, no it is only a " sign " that could be help for some of us.
This Empire 1000 Ze/x not only makes everything what the other range cartridges makes at its best but with improvements. In other thread some one posted that this cartridge has no highs, I respect that opinion but my experience with is that we have everything with the Empire that is in the recording including those highs. I'm testing it trying to find a cartridge drawback and I can't find it yet, if I put me very exigent maybe I could ask for a little more output over 10K-12Khz but nothing important.
The quality performance with any kind of music is just stellar with this Empire in my system with that set up.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: You can buy here for 99.00: http://cgi.ebay.com/Ortofon-D-20-E-Super-Stylus-M-20-E-FL-Super-NOS_W0QQitemZ400089498518QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item5d27314396#ht_2178wt_1165
The AT20SS is a good cartridge but I don't try it in these " different " times/days.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
How much for the M20E stylus assembly alone? I hate to be a slave to fashion, but....
Raul, Is the AT20SS up there in your top tier these days? I bought a very used and very cheap AT15Sa and then an NOS ATN20SS stylus, several months ago but still have not put them together. I noticed you listed the whole series of Audio Technica's in the 160, 170, 180 series as being among the best. |
Dear Downubder: Yes, only differ on the stylus shape/compliance/VTF.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Raul
From your email I am assuming the M20FL & 20E have the same generator but different stylus?
Frankly, the 20E is only around 80 Euro, so not expensive if one was to buy. |
Lewm
I can only state how a cart sounds in my system. Not that the M20FL sounds bad, it doesn't, it sounds good.
I have not heard a p77, let alone a p77i.
Buy both and let us know what you think.
You also need to buy a Ortofon 20E now as well now it is superior to the M20FL :-) |
Lew, The more so as an MCC1 sold yesterday for $600. Reminds me of an old Don Henley lyric that goes something like, "It was a great little town before guys like me came here and ruined it." |
Dave, I paid $500 for my NOS B&O MMC1 several months ago. I am glad to know that my investment now makes sense.
Re the MP50 vs M20FL comparison, I have no basis for confirming or disputing your conclusion, but if we scroll back up the thread a bit, I think someone else posted a contrary conclusion not too long ago. How about P77i vs MP50? If I have another $500 to blow away, which one would you suggest and why? |
Dear Downunder: You can buy the M20E stylus replacement and use it with the 20FL cartridge.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I fitted the Nagoaka MP-50 and IMO it is quite a bit better than the M20FL Super.
The M20FL is a little forward in the upper midrange and as Raul said, it is a little coarse in the high frequencies. The MP50 has better transparency and a more refined realistic treble. It also seems to be better balanced than the M20Fl with no forwardness like the M20FL.
Interestly Raul re the M20e Super - this cartridge is cheaper than the M20FL Super. It does have tracking of 1gm vs 1.4gm. |
Yikes, The $500+ just paid for an NOS B&0 on ebay has brought many more sellers out of the woodwork. |
Dear Zhuweil231: Yes, the latter is a big step up. Both are different ( more refinements. ) designs, the stylus replacement in both cartridges are the same when you see it but if you take the one fromm the Gold Blue it does not works ( it fits. ) in the Dimension 5.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Well I tested/try my Ortofon M20E Super. As I posted this one was the cartridge that impress me and my first " touch " with these Ortofon models more than a year ago.
I made comparisons against ( mainly ) the 20FL Super. Both cartridge has the body on gold. The comparison was made " everything the same " because I try both cartridges with both stylus and the results were the same.
In my sample cartridges the 20FL has a different output than the 20E, around 3db higher.
No doubt about the M20E Super is a better performer an IMHO a step a top the M20FL Super and a step below the Astatic MF-100 and the B&O MMC2.. This was in some way a surprise to me due that I was thinking that the 20E was in disadvantage for its elliptical stylus shape against the line contact in the FL.
In the 20E and over all the frequency range the music flow more easy with better " continuity " . The 20FL in comparison sounds more " rough ", like if the 20FL had more " trouble " on tracking ( that it does not have. ). The 20E has lower distortion over all the frequency range and this characteristic gives a truer music presentation and a feeling of " loseless " recording performance. The 20E is less edgy than the 20FL but with a more natural music agresiveness, its more " soft " ( not really soft but I don't have other word. ) sounds makes that you can enjoy it for more time an even at higher SPL.
I make the tests with an average SPL , at seat position , around 85db with peaks at 92db. Normally I make tests at lower and higher SPL range. At an average SPL 93db with peaks at 99db that 20E " lower distortion " makes the differences very clear because the 20FL performance at this SPL shows its drawbacks in better way.
Overall the 20E quality performance is more refined with better " class ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
How's Sonus Blue gold comparing to Sonus D5? Is latter a big step up? |
Apologies, Raul: Mr. Colloms' (1977 production only) recommended/not lists and your choices are not far apart. The info. concerning cartridge loading is somewhat technical, but agrees with your findings.
www.bostonaudiosociety.org/pdf/bass/BASS-06-01-7710b.pdf, (dosn't work for me either)
Can be accessed by: Google-> Boston Audio Society-> click on BAS Speaker, scroll well down and click on 06-01-7710b. Lots of good reference reading to be found there, I keep the BAS link in "favorites". |