Siniy123, I think you should try even more positive VTA before you make final judgement on the black/alu version of the M20FL Super. The tail end of my tonearm is up by an improbable amount for best performance. Then of course we have all the unknowable factors that figure into your evaluation - your personal listening biases, your speakers, your phono preamp, etc, etc. I don't find my sample to be hi-fi-ish at all.
Have you been listening on your L07D, with the L07D tonearm?
To all who are following this subject, I presume that all the M20FL Supers sold by William Thakker over the past several months are of one type, black/alu in color. Yes? Siniy123, where did you get your gold one? Thanks. |
Dear Siniy123: Good to hear from you on the M20FL subject. I have some things to say about but before I have to make some tests before.
What made more complex is that now we have not only two cartridge versions but three!!!: one gold/cooper body and two silver/aluminum with different height on the stylus.
So, if yours comes from WT then I would like to ask Kcc123 his silver/aluminum one: comes from????
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Re: Ortofon M20FL super: VTA was 1.5 g.
1. original Gold/copper vs. silver/nickel body from William Thakker: original one sound fuller, more right and coherent, more organic. Silver/nickel body sounds more "hot" and hi-fi like. I like original body better. Original body is 800 Omh DC resistance vs 750 Ohm on silver. there is serial number embossed in plastic on original body. 2. Flat vs tail up. I compared M20FL flat (I measured cart height to be around 15mm, may be little less) vs significant (2.5 mm, on Technics 1200mk2 tonearm) tail up. I can say that I like flat better. More human sound, better integration between frequency bands. 3. Compared stylus assemblies and styli from William Thakker and other NOS I have (one in small Ortofon box with HMV price in British pounds). I see no differences in cantilever, diamond and stylus holder.
Hope this helps. All in one this is very enjoyable cartridge in both forms.
Happy New Year! |
Dear Kcc123/Siniy123: I have on hand an Ortofon VMS30MK2 that has similar body shape than the M20FL but with silver color. Both cartridges comes with the same stylus shape and looking at micro the one in the VMS looks like the one in the picture ( silver one. ): alittle taller. Now, and this is something I can't be sure because I don't have on hand my 100x micro but only a 40x, it seems to me that the stylus assembly in the shorter one goes " deep " in the aluminum cantilever than the taller one.
If any of you have the time I appreciate if you can confirm or not my " impression " about ( yes, I know that I'm talking on the VMS 30MK2 instead both M20FL versions but IMHO it could help to figure what is all about. ), thank you in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Tigerwoodkhorns: IMHO that AT-15 cartridge performs a little better at 100K but certainly not rolled off/closed in at 47K, maybe that's because the stylus is near its " life-end " or something wrong with the cartridge suspension. If I remember the stylus body on the AT-14 can fit the AT-15, if this is true then swap the 14 to the 15 and hear it looking for a more " open " sound, of course that I'm thinking here that the AT-14 is in good shape. Then if you find that the problem is in the AT-15 stylus try to find the AT-20SS stylus replacement that will be a very " nice " up-grade for that cartridge.
For your Shure type 3 I think that you can go for the Jico SAS stylus replacement that is a very " nice " cartridge up-grade too.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Kcc123: Maybe only you and Siniy123 are the ones that own both version.
Wo you already made comparisons with the same analog rig/set up? which were your findings?
I don't worry about the different color on the body but more about that difference in the stylus. A good notice is that both cartridges like to ride with unusual high VTA/SRA and this seems to me hard to think like a " coincidence " but like a sililar performer/performance.: of course I can't be sure because I don't have both like you.
I have three stylus replacement and one of them I buyed through that ebay seller, I don't want to " touch " the 20FL that I'm enjoying so much ( you know, when something is so great you don't want even breath near it! ) to see through a micro the three M20FL but I will do it sooner or latter. The other alternative that I'm thinking seriously is to buy the aluminum cartridge body but first I would like ( like any one in this thread. ) to know your first hand opinion as the one by Siniy123.
I have to say that due that Ortofon does not choose to modified the model name ( MKII ) I don't " wait " for a different cartridges performance or at least not something dramatic: Ortofon is very consistent in what they do.
Btw, thank you for those pictures.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Here is the thread that I have posted some pictures of M20FL Super on vinylengine:-
http://www.vinylengine.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=23259 |
I'm a little late to this thread, but here is my situation. I have a second table that I like ot use with my noisey records. It is a Technics Sl 1210 with a Sumiko MMT arm. I am using a Denon DL160 which works very well at supressing noise, but I also have te follwing carts:
AT15Sa
AT14SA
Shure V15 Type III
I was going to buy new stylus's for each as the AT's are great at getting deep int the grooves. but I do notice that the AT 15 and 1 sound really rolled off laded at 47K. I tried 67K ohms but it was still very rolled off on top. Kind of closed in.
What do I need to do here? |
Here is the picture of the gold colored M20FL Super:-
[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/1zfpumh.jpg[/IMG] |
Lewm, just for the record, I mentioned that "very substantial" pivot up, when one of the folks here understood you it being only "slightly" up. As it turn out, I came to this conclusion via the same road as you did. It is so substantially up, that under the usual circumstances I'd never have tried. The unusual circumstance in my case was the SME V arm touching the record edge when busy on the inner grooves. So a complete no-go with "level arm" (sans shim) so that tall VTA made all difference in mechanics and the sound as it turns out. As I mentioned it is equal to level arm with a 18mm tall cart and translates to about 5mm pivot up. Greetings, Axel |
Two versions of the M20FL Super? Both of mine are black with aluminum-colored lower body. Can someone post a photo of the copper/gold one?
Dear Raul, Thank you for giving me credit for noting the best VTA for the M20FL Super, but I think that someone else mentioned it first, and I did as he suggested. Either that or when I changed from the Grado TLZ to the M20FL super without changing the height of the pivot on my Dyna DV505, the natural result was a lot of positive VTA, because the TLZ rides so much higher than the M20FL. Anyway, positive VTA is the way to go in my system. Someone else reported that he is running his with the tonearm level. Perhaps that person is missing some of the magic. |
Dear Dgarretson: From some time to now I'm not using capacitance through my phonolinepreamp and IMHO and due that I'm loading at 100K and that the MM/MI cartridges are very sensitive to capacitance the performance on all the cartridges that I heard in this way seems to me more " real "/natural/less mechanic. Yes, my advise is that you can /coul go in the same road.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Cashcamp: I can't say if there is quality performance differences between it because all the ones I have comes with the cooper/gold body.
Siniy123 owns both and I hope he can put some " light " in the subject.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul, You mention above that you are not adding any capacitance to your phono stage anymore. Would you suggest that I take the same approach with my combo of balanced ARC PH-2 and Hovland Music Groove IC? At input of PH-2 there is one fixed 220pf cap from each XLR signal phase to ground. The disconnected Hovland cable measures 218pf between phases. When testing my continuously variable cartridge load circuit to determine the best loading for each cartridge, I'm thinking that it would be nice to limit the variables by sticking to a "happy medium" of capacitance for the four MM/MI cartridges in my small collection(MF-100, P-76, Empire 888 & 999.) Any recommendations are appreciated. |
Hi Raul,
I know there are two versions of the M20FL super. The older one has a "copper" body and a shorter stylus. Is there a different between those two?
Best,
BrianC |
Dear friends: I was aware of the Ortofon M20 Super more than a year ago when I buy my first one ( I own 4-5. ) the M20E Super that I buy to a person on CA where I pay something over 200.00 for it.
When I mounted and heard it I was really impressed for its very high quality level that was a nice " discovery " for me. Two months latter I buy a second sample of the E model and latter two FL models and stylus replacements too. Both Ortofon models are the same/similar but the stylus shape.
On " those " times I heard the FL very brief and after heard the E one I don't recall to heard an additional improvement over its cartridge " brother " all I knew about is that was/is a very good performer and that Siny123 agree with.
Well, time to hear it again. I mounted in the Grace G-940 ( internally wired with Audio Note. ) with an unknow aluminum headshell ( nothing especial. ) running at 1.6grs, with a " heavy " ( very high ) positive VTA/SRA ( as Lewm point out. You are totally right Lew: a must to. ), no antiskating, 100K on load impedance and with no added capacitance other that the one on the phono IC cable ( as a fact I don't add any capacitance with any cartridge anymore.) . The cartridge is very sensitive to tiny Azymuth changes and till this set up parameter is on target you can't hear it at its best.
When the cartrridge set up is right on the cartridge performance is nothing short of awesome ( for say the least ), I was not prepared to this very high quality performance ( not that I don't heard something similar in a 2-3 other cartridges. ) because I never imagine how good is this cartridge: very nice " surprise ".
The AKG P100-LE or the AT 180 ML-OCC are top rated cartridges and extremely hard to beat even to even its quality performance but this M20FL Super approach that top quality level.
The music takes a so " vivid " character that is hard to think that what you are hearing comes through your system instead a live event.
I never heard in any system ( elsewhere ) with any cartridge the so real timbal/drum on a classic music ( Pictures at an Exibition. ) recording similar of what you heard/hear in the music hall like with this cartridge " gem " and not only with this recording but with any single recoprding: the performance is so true/vivid with a full music body that I never heard it before.
Other surprise is that as good as is the cartridge low end performance as good is at the other side of the frequiency extreme ( normally when a cartridge is a little bass-heavy this preclude for transparency on the other frequency ranges. ) where we have not only a natural transparency and detail but the similar notes definition that we have at the low bass performance. The cymbals sound not only like a " white noise " but with a clear/precise sparkle very hard to attain for any cartridge and boy! that music cartridge " body ": addictive for say the least.
The mid-bass is something to hear and with this cartridge you can distinguish between mid-bass and low mid bass like in no other cartridge I know. It has the precision and definition that you have in the AKG P100-LE ( no other cartridge I know has it. ) especially when no matter which is the recording level of each music recording soundstage layer you can hear very clear the music notes on that single soundstage layer even at the deepest layer.
I have on hand the A90 ( again, Iask for it and my friend was happy to hear it in my system. ) and other MC/MM ( MP-50, Astatic MF-100, ADC XLM #,, ) cartridges and for the ones that we heard all of them sound just " boring " or ( the MC ) " anemic ". No, the A90 IMHO can't compete with his " cousin ", well not many can do it.
I want to hear the M20E Super again but after heard the FL my brain don't call to hear anything else!!!
Axel, you need that 100K load especially with this M20FL Super.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Due that the compliance numbers I posted comes from a Japanese magazine then the true values are what you already know: 40cu and 20cu. Please read this ( at the end of the link. ) and sorry to create this confusion:
http://www.moerch.dk/files/Cartridge%20Armtube%20Combination%20List.pdf
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Cashcamp: Great info, thank you!!!
Now, this info about dynamic compliance put me in doubt the info I posted and have in that Japanese guide ( 1984 ) where they have two values: 20cu and 10cu, where I take 10cu for the dynamic compliance.
Seen the 20FL against other cartridge with ( sure/precise ) 20cu the cantilever deflection on the 20FL seems to me less than the other cartridge and this could tell me that the 20FL has a lower dynamic compliance than 20cu: say the 10cu on the Japanese guide.
Anyway, till today no one report a trouble because of the cartridge compliance.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
This one of the most interesting thread. I have been following this from the beginning. I also acquired the M20FL super based on the recommendation.
I have a reviewed article from Hi-Fi Choice from 1979 on this particular cartridge. It is consider a Best Buy and a top MM cartridge at that time. Unfortunately I don't have the scanner. Anyway this is part of the informations
Cartridge type and mass Induced Magnet 'VMS', 5g Estimated dynamic compliance 20cu (x10-6cm/dyne) Specific downwardforce: range 1.25g to 1.75g tested at 1.6g Sensitivity at 1 Khz 17mV/cm/sec Relative output (0dB=1mv/cm/sec) +4.5dB Recommended loading 47k ohms plus 400pf Recommended arm mass and damping 4 to 10g, moderate Cartridge coil and resistance 800ohms, 600mH Stylus type and spec detach, naked line contact 8x line um Frequency response 20Hz- 20kHz +/- 1.6dB Frequency response 100Hz,-5kHz +0.2, -1dB Stereo separation, 100Hz, 1kHz,10kHz 20dB, 36dB, 28dB Channel difference at 1kHz, 10kHz 0.9dB, 1.0dB Trackability 300Hz lateral+15dB,+18dB(Supertrack) 1.2g, 1.7g Trackability 300Hz vertical +12dB 0.8g
I hope this help.
BrianC |
Dear Dgarretson: Well I'm exited right now for: which will be your findings about?, I can't wait.
Thank you for share this interesting and usefull " tool " that you describe in deep for almost any one can/could take advantage on it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Downunder: +++++ " Is tracking to be set at around 1.5 gms?? " +++++
the answer is yes. Now, like others posted there is no more information about the VTF cartridge range but IMHO and looking to my Japanese Stereo guide these guys take the 1.5grs value like the cartridge builder " preference " ( because they did with other cartridges they listed. ) and I think that a 0.3gr +,- ( plus, minus. ) around !.5 figure will be a safe VTF range to try it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
This weekend I turned up a circuit that allows continuously variable cartridge loading using Silonex light dependent resistors(LDR). In my balanced phono stage, the LDR works in parallel with Caddock TF020 high-value fixed resistors. In a single-ended phono stage, an LDR could entirely replace a 47K load resistor. The LDR circuit could optionally be built externally and placed in series with interconnects.
The range is adjustable from 35R-250K via a control circuit comprised of coarse and fine potentiometers in conjunction with a 5V Burson Superregulator. The control circuit works outside the signal path to govern LED brightness and set resistance value of the photo-resistive element in audio signal path. The signal path is straight from PCB through soldered-in LDR. There are no switch points or wires or carbon pots in signal path to degrade sound.
My initial interest was to evaluate the sound of Silonex LDRs relative to other top resistors. The topic has been explored in a DIY forum thread in the context of the Lightspeed passive attenuator. But of course one wants to hear this for oneself.
In short, a Silonex LDR in parallel with TF020 sounds better than TF020 alone. The LDR sound is resolving, clean and extended at the frequency extremes in the manner of TX2575, with an enveloping yet articulate LF that blends the best attributes of TX2575 and Audio Note tant.
Next week Soundsmith should be returning my Helikon retipped with optimized line contact diamond. This sets the table for me to compare Astatic MF-100 and P-76 to a (possibly improved) MOMC on one phono stage with the flexiblity of precise loading across a wide range. |
Downunder, the spec. sheet of the seller says 1.5g VTF for the M20FL super and NO range is given. Axel |
Lewm, >>> When you changed the load resistor on your Windfeld from 100R to 47R...Does it now compete with the M20FL, in your opinion of course? <<< Yes, it does --- in a way that e.g. the MP-50 does compete. It's sort of like two pretty women, one with ~ better legs [M20FL] and the other with better "front-end" [Wndfld] :-) (Incidentally, it is also 47ohm loaded when using the SUT of 30dB into 47K phono-pre, this too confirms the 47ohm somehow). So your next question is the difference between 47R "straight" and 47ohm SUT impedance, yes? Lets wait until after Xmas, and a good one to you all you folks too :-) Axel |
Tonite I verified that I am at 1.5 in a Dynavector DV505 tonearm and tracking is superb. |
The 1.5 grams VTF is what the E-Bay seller of NOS M20FL Supers claims but there is no Ortofon paperwork with the cartridges. The Cartridge Database on the Vinyl Engine also says 1.5 grams VTF. If anyone has the original paperwork for an M20FL Super it would be interesting to see what it says. |
Downunder, Cannot recall where I set VTF with M20FL, but 1.5 sounds right. I took the VTF from another post on this thread. Maybe the original poster will 'fess up. |
Gentlemen, M20FL super - Is tracking to be set at around 1.5 gms?? |
Dave, Perhaps I was wrong in categorizing the SME3012 as having very high effective mass. I must have read it somewhere. Plus it LOOKS to be a heavy tonearm. Anyway, your listening experience is all that counts. |
Axel et al, Re VTA with the M20FL, what happened to me was that I replaced the Grado TLZ with the M20FL without altering the height of the tonearm pivot. As Axel says, this serendipitously resulted in quite a bit of positive VTA, just because the M20FL has a lower profile than the TLZ. The immediate result was so terrific that I never even considered fiddling with VTA thereafter.
Axel, I think I can ask the question over on this thread without arousing any ire. When you changed the load resistor on your Windfield from 100R to 47R, you say the W is now much better. Does it now compete with the M20FL, in your opinion of course? |
Raul, Thank you for the recommendation of the m20fl.May be the best sound I've have had on my system. Need to get my soundsmith repaired and do a comparison but I really enjoy this cartridge.Very musical. Makes me wonder about the Garrot although I probably need to upgrade the Music Hall first. Anyway thanks.
Merry Christmas to all, Danny
|
Dear friends: All of you,
Merry Christmas!!!!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
What recommendations does anyone have for a tonearm to match the Technics EPC-100c Mk4?
Many thanks |
Downunder, >> ... Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.<< Well, if you'd ask me it's quite A LOT up! In fact (measured at the arm post) about 5mm, and that certainly is more then "slightly" in my book. That cart is ~ 2.5mm less in height then most others. So having the arm about level with say a ~18mm height cart, I'd leave it right there for a start. The M20FL will now be "dipping" nose down, creating a relative large tail-up position. Also looks OK, if you check the stylus (SRA) position. With out "substantial" tail-up the cart sounds pretty sat-on, at least in my rig, where I usually use "lightly" tail up with just about every other of my carts. Let us know what your findings are, it'd be ineresting to know. Thanks, Axel |
Hey Boys
Ortofon M20FL Super - arse slightly up, got that.
Tracking weight - 1.5gms??
BTW - I have not found MM's to track any better than MC's, with the exception of my Koetsu Rosewood. It is not bad, just sometimes it can play up on certain tracks.
My Phantom is the most fussy arm with inner tracking and related distortions - I really need the Mint tractor to fine tune - then all is good. The longer arms like my Ortofon AS-309 and the Exclusive arms have little difficulty - I guess the longer length.
Tracking, especially inner groove tracking IMO is more dependant on getting the alignment correct. Arc protractors like the Wally or Mint are excellent. Once this is done they all track fine. |
Right Raul, I recall your saying this, yes. I do now think it must be weighted much higher as how it came across to me at the time (might be just me though). It is most noticeable with very difficult tracks, yet in the less noticeable parts it translates into loss of "inner detail". I have just no further explanation for this by now. Thank you for reaffirming your earlier and more detailed statement on the subject. Axel |
Dear Axelwhal: This is what you can read through the original thread:
+++++ " IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.
This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it. " ++++++
Certainly not the only factor but an important one along the kind of suspension design on these MM/MI cartridges.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lew/Dave: +++++ " Then Ortofon said the compliance is 20 but is it? " +++++
+++++ " The compliance of the M20FL Super is also lower than that of most MMs and only a bit higher than that of a typical MC.... " +++++
IMHO and searching on the cartridge compliance subject I found in an old Japanese Stereo Guide that the 20cu for the 20FL and the 40cu for the 20E cartridges are the static compliance value and the dynamic one ( that is the one to use it in the measurement of resonance frequency along the tonearm. ) are 10cu and 25cu respectively.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Lewn,
I'm confused about the effective mass issue too. The info in the below link says that the 3012 has an effective mass of 14 grams but I don't think that includes the headshell. There's also a chart showing expected resonace with different complinace and total effective masses. Obviously the "key" to unlock the mystery is the actual effective mass of the arm with headshell and cartridge and it must also make a difference as to where the counterweight is set at the rear of the arm or how far out from the pivot point it is. Then Ortofon said the compliance is 20 but is it? I just weighed the headshell containing the M20FL and the added weight I put in and it's 13.30 grams total. As a result of the not that heavy headshell weight for the 3012, the two weights on the rear of the arm are moved in toward the pivot. I was going to add more weight to the headshell to see what happens but it's sounding so good I may not even bother. Another consideration might be that my 3012 doesn't have the heavy counterweight to balance something like an SPU and I'm only using one "rider weight" or VTF weight rather than the two when using a heavier headshell.
http://www.analogue-classics.com/html/sme_3009___3012.html
Dave |
Do any of you SL1200 users know the effective mass of the supplied tonearm? That would be helpful. I am running my M20FL Super in my Dynavector DV505 tonearm. The headshell weighs about 11gm, as I think I wrote earlier. Since the "arm" is almost all headshell, I would guess that the DV505 with stock headshell has an effective mass in the 11-13gm range, making it "medium" mass. The compliance of the M20FL Super is also lower than that of most MMs and only a bit higher than that of a typical MC, placing it in the "medium" compliance category. Hence, I would have thought that explained the excellent result I am having. So I am surprsed that tonearms of high effective mass, like the SME3012 would also work well. I am also running a fair amount of "positive" VTA. I would be very interested to learn how Downunder feels about the M20FL vs the A90. |
A question: Why are MM / MI cart better trackers? I slowly find out that some more difficult grooves are negotiated with just more aplomb, then with any amount of fiddling when I use some of my MCs. In fact I have come to think it may well be one explanation why some of these dumb MM / MI are simply sounding better --- less mistracking = less distorting, and I'm NOT only talking about the most blatant most noticeable stuff. If it happens with the rough, so it will with the more subtle, and influence ultimate clarity and harmonics. Any thoughts about that? Axel |
Davev,
That's great to hear and maybe it will improve more over the coming hours. I also agree with you about some things being immediate. Of all the cartridges that I have owned (or still own) the MP50 still marks a rare moment in which it took me just 5 minutes out of the box to realise it was something very special. Unlike cartridges such as the Andante P-76, the Nagaoka's performance is also consistent across all frequencies and reproduces inner detail, imaging and attack for all instruments: a much more grown-up cartridge, in my system and with my particular familiarity with live music at specific venues at least. If you get the same joy from the Ortofon (and others do so from what sounds most accurate or most enjoyable to them with their different earing abilities), that must surely be a good thing.
Happy listening |
Dgob response and more on M20FL: I agree with a breakin for catridges because of their semi-mechanical nature but if a cartridge isn't even in the ball park of what I like to hear after trying this and that, the only other break in I'm willing to offer it is with a hammer. I just don't believe in suffering with bad sound hour after hour waiting for an improvement in anything that would be a miracle if it did happen because the sound would have to change that much to satisfy me. With the M20FL I heard things I liked so I kept going and asked here about what arms it seemed to work well in. After hearing that it does well in a Technics 1200 I knew I was going in the wrong direction with mass and more mass did the trick. I listened more tonight and the "zippyness" I mentioned was far less apparent and like I had said, I needed to use it more and tweak it in if necessary. I can now say that even with less than 4 hours use it's an outstanding catridge in the right headshell/arm. Besides sounding fine with most LP's I tried, it played two that lots of cartridges I've tried can't seem to get right. Paul Simons "Kodachrome" band on Columbia KC32280: the bass was pounding, the vocal didn't scream to make your ears bleed and the piano runs stood out in a solid fashion. Joan Sutherland The Art of the Prima Donna vol 2 London OS 25233: Her voice was clear and crisp without being shrill yet I could hear the space ambience and the orchestra sounded full and real. Not bad for $189 for sure.
Dave
|
Dear Davev: Nice to hear that finally your M20FL Super is running in better way in your 3012 tonearm, enjoy it.
About the 103/103D I agree with you. I own both cartrridges and I try it in almost any tonearm I own/owned and never give me a " satisfaction ", like you I gave up. The " humble " MM/MI alternative ( IMHO ) is a lot better option than the 103/103D.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Davev,
I think another of those trial and error truisms relates to giving a cartridge at least 20 hours break-in before assessing. Maybe this will apply to your NOS ortofon but others surely seem very impressed with it.
I'm sure you know this already but just in case... |
Davev,
Great to hear. Yes, as we seem to agree, their providence is an important factor in their popularity. Indeed, the Grace/103d combo is actually 'the' combo that was most frequently used. That other cartridges have made you happier is also a wonderful thing and I hope everyone can find musical happiness with similar experimentation.
Happy listening |
Dear Axelwhal: +++++ " Is "IM" the same as "MI" such as is the case in the M20FL super " ++++++
in plain word: yes. The IM is a moving iron design.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
A new thought to the discussion? Does anyone else with multiple trial and error generated setups with that final tweaking for the best sound find that they all sound pretty much the same but one still does something a little better or a little worse? I don't yet have a way to be able to switch in my five different turntable setups in seconds but when I do switch setups that I have tuned to my liking, I find that I can live with any one of them if I had to because they are all so similar in sound. So in my case I know I'm rejecting anything that doesn't float my sonic boat in my room with my system and I'm ending up with very similar favorites. It's been fun doing this but finding the stopping point has been elusive. |
Dgob: I have a DL103 and a DL103D. I gave up on the D103 because I could never get it to sound good enough for me to listen to and all that modding and hand selecting can cost more than a new cartridge so why even bother trying to make a silk purse out of an pigs ear? The 103D is considerably better and lots more listenable, but to me it just lacks "a draw" to make me want to listen to it. Harry W. at VPI told me that it's a match made in heaven with the shorter JMW Arm but I didn't have the two of them at the same time to try that out. My old Ortofon SPU/GT blows them both out of the water in terms of musicality and sheer listening pleasure but only after it was taken out of my old Ortofon arm and mounted in an FR64 arm so I grant you that the "cartridge arm combo" is important. I have enough cartridges and I need to get off of the cartridge-go-round and concentrate on what I deem the better combos I already have. If there is another cartridge in my future it will be another old SPU because I do find that they have many qualities I like rolled into one cartridge but most importantly, a natural or life-like sound with exceptional midrange and tame yet all there treble. Now I understand why the Japanese have been buying them up all these years. The M20FL has some of those SPU qualities but after some play time and it already sounding better, I'm hearing what I'd call a "zip factor" like going from 0 to 60MPH in 4 seconds that is kind of annoying but it's still under 2 hours of use and I haven't tried to fine tune the setup yet.
Dave |
Davev,
You should try a Denon 103d on a Grace 660P tonearm. It was the standard used in Japanese broadcasting back in the day and helps me, at leaast, appreciate the clamour that there was for this cartridge (albeit clearly a budget item). Definitely worth a listen if opportunity allows. |