Griffithds, you're right. Never had a problem to play 45s with MC on different tonearms. I lost any hope that somewhere can be a special cartridge dedicated for 45s. That's why i have mentioned rare 102SP which some people on agon identify as MM for Singles (in fact it was just for 78 rpm).
But tonearm alignment for 45rpm/7'inch singles still intriguing me.
Most of the rare 45s from independent labels (in the 60s/70s) never been issued in any other format and never been reissued in any format. |
Flieb,
I believe I have read that interview that Charster refers to. I do get your humor! What is said in that review was the belief at 'that time'. Sort of like reading a report from some scholar back when the belief was that the World was flat! (grin) Just because some authority said it then, doesn't make it so today! |
Chapster, You have a 12" Reed ? Oh my, you must be the object of desire or envy of all the girls and boys. I guess it might be hard to separate humor from serious content, at least when we're discussing something as controversial as offset or not to offset. That is the question that coincides with 7" 45 alignment optimization.
Methinks it nobler to forgo offset here with such small groove span, but aesthetics dictate otherwise. You should seek out Robin. Gold plate it if you must, and you could always employ in the usual manner or sell it if you dislike it sans offset. The Chpratz protractor is real and invaluable when devising alternate alignments. I suspect Mr. Van den Hul's consideration was tracking/tracing ability, but you provide no explanation. If that is the case, things are a little different today with tracking ability. I would think 90um or greater would be more than sufficient.
Regards,
|
Flaib, are you serious when you advise "Stanton straight DJ arm." to user of REED 3P "12 tonearm ?
Or that was some vintage stanton tonearm that i don't know ? If you're talking about modern stanton short straight arm it is not only a very bad tonearm (like all modern products of stanton), but that kind of arms made for conical stylus profile only (or to kill the records) for those who call themself "turntablists" in the clubs. The ony one good dj product is Technics, but we're not talking about that kind of equimpent here.
I've seen ViV tonearm and i know some people are happy with it, but this is one of the ugliest tonearm that i know, especially headshell (sorry).
Anyway let's make it clear: 45 rpm (7' inch) invented by RCA in 1949 and later become a Radio Standard (apart from jukeboxes and club djs of course). I have many promotional 45s made especially for radio stations. Remember which tonearms did they used in Broadcast Studios in the 60s, 70s, 80s? Denon, SME, Technics, EMT just to name a few popular brands. Can't remember any straight tonearms without offset angle.
When i'm talking about Stivenson protractor i'm referring to his point that distortion in the end of the record is more important (this is where the 45s grove is as you stated correctly).
Acording to Van Den Hul interview MM cartridge is better to read high modulated 45 rpm groove.
|
Chakster, Best alignment for 7" 45's? Interesting question. The groove only spans about 30mm, roughly between 55 and 85mm from center spindle. Any conventional alignment will put the outer null off the record. Stevenson inner null - 60.325mm, Baerwald - 66mm, Loefgren B - 70.3mm. Stevenson or Baerwald?
Here's what I would do. 1) Go to Vinyl Engine and download a Chpratz protractor. Every self respecting turntablist should have one. It's just a calibrated straight line w/grid, but it comes in handy. 2) Buy or rig up a straight arm w/no offset like the ViV Rigid Float or similar. Don't want to spend $4K ? Find a straight arm with conventional headshell connection like Graham Robin or Stanton straight DJ arm. 3) Use regular SME type headshell(s). Mount the arm on a heavy pod or in such a way to get underhang null around 67mm. Set VTF and use no anti-skate.
You could easily swap carts and I'll bet it knocks your socks off. OR, use the Chpratz to find the best null. Regards, |
Fleib, OC9II and ART2000 are slightly different:
Frequency Response: 15Hz-50kHz (OC9II) Frequency Response: 10Hz-50kHz (ART2000) *
Tracking Force: 1.25 - 1.75g (OC9II) Tracking Force: 1.7 -2.0g (ART2000) *
FULL SPECS OF ART2000 HERE: http://www.edsstuff.org/docs/atart2000.pdf |
Fleib, i have a massive collection of vintage 45s (American original pressing with big hole) from the 50s, 60s, 70s and early 80s (Jazz, Soul, Rhythm'n'Blues, Latin ).
Most of them are stereo, some of them are stereo on one side and mono on the flip. Some of them are mono only.
I do not have any mono cartridges yet, never tried mono cartridges. maybe i should use my spare Shick tonearm for mono (if i will even buy Miyajima mono MC)
I use stereo cartridges and 45s sounds good, no problem if the pressing is good. Some of them sounds amazing BTW. My records are clean and VG+ or Mint- condition. Apart from my favorite hi-end needles (vintage Argent, new ZYX and AT) i have tried NOS broadcast MM Denon DL107 conical on EPA100 tonearm for 45s and it was OK for it's price, also MC Ortofon SPU slassic GM mk2 on Thomas Schick tonearm which i didn't like at all (and sold the cartridge).
I've noticed that for stereo 45s i preffer hi-end cartridges (MC), same that i use for LPs, my Technics MM cartridges also played 45s very well.
So i really doubt there is a dedicated cartridge for stereo 45s (7' inchers), but since the 45 groove is close to the spindle (like the last track on LPs) maybe STIVENSON'S protractor/alignment is better for 45s ?? |
Chakster,
I have forgotten to mention a cartridge (M/M), that I own that does compete with my "best" M/C. Let me be clear here. I am saying competes! This M/M is the London Decca Jubilee. In some regards it does better my best M/C's but there is no perfect cartridge. That is why some of us own so many! (grin) BTW: The Jubilee is #2 in London's lineup. I have only had the opportunity to hear London Decca's best. That is the "London Decca Reference". I intend to buy one when I can find one at the right price. Hum can be an issue with these so be prepared to try various grounding methods if you ever decide to buy one. It will put a smile on your face that is damn near impossible to remove! Regards, |
Chakster,
Quoate: ''I'd like to check top Glanz/Astatic, Garrott, Signet/AT line people advised on here, but do you think they really can compete with top of the line MCs ? It's hard to believe.''
I own examples of each of these. The simple answer to your question is "YES".
I have not discovered a M/M cartridge that is better than my 'best' M/C. But that is not the question. You aske if they can compete. If I had to say where in the ranking would the better M/M cartridges get placed if the were to be combined with the ratings of the better M/C's, I would place the M/M's in the upper middle of the entire list. A few, like the AT 180ML or the Signet TK 10 MKII (as examples), even a little higher. Regards, |
Sorry, I meant 150ANV the MM. The 50ANV is still available and might be a good investment. It's now < $1.5K and seems to have slightly better specs than ART7. |
Judging a cartridge from incomplete specs is like pissing in the wind - might not be what you had in mind. The 155LC has the same basic motor as the modern 440/120 or the 160ML. There's no arguing with opinion or value judgments, but don't try to pass it off as fact.
This 490mH generator isn't always loved when coupled with a tapered aluminum cantilever and a nude square shank ML, but in a deluxe body with a boron/ML or with a beryllium/LC, it might be a favorite. There also could be some generator modifications or "improvements" like laminations or stronger magnets, but everything old is better than new?
The 50ANV has a 350mH (150MLX) motor, the lowest inductance for an A/T MM today. Lower inductance means greater potential for transparency and extension. It's also harder to load. A/T first used titanium (body) in '89 with the ART1, a cart that set the industry on its ear. At $1200 list it competed directly with Clearaudio and Benz and outperformed them IMO. The ART2000 looks like an OC and has similar specs - .4mV, 12 ohms, boron/ML, 8g body. Is this different from an OC9II ?
Some express love for the Ortofon MC2000/3000. Were these coreless designs manufactured by Ortofon or Audio Technica? Strange that AT had identical models, they must have been the OEM.
What's the inflation rate for the past 30 years, 300% ?
No 2 phono carts of the same model are identical. Hand made MC's tend to be less so. Some companies QC is better than others. You pay your money and take your chances, but don't fool yourself thinking yours sounds just like all the others of the same model. |
Hello Chakster, You're talking about a modern 7" 45rpm record with a 1.5" center hole? Those are stereo microgroove pressings and normally played with a stereo pickup. If you have older mono versions you could play them with a conventional mono pickup. The only 45 dedicated cart I know of reside in juke boxes, but maybe there is?
If you're playing some vintage recordings you might want to use a slightly bigger stylus. Mono tips vary from modern advanced sizes and .6 - .7 spherical, up to about 1 mil. A very old or used record might sound better with the larger tip.
78rpm styli are 3 mil and inappropriate for microgrooves. Regards,
|
Meanwhile i remember someone mentioned rare Technics model EPC-102SP. It's hard to find any information about this SP model, but it was described as the cartridge to play SP records (with special stylus profile) without mentioning that SP is actually not just a singles, but a 78 RPM SINGLES (you know LP, EP, SP). I assume this is a MONO cartridge for 78 rmp vinyl only! It's headshell integrated model, but not for standard tonearm because it looks like Ortofon Type "A" headshell (all others from technics are standard like "B" type with 52mm overhang).
http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_085627.jpg http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_0152354.jpg
I decided to post it here since the Technics EPC-100cmk4, 100cMK3 and 205cMK4 were mentioned here. To make it easy to understand for someone who looking for old Technics pickups.
The Technics EPC-102-SP is not designed for 33/45 rpm stereo 7' inch singles (i would like to have MM cartridge designed for 45s), but designed for old 78 rpm 10' inch singles (SP records).
http://pds.exblog.jp/pds/1/200911/21/47/e0193247_09288.jpg
So this is another rare MM design for broadcast tonearms and in comparison to standard EPC series it looks like this:
http://yosigaki.s214.xrea.com/heppoko7.jpg
Long time one seller on a'gon advised this model to me when i was looking for a pickup dedicated to play singles (45 rpm, 7' inchers). He was wrong and i was a bit naive to dream about 45s dedicated pickup.
Source: http://audiooyazi.exblog.jp/d2009-11-21
|
Fleib
"There's lots of misinformation and/or apples/oranges comparisons the last 10 posts. We're presented with specs that ignore the generator and price comparisons that span 20 or 40 years. When I was a little kid gasoline was $0.25/gallon. As Miles would say, So What."
Please explain where is misinformation?
BTW The name of this thread itself is about Apples (MM) / Oranges (MC).
I did checked the prices for top MMs mentioned in this thread, some of them goes for up to $600-1400 used on ebay, some modern MM goes for $750 new. And some unknown MMs goes (sometimes) cheaper on auctions where nobody bidding on them (like Glanz, Astatic this week). In general some legendary MM are in the same category as some nice used MC (let's say $500-700). As someone mentioned before the increasing prices on good MM connected to this thread too.
I don't know who pay full price for new "high piced" MCs (say $3000) when they can be purchased here for half price (say $1500) with low hrs on it. But those are quality new MCs with modern Micro Ridge stylus with 2000 hrs life minimum. |
Oh boy, where to start? There's lots of misinformation and/or apples/oranges comparisons the last 10 posts. We're presented with specs that ignore the generator and price comparisons that span 20 or 40 years. When I was a little kid gasoline was $0.25/gallon. As Miles would say, So What.
A .2 x .7 mil elliptical has the smallest contact area of any stylus. It's a tiny oval. The .2 mil minor radius means it's also very slim and can track high frequencies like a banshee. There were a couple of CD-4 carts that used .2 elliptical. The problem is lack of vertical contact area, and all things being equal it will wear the fastest.
.2mil = 5.08um - thinner than shibata. Shibata has greater vertical contact area. It's thin enough for high frequencies and will tend to miss less from tracing or worn records. It's also cut with different facets on the front and back. That gives it a curved contact area as the record spins past and the "romantic" sound. It's actually a softening of high frequencies. More later, |
To be honest, untill this thread i have never expected people re-tip budged MM cartridges so often (along with cantilever and suspension replacement). I alway thought re-tipping is for MC (due to their desing) or just for very rare expensive MMs like Technics P100CMK4.
At the same time i have seen so many re-tipped MC cartridges on sale after the customer got it from re-tipper. It's quite often people broke the tip or cantilever on original MC, then they pay for re-tip (often SoundSmith or VDh) and after it's done they just tryin' to get rid of the cartridge (even if they say it's much better than the opriginal of course :) Which make me think than original desing means something important (at least for MC). No?
Still curious how good is the original motor of Technics 100cMK3 and who can make re-tip, new cantilever and suspension to make this cartridge much better than original and place in at the top leven MM even made ? |
Answering your question i can clearly say that all MC cartridges in my arsenal are better than vintage MMs i have tried. But i'm in the beggining of the road, i do not have much experience as you guys. I wish i could find decent MM design to compete with my MC (for example my favorite vintage Argent MC500HS high output sapphire cantilever with hyper elliptical stylus).
Audio-Technica MC ART-2000 ltd (boron, micro line stylus) simply blown away all top Technics MMs like selected 205cmk4 and used 100cmk3. With ZYX CPP-1 Pre-Pre connected to MM stage this AT ART-2000 MC sounds even more detailed. The price of this MC is not much higher than their top MMs (no matter vintage or new in $300-750 category). This Argent MC on the right tonearm also blown away all the technics top line. Before i have tried them (MCs) i thought these MMs are fantastic.
I'm not talking about my ZYX Airy or ZYX 4D Premium here, cos the price is much higher.
I'd like to check top Glanz/Astatic, Garrott, Signet/AT line people advised on here, but do you think they really can compete with top of the line MCs ? It's hard to believe.
I have starded another thread about exotic Bamboo cantilever of Madake by Miyajima. If you think cantilever is very important i wonder what do you think about organic bamboo cantilevers :)
|
I have had many cartridges re-tipped. But I am using this word in a very broad sense. Actually a new cantilever also came with this 're-tip'. Never have I stayed with the original profile if it was a M/M. I have always 'upgraded' the profile. Sometimes with a Shibata. Sometimes with something more exotic. All depends on what I wanted as its end results. Personally I think the cantilever makes the biggest change overall. I also prefer the Shibata profile. It adds a bit or romance to the presentation. (grin) I don't believe there has been a 10, 20, 30+ fold improvement in cartridges over the last couple of decades yet the prices have increase that much and more. Yes, I understand that if you sell less, you have to charge more but this spiraling upwards of prices began way before the market reduction of sales which was due to the CD. I think the word 'greed' fits in here quite nicely. The SAS from Jico is a very good example of what is wrong with the cartridge pricing. They Sell the Technics 205C SAS for $133. Try to find a re-tipper willing to mount a Boron cantilever with a Micro-Ridge tip for that amount of money. A cartridge dealer usually wants at least 50% of the original selling price to get a repair. Why such a difference between Jico and the rest of the industry? Surely Jico is making a profit at $133. Clear Audio has a cartridge. The Virtuoso. Sold for $900+. It turned out to be a Audio Technica AT 95E. The AT can be bought for $30! Yes, Clear Audio made a few changes to the AT 95E, but to charge 30 times the price of the original AT is just 'GREED'. We buy these old M/M cartridge due to value. There has been very little improvement and what improvements have been discovered can be applied through a new cantilever/stylus. Weather it be through Jico, an original off of ebay, or re-tipping, it is as good if not better that what can be bought today and done so for far less money. |
So why do we need MM when we have MC (for the same price) ? So you believe that MCs are better than MMs at equal price levels...? |
I guess so ... Otherwise i don't understand why people retipping old cartridges to the new standard when totally new cartridges available and claimed to be better. Ferefing to you own comment the old ATs are better than new ATs. Same we can see looking at their specifications (if it means something).
The questions is also a comparison of MM vs. MC of the same brand (Audio-Technica) when the price for their 150ANV (MM) is similar to the price of Limited Edition AT-ART2000 (MC). I can confirm that the last one is amazing cartridge, but i never checked their MMs.
So why do we need MM when we have MC (for the same price) ? |
Chakster, Interesting specs.... Why do you imagine manufacturers of current model MM cartridges are building them to lesser standards than past ones...and certainly lesser standards than current model LOMCs...? Is there some sinister plot...❓👹 |
Chakser,
I own everyone of the cartridges you mention except the ART 2000. The ART that I own is the new 9. It is 'by far' the best cartridge when compared to everything that we have discussed. It is also better than many that we have not! Regards, |
"Whilst the AT150ANV sounds similar tonally to both the AT155Lc and the Signet TK7LCa....it somehow misses the ability to convey the emotional impact of the music." -Halcro
Yep, looking at vintage AT155LC spects (1982) i found it superior to latest AT150ANV (and AT150MLX).
--------------*** AT155Lc SPECTS--------------
Frequency Response: 5-35,000 Hz *** Channel Separation: 32 dB (1 kHz) Tracking Force Range: 0.8-1.6 g Stylus Construction: 0,12 mm, Nude square shank Recommended Load Impedance: 47,000 ohms Output: 5 (mV at 1 kHz, 5 cm/sec) Channel Balance: 0.5 dB Stylus Shape: Linear Contact Cantilever: Beryllium Compliance: 16 (100Hz)
--------------*AT150ANV spects. --------------
Frequency Response: 10-23,000 Hz Channel Separation: 30 dB (1kHz) Vertical Tracking Force: 1.2 - 1.8 grams Recommended Load Impedance: 47 k-ohms Output: 4 mV Channel Balance: 0.8 dB (1 kHz Stylus Shape: MicroLine™ (ML) Cantilever: Sapphire Pipe Compliance: 10 (100Hz)
--------------*AT150MLX spects--------------
Frequency Response: 10-30,000 Hz Channel Separation: 30 dB (1 kHz) Tracking Force Range: 0.75 - 1.75 g Stylus Construction: Nude square shank Recommended Load Impedance: 47,000 ohms Output: 4 mV Channel Balance: 0.8 dB Stylus Shape: MicroLine™ (ML) Cantilever: Gold-plated Boron Compliance: 10 (100Hz)
Now i wonder how all these MM sounds compared to my ltd. Audio-Technica MC design (which i like). Is is worth to try AT MMs (i'm not sure).
-------------- AT-ART-2000 spects --------------
Playback frequency range: 10 - 50,000Hz Output voltage: 0.4mV Channel separation: 30dB (1kHz) Output balance: 1dB (1kHz) Stylus pressure: 1.6 - 2.0g Coil impedance: 12 Omega (1kHz) Direct current resistance: 12 Omega Load resistance: Head amplifier: 100 Omega or more Trance: 20 Omega or more Coil inductance: 50 mu H (1kHz) Stylus: Angular MicroLine™ (ML) Compliance 9 (100Hz)
|
This is very interesting fact:
"The earlier Pyramid stylus - released in the late 1950's appears to be the first attempt at a Line contact stylus, however at that time there was no pressing need for it in the market, and the concept appears to have failed commercially, and disappeared with very little trace. The idea was then resurrected with the release of CD4 and the Shibata.)"
I wonder which stylus profile people use for retipping top of the line Technics 100c series mk3 and mk4 (eliptical), those who want to keep it close to the original (as someone described here earlier). If the original Technics naked stylus was laser mounted to boron cantilever i guess modern profiles are just glued to the boron cantilever ? Correct me if i'm wrong.
Technics mk3 spects are: 5Hz to 100 kHz (20Hz ~ 15 kHz ± 0,3 db) Eliptical 0.2 x 0.7 mil / 5 x 18 um
range of eliptical profiles are: Eliptical 0.4 x 0.7 mil / 10 x 18 um - budget styli Eliptical 0.3 x 0.7 mil / 8 x 18 um - quality styli Eliptical 0.2 x 0.7 mil / 5 x 18 um - premium styli *
"When they developed CD4 Quad 4 channel recordings, they needed to be able to record and play back frequencies up to 45kHz - more than twice the highest goal frequency attained with the eliptical styli. Also the very fine corrugations in the groove required for 45kHz could be more easily worn away, so a design was required that could 1) track much higher frequencies and 2) Reduce wear on the record. "
and now we have all these:
Shibata "large" design 6 x 75 um Shibata "small" design 6 x 50 um Hyper Eliptical (various sizes!) Stereohedron 0.3 x 2.8 mil / 7 x 72 um Line Contact (various sizes) Fine Line 8 x 40 um These are all much the same. Micro Line 2.5 x 75 um Micro Ridge 3.8 x 75 um VanDenHull 4 x 70 um FritzGeiger 5 x 70 um SAS 2.5 x 75 um Paratrace 4 x 70 um
Source: https://sites.google.com/site/zevaudio/turt/stylus-shape-information |
Chakster,
Your first mate and I would agree. My MK IV (original) also preforms better than the XL-55. That was why I sold the XL-55 and bought the XL-88. Just so anyone who reads this thread understands. There is not doubt that an original Technics, weather it be the 205C or the 100C are great cartridges. But its styli profile is only an elliptical. Only so much information can be removed from the record grooves with this profile design. This is why the conical got replace by the elliptical, and why the elliptical has been replaced by several generations of profiles since. Regards, |
It's a matter of taste then. To my ears original stylus of 205c MK4 has very pleased presentation, sweet, delailed (especially in the upper range). My sample also came from Alex Tan. However even used 100c MK3 goes much deeper in the bass with better soundstage and more organic presentation than sweeter sound of 205c mk4. That's why i only keep100c MK3.
Jico SAS stylus looks too ugly on the beautiful 205c mk4, but this is just aesthetic point of view of course. Original Technics 205c MK4 is their best design IMHO. Looks a bit like lipstic from the colorful 80s era. Jico SAS with that big black front pannel kills everything aesthetically.
In terms of sound SAS is full of details etc but somehow boring, maybe it's just me.
P.S. My flat mate who tested those Technics with me also voted for full original 205cmk4 and 100cmk3 (his own cartridge is Sony XL55 MC). Jico SAS replacement was new from Japan btw. |
Chakster,
I bought a NOS (new old stock), Technics 205C MK IV stylus from Foxtan about 5 years ago. I now own 2 of these MK IV stylus's. They both can be outperformed by the SAS. Perhaps it is the SAS that is the 'ONE' that is a cut above the rest? Regards |
Yep Griffithds If the SAS for 205c MK3 is an improvement I can't say the same about 205c MK4 which is a much better cartridge with stock technics stylus. It was not easy to find 205c MK4 in absolutely perfect condition (suspension/stylus). I have tried 4 good working samples and only ONE of them was absolutely amazing (like new).
Now i have only upper model 100c MK3 and i hope Jico could release their SAS stylus for this extremely rare 100 series. I really want to hear full potential of this cartridge. Sometimes i even start thinking of suspension refresh and retip of my 100c MK3 (Alex in Germany can do that, i asked him several times). But i would prefer to find one extra original 100ED3 stylus just to make A/B test with my used 100ED3 stylus. Sometimes i just want to sell my 100c MK3. it's a big question to keep it and invest more or to sell it. That headshell intergated version is not for my main system anymore (since i sold my EPA 100 tonearm). but for second system it's such a great MM cartridge. |
Chakster,
Interesting comments in regards to the SAS and your comparison with the Technics MK 4. I find just the opposite. I even have a MK 4 with good suspension but in need of a new tip in which I refuse to have repaired. The reason being is why pay $400 to re-tip something that will not sound as good as a SAS which can be bought for $133. It just sits in the original box wasting away! |
Fleib, absolutely no broblem to track all bands on HiFi Analog Test LP with 2g tracking force. I must say the sounds really opened up on Reed 3p tonearm with much more air and details. Before i have tested it on several arms including EPA-100 and Schick. It was much better on schick than on EPA. This cartridge really rocks and do some magic.
"HS" means High Output & Sapphire Cantilever. With output like that it's possible to use even MM imput on my preamp, but the magic starts only when i use MC imput on my WLM Phonata phono tage (with automatic impedance).
The cartridge sounds so lound that even with my 5W per channel triod tube amp (WLP Minueta) paired with Zu Druid MK4 (101db) i always use minimum volume control (almost nothing at late night sessions).
The cartridge is very obscure and i know it's nothing in the internet, except one image of their catalog page with all models listed with spects. Argent diamont is the top of the line. My 500HS (sapphire) also available as 500HR (ruby).
With this cartridge i just enjoy music and happy to listen more and more. I have tried Zyx Airy, Zyx 4D Premium, AT-ART2000 ltd, Technics EPC-100cmk3, Technics EPC-205cMK3 and MK4, Denon DL-107, Ortofon SPU GM Classic MK2, Ortofon SPU Spirit Ltd ... etc.
The tonal balance of Argent 500HS (on Reed 3p) with slam of high output i like the most.
I'm still not sure it was made in USA or in Japan for Argent. Compliance listed as 8x10-6 (but i don't know at 10Hz or at 100Hz). Anyone?
There must be an article in Absolute Sound Mag (Vol.8, number 29, March 1983) on page 170. If someone can scan and upload it would be nice :) |
Chakster, Any problems with tracking or the suspension on the MC500HS? There's not a whole lot of information out there. Apparently Argent went out of business after a few years.
Tracks 1.8 to 2.2g, 1.9mV, boron/HE ???
Thanks, |
thank you Griffithds That's what i heard before about TRX-2 and Astrion, seller also preffered TRX-2. |
Thanks Halcro I wonder how do they perform against fabulous Technics EPC-100cMK3 ? I forgot who shipped his Technics to Alex for suspenssion replacement / "refresh" etc, but i'm still not sure about my own EPC-100cMK3 which perform very well (but maybe could do better after Alex service).
However, In my experience i didn't like modern Jico SAS stylus on my EPC-205cMK4 (the original technics stylus deliver what you're talking about).
Anyway i preffer my high output vintage Argent MC500HS to both of them. |
Chakster,
To answer you question in regards the the ADC Astrion. It is better than the TRX I. I prefer the TRX II over the Astrion but we are splitting hairs here. It could be nothing more that production variations because they are quite close. As far the the TRX III. Never found one to buy so I can not say. Regards, |
Back in the day analog reproduction was all there was for the consumer, and records were pressed in the tens of thousands, even millions of copies, so why wouldn't most efforts back then be concentrated on analog?
Even with the resurgence records are now a specialty product and record playing is more of a hobby, but I doubt if the best tables/arms 30 years ago better all of todays'. If you were considering being a cart manufacturer today, would you want to compete with the big guys for a non-existent mass market, or tout your hand made $8K MC and hope you can survive or even thrive?
Japanese MC's started flooding the market in the '70s. The characteristic rising high end complimented many primitive speakers, and in all honesty some have superior imaging. This is due to that rising high end and/or more extended high frequency resonance, plus low inductance. Of course there are exceptions, but the situation was worsened by incompetent and corrupt reviewers who defined the gestalt. MM/MI carts require more careful loading, not less, and without it performance suffers.
On page 233 in this thread Dlaloum mentions Shure V-15/SAS. He says the V15 III and IV are best with SAS. |
I have the AT150ANV and the AT7V and have compared them to their vintage brethren. Whilst the AT150ANV sounds similar tonally to both the AT155Lc and the Signet TK7LCa....it somehow misses the ability to convey the emotional impact of the music. In fact...if I had to summarise the single greatest difference between the fine vintage cartridges and their modern equivalents....it's this general inability of the modern versions, to raise goosebumps..⚡️ The AT7V is really a cheap entry model which lacks refinement and polish. |
I'm in the middle of reading this thread, but couldn't find the opition about modern production of Garrott for example.
While people talking about benefits of vintage MMs, we still have so called upgraded versions of the classic MMs like Garrott P77i vs P77, Nagaoka MP50 vs. MP500, Audio-Technica AT155LC vs AT150MLX vs. AT150ANV ..., also old Signet TK7 vs. Audio-Technica AT7V etc.
Laterst versions of Garrott use the most complicated stylus profiles.
If someone compared vintage classic models vs. modern upgraded models of the same series, it would be nice to read about in this thread.
And the question about vintage ADC for experienced users: Does the super rare ADC Astrion is superior to rare ADC TRX 1,2,3 ? |
They say you have to kiss many frogs before you find your prince...🐸 Luckily with vintage cartridges...that adage doesn't necessarily apply..😍 Over the last six years the majority of the fifty or more used vintage cartridges I have bought have given me much satisfaction as well as knowledge. As one's ears become keener and more selective, the purchases become more informed and perhaps esoteric......and through Forums like this....newly discovered gems can be unearthed. And so it was that through the words of Griffithds and with the help of Banquo...I acquired a Victor Z1 and Victor X1/IIE. There is no 'burn-out' with phono cartridges as each new model promises to deliver a unique experience... In the case of these Victors....that is exactly what occurred...👅 I know the majority of 'high-end' audiophiles sneer at the very thought of a humble MM cartridge and smugly write a cheque for the next $8,000 LOMC panacea to their vinyl playback, and if one compares the current available range of production MM cartridges...I may agree with them. But the simple fact is that the art of MM design and production reached its zenith 30 years ago and some of those models are simply better than the very best current LOMCs produced and certainly better than modern MM design. Why is this so...❓👀 Possibly for the same reasons that some turntables and arms designed and produced 30-40 years ago are better than those of today...😎 In the world of analogue audio, it should be remembered that many great minds, many great companies and more funding than can be imagined today were concentrated towards the ultimate betterment of the analogue chain..🎼 |
Thanks for the feedback on the Shure carts guys. The Victor Z1 and P77 I have coming should keep me busy for awhile. Will have to investigate the Shure's one of these days. |
Travbrow,
Yes, he is still around. He has just returned from a vacation. Answering emails is not one of his specialties. His turn around time has gotten even slower than what Sound Smith's was when it was at its worst. Andy at 'The Needle Clinic' has been turning them around in a couple of weeks. Regards, |
Is Axel still around? Has Two of my cartridges for almost a year, didn't reply to my last week. |
Sorry.....I meant to say HiFiDo sells V15s for $300.....not $400 👹 |
Sarcher, You are quite right about the lack of 'love' here for Shure cartridges. In fact I wrote a post here about just that nearly a year ago. If you visit other Forums, you will see the great love for the Shure V15 in all its configurations....especially with the addition of the Jico SAS stylus. HiFiDo has about 10 Shure V15 cartridges for sale every week of every year...and they are snapped up for $400 each. I consider the V15/III/SAS about the best 'bang-for-buck' MM cartridge easily available for the modern audiophile..😎 |
Sarcher, the Ultra 500 is one of my favorite cartridges, but there are not very many out there. Don't forget the Ultra 300 and 400 when searching. There are a lot of NOS styli, due to scarcity of actual cartridges. Another Shure which uses the Ultra stylus is the 140he. A little laid back, but I like them all!
I have not heard it with the Jico SAS on the Ultra 500, but have heard from others it is awesome. I have only heard the 500 with the VN5MR. |
Sarcher30,
I think it is from 'over' hype! They are a good cartridge. So are the Grado's. But due to their rivalry and hype, both have suffered. There are followers of both and you would not go wrong to own either brand, especially the models that you have already mentioned. As for the Grado's. Put an 8MZ stylus on one (find a G1+ body), and you will understand what I have just stated. I'm not stating that they will somehow magically transform your system, but only that they diffidently will compete with what is available! Regards, |
I've never heard one, but I'm wondering why there not much love for Shure carts on this thread? How do they compare to some of the better carts talked about here. Mostly curious about the V and Ultra 500 with a Jico SAS. |
Lewm,
Never heard the 100. IIRC, Raul expressed his preference for the 200 over the 100. 200 is clearly more refined than 300, but I like the 300 for rock and roll. The presentation/stage of the 300 is huge; it reminded me of the Acutex 420str. Don't hold me to it, but if I already had that Acutex, I wouldn't be in any rush to find the 300. As for the 200, I looked for a replacement stylus for what seemed like forever. Then, out of the blue, Acman3 sent me one (thanks, again!). I reviewed it on this thread somewhere; maybe you can get Abrew19 to find the exact page :).
Although there were none to be found during my search for the 200, mysteriously there is a veritable cornucopia now on the bay. At the asking prices, I wouldn't hesitate to grab one, except for one reason: the suspension on these astatics seem especially frail. I've had 2 fail prematurely on me, and my present 300 is riding low. Yikes. YMMV.
Good luck finding a mf2500. I have the generator, but the line contact stylus seems to be unobtainium. |
Lewm,
To address your question, The order of preference is as you stated. I own the MF-100 and the MF-300. The MF-100 reminds me of the ADC ZLM in regards to its performance attributes. I've not done the comparison but it is said the the MF-200 could be the preferred cartridge, over the MF-100 in some systems! There were models by Glantz that were the same as the Astatic's. I do not recall what those model numbers were but I am sure there are people (Nandric), who would know. I recall there being a Glantz thread which covered alot of information about the cross referencing. Regards, |
Can't no one say nothin' about Astatic for my benefit.
Abrew19, The secret of most of us is that we don't have to read these 235 pages of posts, because most of us were on the thread from the beginning and read the posts at a leisurely pace as they accumulated during the past few years. We've got a "feel" for the contents, but the details do fade over time. Glad you've got a job, though. And glad you have no objection to this geezer cracker-barrel discussion of old things. |
Dgarretson,
I hear ya, but when you can have the best of both worlds, volume and no hum, sure does make life worth living! (grin) Regards, |