What's up with the Audio Technica AT155LC. Don't recall it being mentioned before.
Brad
Brad
Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?
Raul and everybody chime in on Arm mass one more time. It would seem most of the catridges being discussed are high compliance that would normally use a low mass arm. The compliance ratings I have looked at for most of the common cartridges discussed. But I have seen for instance a Sumiko MMT or current Jelco's being recommended, which are pretty heavy arms at 20g effective mass. Bare with me here as one who wants to try a few MM have one nice arm to use with them, but certainly not at the level as many of you, I cannot be the only one. I know we have also commented that the resonance charts/effective arm mass info is not abosolute, but it must have some meaning. For those of us that want to buy a few nice catridges, and one good arm, what should we be buying. In my case, I have 2 arms now, an MMT and a SME Series II IMP/fixed headshell. These 2 are on extreme opposite ends 20g for the MMT and 6.5 for the SME. The MMT at 20g mass seems to lock out any of the high compliance cartridges, many of which are 20-30 at 10hz. MY SME fixed headshell works fine with my Ortofon VMS20E MKII. But this arm has it limitations in up to 1.5g VTF and only an 8 gram max cartridge(less if you include fasteners) So I am thinking about an arm that would have a mass of about 9.5g or so and that would work with a wider array of cartridge weights and compliances and a wider VTF setting. I would like to buy an arm new, but don't see buying a Jelco or other heavy arm, but have thought about an M2 10. |
Dear friends: More fine opportunities: http://cgi.ebay.com/GRACE-F-9L-CARTRIDGE-/360293609520?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_3104wt_1137 these ones accept the AT200 stylus replacement: http://cgi.ebay.com/Audio-Technica-Headshell-AT-15sa-Phono-Cartridge-/320581455739?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_500wt_1154 http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Audio-Technica-AT15SS-Turntable-Cartridge-/270626803320?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0#ht_500wt_1154 Good luck. Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Plinko I own the Nagoaka MP50 and tye dyna XV-1. Is the MP50 better than the XV-1. No its not, however its not worse either, only different. The MP50 has a more balanced sound and maybe can sound a little lite at worst, fresh and vibtant at best. the dyna definately has a bigger bass, but depending on your system may be a bit bloated in direct comparison. thy dyna has that MC high end lift (to a lower degree to most) that a lot of MC's have, not a bad thing indeed, but there never the less after you havce played with MM's for a while. for the $$, a bargin but don't expect it to be at a different level but it definately has the potential to sound great with the rigfht ancillaries. the XX2 is very good. |
Dear firends: A fine B&O " touch " ( top of the line in its times. ): http://cgi.ebay.com/Bang-Olufsen-MMC-20CL-phono-cartridge-BOXED-/220660560110?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item336064f0ee#ht_915wt_1137 this one too: http://cgi.ebay.com/AKG-P8ES-stereo-phono-cartridge-NEW-OLD-STOCK-/220660405048?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3360629338#ht_886wt_1137 Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Downunder: Yes, Nagaoka is a fine performer. Btw and just curious: almost every audio item you add to your system you listed in your " virtual system " like the A-90 cartridge. You own several MM/MI cartridges that like the Nagaoka you really like it you even are a proudly and privigeled ( I assume this because what you posted on its quality performance more than once. )owner of the great Technics MM cartridge but you don't put in your " virtual system " items list, no single MM/MI cartridge there! Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi All, Does anyone know if Empire ever made the 1000 ZE/X without the name etched on it as normal? I've seen similar on some of the 999 XE/X cartridges that I have but came across a 1000 ZE/X (in original box etc) that bears no writing. I wonder if this is just wear, as the stylus definitely fits etc. Views and information keenly needed Cheers |
Dear Waynefia: I think and I already posted that one critical factor/subject on tonearm choice for MM/MI cartridges is to look for a low pivot bearing friction more than low effective mass ( 08-18-10 post in this same page, just below Lewm and Birdliver posts. ). Here is something that I read on the AKG P8 cartridge description: ++++++ " It should be matched with only the finest tonearms having very low friction in the pivot bearings below 15mg in any direction. * ++++++ The AT tonearms have very low bearing friction, lower than 10mg as the Technics ones that are around 5-7mg. I name these tonearms because all them are medium to high effective mass but the AT 1100. All them performs really good with any MM/MI cartridge I tested on it. In the other side there are tonearms like the Dynavector 505/507 where the bearing friction is higher: around 40-50mg, that's still low against the VTF but high on what cartridges needs. A low bearing friction is almost good to help a better groove tracking. So, don't go only because the tonearm effective mass that IMHO it is not the critical issue but many other subjects around where the bearing friction play an important role. Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Dear Raul, In your remarks about bearing friction, I presume you refer to friction in the lateral plane. Yes? Of course for the DV tonearms, we have two different pivots, one for lateral and one for vertical. Does DV publish the figure you quoted (40-50mg) for friction of the bearing in the lateral plane? Thanks. I would not be surprised if you were correct. OR perhaps you are talking about vertical friction, since the MMs have such high compliance. |
Dear friends: More fine options. This is very hard to find: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ADC-Astrion-cartridge-/130424597252?pt=Turntable_Parts_Accessories#ht_500wt_1154 anoter AKGs: http://cgi.ebay.de/Phono-Cartridge-Tonabnehmer-AKG-P8ES-vd-Hul-II-/230516187328?pt=Plattenspielerzubeh%C3%B6r#ht_968wt_1137 Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: I'm refering on both vertical/horizontal-lateral. Both are important for groove tracking. These are the 507 specs: Specifications Type Bi-Axis inertia controlled Dynamic and Eddy Current Damping Dynamic Balance type tone arm Overall length 306mm. With head shell: max 326 mm Effective length 241mm (i.e. tonearm pivot point to cartridge stylus point) Overhang 15mm Offset angle 21.5 degree Height 59mm lifts up to 92mm Height adjustment range 39mm-72mm at sub arm center Depth 36mm without connecting cable Optimum cartridge weight 15-35 grams, including headshell Horizontal tracking angle error -1.1 degree - +2.2 degree , 0 degree at inner band of record, 2.2 degree at outside Tracking force adjustment range 0-38 grams by 0.2 grams step Sensitivity Horizontal:less than 50 mgrams, Vertical:less than 40 mgrams Net weight 1,380 grams Output connection 5P connector Headshell connection EIA standards 4 Pin connector Accessary low resistance (0.046 ohms/m, 54pF/m) high quality arm cable, milled aluminium headshell weight 15.4 grams. mounting template for the arm overhang guage for the headshell in the 505 both are 50mgrs. Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
I recently bought a new hyper eleptical stylus for my Empire 600LAC from LP Gear. I am very happy with the sound but noticed that the cantilever is at a sharper angle than the old generic stylus I was using.I have had to increase the VTA to allow for this. Are the Jico styluses like this? Do you think the Jico SAS would be much better than the LP Gear one? At the moment I think the 600 LAC is sounding better than the I have been using.Way better than a Denon 103 for example. |
Some sad news: Kevin at KABUSA informed me that he has sold the last of his stock of NOS Stanton D22E/Pickering D3001E 0.2x0.7 elliptical styli. I just spent a few hours comparing these with the NOS stereohedrons and JICO shibata replacements using both Pickering XSV5000 and Stanton 981HZS bodies. These ellipticals sound nearly indistinguishable from the much costlier stereohedrons, preferable with some music. I regret not having given them a better listen when stock was available. At $79 they were an absolute steal. |
Not to be a nitpicker, Raul, but the data you quote say "less than" 50mg for the bearing friction of a DV507. This means to me that there is some sample to sample variation but that the value is always "less than" 50mg. However, one hopes that is a very conservative statement, because that's a fair amount of friction for a high end tonearm. |
Dear Jtgofish: The 600LAC is a good Empire cartridge ( like almost all Empire's. ). I never heard the LPgear stylus replacement and I think there is no SAS replacement for the 600LAC. If you are going to buy a stylus replacement maybe is better to go with the original one. You can find here: http://www.adelcom.net/EmpireStylus1.htm or here: http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=296 Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Downunder: Thak's for your kindness. Maybe you already know, my thoughts on that subject comes because other persons that I know they own ( by personal recommendation. ) vintage MM/MI cartridges does not list in their virtual systems. I'm talking on M.Lavigne, Doug, Vetterone(S.Doobins. ), etc, etc. Even and like you Halcro does not list his beloved Empire. I know that some of them ( like you ) maybe have no time ( camera ) or is not important to do it or even they don't want to disclose these " humble gems " because maybe that could goes against their " personal image ". Anyway, only my thoughts and every one makes what he likes, no problem about. I'm proud of every single audio link in my audio system. regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: Like you almost all audiophiles are totally unaware of the bearing friction " figure " in their tonearms and this fact is mainly because the tonearm manufacturers almost no one disclose that information. In the other side we audiophiles really does not care about because we never had reasons to be aware and almost never no one speaks about. I really was unaware of its importance either. I take real " conscience " on this pivot tonearm bearing friction important subject when I decided to design a pivot tonearm and latter on because these MM/MI alternative. I think that we all make for " done " that the tonearm bearing friction is no single issue with our cartridge/tonearm quality performance and today I know that's not totally true. Anyway, an additional analog audio subject to think about. regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Thanks Raul, Situation corrected although I did have the Garrott P77 listed. The Empire 4000D/III Gold is everything you describe in your review...and perhaps even more. I intend to add reviews of both it and the 1000ZE/X in due course, which are quite different to each other yet offer insights into vinyl reproduction which seem to elude most LOMC cartridges? |
Wayne, I would say "no" to your question, if you want to make rules. As a rule, the need to match cartridge compliance with tonearm effective mass is still valid, but it is obvious from everyone's experience that there ARE other factors at play (e.g., the difficulty of measuring actual compliance under dynamic conditions, the other elements of tonearm design) that sometimes result in good sound from unlikely tonearm/cartridge partners. Anyway, really, the compliance/mass thing only applies to determining the resonant frequency, which only needs to be within a fairly wide acceptable range. After that, everything else (e.g., bearing friction, apparently) counts. So the bottom line I would live by is that if there is any reasonable possibility of a match, try it. |
Dgob: The best information I can offer comes from Empire Sci.: Empire states all styli fit all cartridges within that family. Specifically listed are the 1000/900 series. Empire cautions that although the cartridges can be upgraded through the styli, the cartridge retains it's character. Perhaps of greater help, output voltage for the 1000Z/EX is given at 5.0mv., 999V/EX, 999T/EX @ 6.0mv. The 999S/EX, 99E/X, 909E/X and the 90E/X @ 8.0mv output. Some Empires in this range have the cartridge designation printed on an adhesive film label. Perhaps your example came with similar identification but it has fallen off? Anyone familiar with Signet cartridges? Information/opinion specific to the AM (Analog Master) or MR (Maximum Resolution) versions would be appreciated. I've happened onto a number of NOS stylii for these, the AM20 (nude minature elliptical) is very nice but I've not been able to find a cartridge for the MR 5.0 (5.0 basic, 5.0-e and 5.0-mr) series for which I now have a redundancy of styli. Packaging for some are the Signet U.S.A. label, others show AT, made in Japan as the source. Apparently these, as well as the OC-9 and the 440-ML were Signet designs and continued by AT when Signet was purchaced by them in the ?early 90's?. Thanks in advance for any information. |
Dear Wayne: Tonearm bearing friction is important factor/target in any tonearm design and IMHO has main influence during playback in either cartridge compliance. I posted several times that whatever cartridge we have ( regarding compliance ) we can try in the tonearm we own whatever the tonearm effective mass and heard/hear it. I tested several cartridges/tonearms with out cares about effective mass/compliance and till today I can think was ok for me. I'm not saying that it is not important the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency because it is but I think that we are worried to much on it and maybe we have to put our " thinking/effort " on opther important tonearm/cartridge subjects. I posted that the resonance frequency tonearm/cartridge " figure " is a point to start but not the one that decide my final " road ". In the other side, if we analize the tonearm/resonance calculation formula/equation we can see that we need the manufacturer Tonearm Effective Mass value: we take it from the tonearm manual specs and here emerge an important question? ( at least important to me ): in what place/position the tonearm manufacturer " put " the tonearm counterweight to calculate the tonearm effective mass? the tonearm counterweight is the heaviest weight that counts in the effective mass calculations. If the counterweight was/is at the very " front "/nearest to the tonearm pivot ( where the counterweight effective mass is at minimum. ) we have a tonearm effective mass that is IMHO not real because in no cartridge/tonearm set up the counterweight is in that position. If we move the counterweight at a more " real " position the tonearm effective mass is different and not for 0.3grs but maybe for 2-4grs due to the high counterweight weight. Those differences in grs. in the real tonearm effective mass makes a difference in the resonance frequency calculations that could goes over 2hz-3hz. So we really don't have a precise/accurate tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency value. To this fact we have to think/add that the cartridge/tonearm " react " not in a static way ( tonearm/cartridge in rest. No playback. ) but when are in playback through a recording. Maybe I'm wrong but this is what I think about and my advise is that you make what I'm make and made about in the last 10+ years: forget that tonearm/cartridge resonance " figure " because TODAY we can't be sure if the value that comes out from those calculations is TRUE and if really has and makes a " difference " for the better: how can we hear/heard or discern ( and be sure. ) a quality performance change due in specific to that tonearm/cartridge resonance " figure? . I'm aware that the subject has its self importance level and that's why we in our tonearm self design are on the research to choose a tonearm effective mass that can put " calm " in my brain it does not matters the cartridge characteristics. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Lewm: In those times IMHO more than " brag " about was at least to things: first a " fierce " competence in the cartridge and tonearm market and second maybe those designers not only take care about but thinks that the tonearm bearing friction was an important subject and something to disclose for the customers were aware about. I'm sure that all tonearm today designers take care about, the question is: why choose not disclose it? Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Timeltel, Many thanks for your curteous help. I've resolved the issue now and the adhesive label that you reference is the cause. The 1000 ZE/X also has a round stylus fixing pin in contrast to the 999 series and their diamond shaped ones. The 1000 ZE/X is interesting and better than the earlier model that I had exchanges would have led me to believe. Although it doesn't scale the heights of the Technics 100Mk4 or Glanz G5, it is a quite detailed performer and great fun. Good luck with the Signet data search and I shall of course contact you if I come upon any related info. As always |
Hi All, I've still not found time to test the ADC Point Four cartridge but have come across a bit more info. There's a very positive review of it in The Gramaphone. You can find it at: http://www.gramophone.net/Issue/Page/November%201964/107/805510/TECHNICAL+REPORTS#header-logo. Of course, I'll comment on it when I find time to fully audition it and if I find it to be worthy of such Till then... |
Regards, Raul. It seems to me that from simply observing audible and visual cues one can determine if the tonearm is appropriate for the cartridge in use. Just as over-damping of a low mass tonearm will result in excessive flexing of the cantilever and result in audible tracing or tracking problems, a tonearm not suited to the cartridge (by reason of mass or bearing friction) will cause the cantilever to move outside of its optimal position. This results in the cartridge percieving a false signal generated by inertial/momentum induced tonearm movement (or failure to follow the groove) and not from the recording. Excessive wear of the the stylus and vinyl are likely, damage to delicate suspensions is also a possible consequence. This applies, of course, to the discussion of high compliance cartridges. Resonance concerns aside, your advice to try it and see lacks the specificity we are seeking but is most appropriate. Your comment on the position of the counterweight is also noteworthy. IMO, best audible results occur when, with proper VTF applied, the weight is approximately midway between the extremes of available adjustment. Headshell weight and composition, TA mass, bearing friction, to damp or not, cartridge weight, isolation and compliance are all "points of interest" on the road to good audio. Like a Key West waterfront juggling act, one just can't know how it'll come out until it's done! Signet. Anyone? |
Dear Timeltel: +++++ " a tonearm not suited to the cartridge (by reason of mass or bearing friction) will cause the cantilever to move outside of its optimal position. This results in the cartridge percieving a false signal generated by inertial/momentum.... " ++++++ sorry my ignorance but: which or where are the " foundations " that could confirm these statements? antiskating, stylus near its life end, wrong set up, bad tonearm damping, even just a bad tracker cartridge or a combination of these factors could shows what you are telling too. IMHO there are a lot of things that are not very clear on the subject. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Aolsala adnn Timeltel, Just started to audition the ADC Point 4 and, straight off, I have been surprised by what $5 can get you!! I think Aolsala is correct that they perform best with copper leads and phono' cables. Need more time to get over the shock and newness of it and then to give my critical faculties familiarisation time before making any fully qualititative assessments but it's very promising at this point. I'd say that its got something special (not surprising for ADC cartridges maybe but), even when heard on the back of playing the Empire 1000 ZE/X!? Stay tuned |
Timeltel, I have a Signet MR 5.0 ml.I had a me but suspension gave out, and replaced with supposedly better stylus. I used it from late 80's til a few years ago. I always enjoyed it but IMHO it is not as good as the cartridges mentioned in this thread. I am going to install it on my table tonight and reconfirm. Where are you located? Maybe I can get it to you to see for yourself. Danny |
When I ordered a replacement stylus for my Empire 600LAC I also bought a new Stanton 681EEE cartridge. I set this up in VPI 10.5 tonearm/Technics SP10 with Kenata plinth and had a quick listen.I thought it sounded quite good but not a patch on the Empire. Since then I have set it up in a Grace 707 tonearm/Kenwood KD500 direct drive[one of the marble plinthed ones] and am astounded by how good it sounds. It is vastly better than that other budget wonder-the Denon 103.So many MC cartridges sound refined and clear but lack vibrancy and musicality by comparison. |
Regards, Raul. You ask a simple question, to answer it requires your patience. From authoritative sources: "The net effect of a poor tonearm/cartridge combination, whenever a large undamped resonance falls within the audio band, is that oscillations may be excited by the recorded signals, producing a rising bass characteristic with distortion and mistracking, and whenever the resonance is below 10 Hz, disc defects such as warps and ripples will throw the arm into gross oscillation, thus producing severe variations in tracking pressure and dramatically reducing trackability. This results in distortion and a lack of detail. Incorrect force, wether it is too low or too high, momentarially moves the cantilever out of it's optimum position. There may be repeated, if momentary, losses of contact with either or both groove walls and repeated instances at which force exceeds the bearing strength of groove walls."* *James Brinton, Bureau Manager for the journal "Electronics", and President of the Boston Audio Society. Published in "High Fidelity" magazine, 1975. "Let us consider the function of the tonearm. When the tonearm/cartridge system is in play, we wish to have the stylus tip follow the record groove and displace relative to the cartridge, generating an electrical signal. Meanwhile, the cartridge shell and tonearm should remain a fixed distance from the local mean record surface, riding the warps and other inaudible low frequency excitation as a cork might ride the waves on an ocean. Whether or not these objectives are achieved in any system is a function of the dynamics of the tonearm/cartridge mechanical system."* *S.L. Phoenix, Assistant Prof., Sibley School of Mech. and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University. "Any stylus cantilever motion not due to groove modulations is -or becomes- distortion in the cartridges output. The cartridge, after all, can't be expected to tell the difference between motion caused by the groove and that caused by the movement of the arm alone"* *Bob Graham, article published by the Boston Audio Society, 1975. What I make of this (and supported by observation and common sense) is that a tonearm can respond either too greatly or too little relative to the vertical and lateral displacement parameters of a cantilever. In case of a warp, the ability to recover from high velocity modulation or disturbance, excessive mass has the effect of driving the cantilever out of it's optimum position or slowing cantilever recovery. This may also have the outcome of the stylus plowing through groove modulations or excessive stylus wear. Tonearms of too little mass (relative to cartridge compliance) have their own set of concerns. Again, obviously. In extrapolating from the words of Mr. Graham, changes in the position of the cantilever are responsible for the generation of signal, wether due to groove modulation or tonearm motion. It is perhaps urban legend and I do not have a written reference at this time but the reports of ADC XLM(1) and Sonus Blue Gold cantilevers pulled from their pivots by inappropriate tonearms are plentiful, the most frequent suspect was "Tonearm too heavy". I am personally aware of one instance with the original XLM. There are also reports of these cartridges spitting the cantilever out for no apparent cause. Although it would be great if one could simply crunch numbers and determine from remote a certain cartridges specific response to a given tonearm, there have been too many agreeable combinations which when technically considered would be thought a mismatch. One does need to be very aware of potentially counterproductive tonearm and cartridge partnering when making this choice. Of course. This is about as complicated an explanation as my simple mind can provide. Simplistically, signal is generated by the movement of the stylus/cantilever relative to the position of the tonearm. When they start going separate ways, it's not a good thing. Whatever the cause. Raul, perhaps I should have been more specific in the post you've questioned, in respect of your expertise you are owed this explanation. My statement was a reference to tonearm induced distortion as a tonearm generated spurious signal. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Of course, you're welcome to agree or not. |
Acman3: Greetings, Danny. Please do refresh on the Signet when you find the time. I have one MR 5.0 "basic" stylus, four of the "E" model and even more of the "ME" (micro elliptical, nude mount). So many of the AM10 & 20's I feel somewhat guilty but they practically followed me home. Tonight I've learned there is also a MR 5.0"ML", thanks to your post. Rumors of nude Shibata, titanium and berillium cantilevers too. I've indications the output for all MR 5.0 series are the same except for the slightly higher output "basic" but there is a difference in the coil windings I've not yet been able to pin down. I think so, anyway. A favorable comment would add impetus to my search. My residence is in Kentucky, just south of the currently steamy Ohio River and I thank you for your kind offer. |
Dear Timeltel: Thank's for your time. My question comes because there are several reasons why what you point out can happen. All your " references " not only makes sense but that's what in theory can/could happen and that's why the importance on tonearm bearing friction, tonearm damping build material, tonearm build execution quality, TT mat and obviously tonearm mass. +++++ " producing a rising bass characteristic with distortion and mistracking, and whenever the resonance is below 10 Hz, disc defects such as warps and ripples will throw the arm into gross oscillation, thus producing severe variations in tracking pressure and dramatically reducing trackability. This results in distortion and a lack of detail. " +++++ how can we have a direct " relationship " between this statements and tonearm/cartridge subject " today "? I have no doubt that in 1975 and before the " normal " tonearms of those times were build with maybe lesser care about because the market " demands " maybe does not ask for " more ". At the end part of the 70's Grace, Audio Technica, Denon and Technics ( between others ) take the " flag " to " solve " many of those tonearm/cartridge playback related problems. It is precisely at the end of the 70?s that appear the almost very first " high end " tonearms like Audio Technica: 1100, 1503 and 1010, Denon: DA-308, 309 and 401, Grace: G-1040 and 940, Exel ES-1000, Technics EPA-500, Stax UA-7, Lustre GST-801 ( dynamically balanced. ), SAEC's or ADC and Infinity ones. All these tonearms has something in common: very low bearing friction that tonearms designs before 1975 did not and not only this but almost all those after 1975 tonearm designs comes with a high care on self tonearm damping on its build blend materials used. All these " new " tonearm designers understand the huge importance of that J. Briton studies ( you posted ) along others one made for them to " solve " or put at minimum those problems. We can find from those times that Technics not only goes to 5mgrs figure in tonearm bearing friction but even design a dynamically damping tonearm mechanism ( EPA-100 ) that help about. I own or owned almost all these tonearms along some today designs where through my experiences in almost none I detected problems that I discern comes because of tonearm effective mass mistmatch. The build quality and care in those tonearm designs are really high and put at minimum distortions that happen and fortunatelly some of us can't detect even in a high resolution system. You can read my post on the Audio magazyne review of the Ortofon MC2000 where the resonance frequency was as low as 5hz ( Technics EPA-250 tonearm ) and through all the review time the reviewer can't detect any single trouble because of that. I posted too that with the Ortofon M20E Super and the tonearm where I test it the resonance frequency was as low as 4.3hz with a great quality performance. I read somewhere that early ADC cartridge designs ( very high compliance ) was on purpose designed for 6hz resonance frequency. I'm not diminished the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency subject or any thing you posted because even if some of us can't heard/detect " distortions ": " things " are happening. In our tonearm design and mat design ( and now in our cartridge design too. We already start with. ) our main target is to " disappear " those kind of distortions and I can tell you that we IMHO already had/have success. Anyway, an adding important issue to this dialog is that we point out and be aware of all those different factors ( between others. ) that have influence in the quality performance of any phono cartridge. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Regards, Raul. Open discussions of damping, bearing friction and eff. mass were just beginning in 1975, as was the popular understanding of the impact on playback quality. Designs available to the high-end consumer seem to have followed innovation by perhaps two or so years, application continues to build on this groundwork today. I selected these references since they were descriptive of the concerns being discussed here and were presented in an understandable manner, even for me. My apolgies if my previous post was vague, and as always your response and questioning was mannerly and, under those circumstances, very appropriate. |
Raul, Thanks for the suggestion and I already know of several sources where you can find NOS styli for both the Point 4 and Point 4E. As you probably know, they share the same bodies and are interchangeable. In line with your conversation with Timeltel, I could add that I'm using the Point 4 on an Audiocraft AC3300; albeit the 'LB' version of that tonearm. Really great with this and a very wide range of other high compliance cartridges. Cheers |
Dear Dgob: No I'm not interested ( yet ) in the Point 4. I'm now trying to give a second opportunity to the ADC 25 ( that suppose was the better ADC/Pritchard design but the XLM II. I have on hand the ADC 25 ( red and blue dot stylus. ), the 26 and the 27: all the that ADC line! I bought them at low pricew but nothing like your $ 5.00 Point 4!!! This same designer designed the GE cartridges when he worked at GE. After that he found ADC and designed MM cartridges: 1, 2 and 3 denomination models. Now that you own that Point 4 maybe could be a good idea to look for a Sonus Dimension 5 Calibrated that was the lattest Pritchard design and compare against his earliest ones. I own the Dimension 5 that I already rated high and better than any ADC I heard it. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Raul, No need to apologise or insist. It's the Point 4. I've not given it enough time but I think it's an fine cartridge for its point in Pritchard's evolution. It casts a very large and sonorous sound stage, has a warm midrange and does that ADC voodoo with timbre. Maybe not as 'good' (here I use that comparitive term meaning, detailed and extended at the upper frequency extremes) as the Empire 1000 ZE/X but is in relation to that cartridge as the Empire is itself to the Technics 100Mk4. Incidentally, I saw Downunder's honest reference to the Technics in his updated System's page. I wholeheartedly concur with his views that it is that good that your system is heard through the cartridge and have attested to the same within my own System's page. Limited only by partnering equipment and I dare say it's a quite different beast in the environment of each of us lucky owners. A truly great cartridge and (along with the Essential 3160) the tool for judging, adjusting and selecting every other component. Although I'm no longer chasing any MM/MI cartridges, I will remain open to the occasional bargain and so the Sonus and your other suggestion might end up spinning on a TT near me. This seems increasingly likely given the constantly surprising kindness of fellow audiophiles and Agoners. Cheers |