Dear Travbrow: Well you are serious about with all those cartridge. Btw, I really like your Technics tonearm specially its VTA mechanism.
I agree with you about the Signet ( an Audio Technica division. ) and I can say that with the new stylus things could improve.
The Empire's are not so easy ( plug and play ) cartridges to obtain its best, are very sensitive to VTA and VTF changes and to changes in headshell that in your case can't do it. Other " issue " is that the Empire need a little more breack time ( playing time ) that other cartridges, I can say over 60 hours.
Anyway, good to know you are enjoying the MM alternative.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Raul,yes I really like the Technics tonearm.Very easy to make adjustments.I rewired the armwand with solid core silver wire,made a nice improvement.I prefer the Technics tonearm with high end mm cartridges to the Ol Encounter I owned useing mc cartridges.The best mc I owned was A Shelter 901.I wish I could find some more armwands for the Technics,very hard to find. |
Travbow Any pics of your lenco in a slate plinth I'm interested in going in that direction as well (I own a lenco in a wooden CLD plinth) I would love to hear your thoughts on this approach and tips on doing this project right |
Musicfile,I would like to show a picture of it,but I am useing webtv.I dont own a computer.You will need to buy a PTP top plate to attempt a lenco slate build.You should join the website lencoheaven.net, A member of the website,Peter Reinders, makes and sells these top plates.His prices are fair and the top plate itself is an upgrade to the stock Lenco.You can view pictures of some slate plinths members have built.You can learn tips on how to work with slate and anything else you need to know about Lenco turntables.Also a company called Oswald Mills builds slate plinths for Lencos,if you dont mind spending more money for a professionally built plinth. |
Travbow Thanks will check it out |
Dear friends: This was posted in other thread and IMHO I think is very interesting to read it, this kind of experiences are the ones that help to up-date our know-how and give us the opportunity to try other alternative along the LOMC cartridges:
++++ 05-17-09: Halcro Dear Raul, I spoke too early. Because I had played the Garrott P77s (I have 2) in my system 15 years ago, I forgot that it needed hours of run-in time just as a new cartridge does? My post was lodged after only 3 hours of listening. The sound has now changed enormously and I believe that it is serious competition to the great LOMCs like Dyna DV1s and ZYX Universe but without a rising top-end. Once again Raul, your advice about re-trying MM cartridges in our high-end systems is a wise and timely one. Thank you. Halcro (System | Reviews | Threads | Answers) ++++
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Dear friends: This is the " original " post:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1236947666&openflup&49&4#49
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Raul, I noticed recently that Garrott Bros. have introduced a new top of the line MM cartridge, the Optim Ruby FGS. As i'd mentioned in an earlier post, I have the Optim FGS and think quite well of it. The new Ruby FGS is only available from Australia though, no importer I've found in the US. Decibelhifi.com.au sells it and will export. I think I know what I'm going to ask Santa to put under the Christmas tree for me this year. |
Dear Photon46: Yes, I see it and I like you would like to try it, maybe on Christmas!
Now, the original P77 that Halcro and I own ( and other people that posted here ) is a performer that put some real " light " of the high " value " of the MM alternative.
I don't hear it for sometime ( it is difficult when you own over 100 cartridges. ) but due to Halcro findings I will try it this week.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Hi Raul, you asked: +++ what do you think on the MM alternative? do you already experienced on the last six months? which cartridges models? +++
:-) I don't know if that is a leading question, but let me answer it frankly and as little stupidly as possible. (Stupidly, as there are no stupid questions, but surely stupid answers...)
My last MM ownership goes some years back and is therefore a bit 'shady' to put it best. A REGA 100 which was pretty wanting, and a Shure V15, which was very finicky as I recall. (high compliance and < 1gram VTF, plain odd by today's more usual carts)
Both would be NO a match what so ever to my current MC cart experiences, of: Ortofon Jubilee, Lyra Dorian, Ortofon Windfeld, (on loan) Transfiguration Orpheus, DV 10x5, and DV 20X-L.
All these MCs still qualify a LO MCs except the DV 10x5 with 2.5mV output. In essence my experience is: **you get what you pay for** with the Orpheus just cleaning the field beyond any question, and followed by the Windfeld with some distance, similar to the Jubilee trailing the Windfeld. (All listened to in my own system). The Lyra Dorian being on the higher LO-end with 0.6mV is a good/stunning performer but lacking in neutrality, tilted to the top end with overly detailed ness if you wish. If you like it 'stunning', a very good pick for the buck.
The Dynavector DV 20X-L is more arm dependent in my experience and sounds jolly tight bassed with a little rolled-off-ness in the treble on a carbon arm, but in the more neutral SME V displaying a less pleasing nature (I thought I now could hear that hard-alu cantilever...)
The DV 10X5 is a good pick for little money but that is 'little boys league' (or what ever you'd call it, and the mounting plain sucks!). It does nothing wrong --- BUT a lot less of what in the groove.
I have also had the mixed pleasure to listen to various Sumikos and would not bother, again: you get what you pay for. Their latest top offering sounded 'big boys league', and has some of a Dorian character but slightly more refined, yet no where near the Orpheus, and not as neutral as a Windfeld.
So, let's see if that is of some use in this context.
Next is the related phono-pre situation. I have used my ML 326S on board phono-modules in MM mode (with my SUT) and found that the 100mV!!!!! overload margin looks great on paper! But it simply lacks detail and refinement in sound. I have no hope at all that ANY MM could ever make up this short-coming --- so its MC for me I guess.
As to the construction differences I can not see that even with the most powerful smallest magnets a similar resolution and detail retrieval is possible. This is important to me, since some e.g. late Romantic Classics only make sense to me with all the detailed impressionist sound painting. In fact I think for pop and really very good pop and rock I imagine an MM might be the better type of cart. There is some raw drive of an old Wurlitzer Juke Box that would just be the better representation with say an Elvis record :-) And I do NOT mean this in any way derogatory.
Greetings, Axel |
Dear Axel: Thank's for your explanation/contribution.
It is clear that you really don't have a MM reference to compare in the same " stage " than the LOMC you own.
+++++ " As to the construction differences I can not see that even with the most powerful smallest magnets a similar resolution and detail retrieval is possible...." +++++
and you never can know it till you " run " a MM cartridge with the right whole set-up in your system.
I can tell you for sure that the " right " MM alternative can/could put on " shame " ( it is not exactly the word but I have no other. ) any single of the cartridges you own and certainly with all " resolution and detail retrieval " that you can ask for.
Anyway, the MM alternative is only that : an additional " experience ".
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Hi Raul,
I know there are some rather fine NOS MMs in your possession and I trust they are mighty fine -- better than Wurlitzer and then some :-)
But here is a challenge: where do you get such in good order? And also replacement styli?
I have listened to a fair number of current Ortofon MM carts around here, but that's truly all Mid-Fi. Nice yes, but not my quality expectation.
Now leaning out of the window for say 1k$ for some nicely renown NOS MM leaves me a bit scared. Also my MM phono-input is (checked with SUT and MC) not looking too promising, it has a rather lesser resolution than going through the 60dB MC input. (All SS as I should re-state0
So how would you go about it, to make a convertee in such circumstances?
Greetings, Axel |
Dear Axel: First than all you have to have a good MM phono stage.
Second, a positive and expectant attitude to " explore " a " new " audio alternative through MM cartridges.
Third, time/patience to find out through the web the NOS or second hand MM cartridges that you want try ( here there is no " plug&play " game. ).
I own over 60 MM cartridges and almost no one comes " easy ", even I buy two and three samples of one model just tobe sure it works with. The good news is that are almost inexpensive against the top LOMC today prices.
Of course that all that effort has its rewards through the top quality music sound reproduction that you can achieve with the MM alternative.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Hi Raul, you say: - First than all you have to have a good MM phono stage.- I have the ML326S phono modules and they have some good 'score' with e.g. German AUDIO magazine, so you tell me if those could work. But one caveat, I can not change input impedance to 70k or 100k since ALL is SMDs on two small PCBs. I can only go lower impedance by using the provided loading 'jumpers' and resistor mounting posts.
- Second, a positive and expectant attitude to " explore " a " new " audio alternative through MM cartridges. - I absolutely do, since: - "The good news is that are almost inexpensive against the top LOMC today prices." -
- Third, time/patience to find out through the web the NOS or second hand MM cartridges that you want try ( here there is no " plug&play " game. ). There is my first problem, since there seem a LOT of low-fi MMs that have flooded the 'el-cheapo' market (correct me if I'm wrong).
Having said that, can you name us some good examples that would, according to your tests, produce results with a 47k input impedance. That would be of some help, since purchasing loads of 'duds' will add up also...
Many thanks, Axel |
Dear Axel: Reading from some of your post I was thinking that your ML don't acept MM cartridge, I was wrong. Of course that the 326S is up to the task.
There are some cartridges that performs very good on 47K, between them: Nagaoka Mp-50/500, Reson Reca, Garrot P-77, Audio Technica ATML-170/180,Grace Ruby. All these cartridges are different ( in price range too ) but very good performers.
I think that all these cartridges will work fine on your V.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Thanks Raul, now it looks like I have a project coming on :-)
The 326S has a jumper setting for 40dB MM or 60dB MC and a 0nF or 10nF cap jumper. I can not have any other capacitances than this (easily). Will this become an issue in your experience?
Axel |
Dear Axel: In my experiences almost all the MM cartridges performs very well with 100-150pf, so you can run with that 0nf and the cable capacitance can/could help about.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Thanks Raul,
I hope this info is of value to the overall discussion also. I'll see what my 'messenger' will be able to 'dig up' in Munich...
Greetings, Axel |
Hi Raul,I see that you own a Technics 205C-MKIV cartridge.I have been useing a Technics 205C-MKII and It sounds great.I have a NOS 205C-MKIV original replacement stylus to try with it.I put 45 hours on the cartridge with the MK-IV stylus and I cant get it to sound as good as it does with the original stylus installed.I spent alot of time adjusting tracking force,VTA,azimuth and antiskating force.The cartridge with the MK-IV stylus installed sounds rolled of in the treble,smaller sound stage and is less natural sounding.The midrange is too forward and bright.Bass sounds ok.My phono pre is loaded at 100k.I am useing low capacitance cables.Any suggestions?Could it be it needs higher capacitance loading?MY pre does not have adjustable capacitance loading.Thanks. |
Dear Travbrow: For what I understand unfortunately the MK2 cartridge is no compatible with the MK4 stylus ( Technics make electrical changes on the cartridges. ), for this one you need the MK3 or MK4 cartridge.
This happen to with other cartridges, example: the AT ML 150-170-180 body cartridge is almost identical but if you put the AT ML-180 or 170 stylus in the AT ML-150 then it does not works but if you make changes between the ML-170 and the ML-180 cartridges every change works.
Then you have to find a new cartridge or the MK2 stylus or to re-tip the MK2 stylus.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
Thanks for the info Raul. |
Dear Toufu: I think I speak early on the Grace Ruby quality performance status.
Now that already run for around 20 hours and that I already make a " fine " tunning I'm convinced that this cartridge belongs to the range/status of " top MM cartridges ".
I hope that your re-tipped Ruby can give you the "joy " that my original one is now given me.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Thanks Raul, once it's back, I will post here my impressions. |
OK, and Hi All, I had to 'fall back' on my MM carts (very recently acquired) as my MC is in for repair.
So, I had no option to start with, when dealing with that 'stand-in' MM. I found out to my surprise, that it (A&R P-77) is at least as demanding to set-up as ANY MC I worked with so far. This might be less of a surprise for some other members, it was for me, so do not underestimate that side of it. Raul had said: "No Plug&Play"! and an MM surely is not (not talking about a round-point, OK)
Once I got it just right - next surprise! This 'middle of the road' vintage MM cart turns out one serious competitor, so much so, that I truly think I will NOT even want go back and bother listening to my 3.5k$ MC cart any more!
Why, because it (MM) just sounds more RIGHT. Rhythm, timing, tonal colours, natural balance of treble to bass to put it in a nut-shell.
I have just very recently (3 - 4 days ago) listened to a Transfiguration Orpheus and yes, it has more resolution, very nice tonal colours --- but something of that MC carts particular way of sounding too. It is the same that I get from even the best of CD players, and until quite recently could not explain what it could be.
As a follow-up to the Munich Hi-End, a discussion brought something into focus: Treble roll-off behaviour, actually foremost related to tweeters, but also of some major relevance to carts IMO. Steen Duelund figured it out, (he is no more with us since ~ 2005), but he noticed that if a treble source e.g. a tweeter goes very high to say 20, 30, 40Hz or even more, and then suddenly falls off steeply, from an until then pretty flat response --- something happens to the listening impression. Something starts to sound 'wrong'.
He (S.D.) also explained, that if you listen to e.g. live music, such steep roll-off NEVER happens. In 'natural' listening, the further away from the source you are the more treble rolls off, B U T it does so quite gently and naturally to the ear. Thereby all harmonic information stays undisturbed, 'in takt'...
The interesting thing is, that MMs have the habit to roll of more early than MC, but do so more gently i.e. do not fall off a cliff when done. That made me think...
What I experience, listening to a well set-up MM in a highly resolved system, is that sort of naturalness that I always seem to miss with MCs. MCs remind me of a TV with the contrast turned up too much as an example. Nice to be impressed for a while, until something in your head tells you that this is just not quite right, a little bit overdone...
It is my experience that MCs are just so tuned to bring out more 'contrast' and it can be exiting - for a while, but then it can get also to this: something's not 'right' feeling. Now, if you like it, nothing wrong at all --- as for myself I prefer that more 'relaxing into the music thing' and not getting 'frightened' by that 'over-exposed, or over-contrasted' as much as it can be a real kick, stunning, exiting and so forth, for vere hunting for the next detail etc.
So, it's horses for courses. A good audio friend of mine will NOT go for this (MM) sound, he might be inclined to even ridicule me for wanting it more 'normal'. But I know, when it sound more right, THAT is what counts for me.
Enjoy the music, as Raul would say,
Axel
PS: Another enquiry yet: Why MMs should have lost their rightful place, so to speak... |
Hi Raul and All, I have a question, that might help me to understand some of these MM 'issues'. The guy that gave that A$R P77 to me (also V15 VN35MR) has replaced it with the relative new Ortofon OM 5E, their most affordable MM if I'm right. e is convinced that it sounds much better than the former two mentioned.
In your opinion, can that be the case, and that OM 5E would be a further improvement on a P77, or would this indicate that he never got his alignments right?
Regarding the V15 VN35MR it might be easier to explain, since in my set-up it does not sound as coherent than he A&R P77. That V15 VN35MR sound more detailed, but seems to lack the coherent mid to bass of the P77 and sound more somehow a bit etched.
Anyone that can comment on that OM 5E? see under --- http://www.ortofon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44&Itemid=64
Many thanks, Axel |
Dear Axel: First thank you for share with us your startingand enjoying MM adventure/experiences.
More than an " adventure " the MM experience is a glorious " trip " to a " land " that can give us a unique and " different " joy of music reproduction that IMHO no other source ( I mean cartridges. ) can even or dream about.
+++++ " This 'middle of the road' vintage MM cart turns out one serious competitor, so much so, that I truly think I will NOT even want go back and bother listening to my 3.5k$ MC cart any more! " +++++
even that that A&R P-77 is not at the very top MM range quality performance level you already experienced that RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS in the music reproduction that everyone of us are lokin for at and that only a few of us already achieve it.
+++++ " MCs are just so tuned to bring out more 'contrast' and it can be exiting - for a while, but then it can get also to this: something's not 'right' feeling. " +++++
I can't say it better than you, I agree of course.
Other than in the future IMHO I think that this time is the best all over times to bring at our homes the MM alternative because our today audio systems are a lot better than 10-20 years ago.
Axel, the good news for you or any other " MM adventurer " is that if you find/choose any of the top MM performers that high " contrast " that you are talking about on the LOMC will appear in the MM alternative but with the RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS that the MC can't show it.
Axel and you all Agon friends: " for any one can audio-die in peace we have to listen any of those top MM cartridges ", nothing comes really near it.
Axel, about your friend " not inclined " to MM: well he is the one that miss/ed this wonderful music reproduction unique experience.
Regards and enjoy the music. Raul. |
As Axel asked previously.........who suddenly decried that MCs are superior to MMs and that this was the direction that the High-End would take? Is it the reviewers or the manufacturers? One theory I have, which Axel and Raul allude to, is that the MCs tend to exaggerate the contrasts in the musical presentation, wringing enormous detail out of the high frequencies, not just in their fundamentals, but particularly in their harmonics. This 'extra' detail sounds initially impressive to listeners who feel that suddenly their systems are retrieving information not previously heard? With the hearing losses brought on by the aging ears of most analogue audiophiles and the solid preference for valve amplification shown by many of them, this suddenly 'spot-lit' detail of the higher frequencies is often all the evidence they need to assume that MCs are intrinsically superior to MMs? Once an audiophile has 'ditched' his MM cartridge and installed his MC, it is rare indeed for a revision to occur with the quest for a better and 'faster' or 'more neutral' MC resulting in the purchase of more and more expensive MC cartridges. The epiphany that one can experience when re-installing a great MM is rarely experienced and thanks to Raul, I have had that epiphany. When Raul talks about the..... RIGHTNESS/NATURALNESS that the MC can't show it. he speaks truly. The high-frequency exaggeration of the top end combined with a (usually) better controlled and delineated low end, often leaves the midrange, the core of musical presentation, in a slightly lean and unnatural limbo compared to the seamless 'organic' continuum of the MM cartridge structure. This may explain the popularity of the Koetsu 'sound' which tries to bring the midrange to its natural predominance over the high frequencies. Certainly I have learnt (and heard) over the past few weeks of intense comparisons between some of the very best MCs and the Garrott P77 MM, that the sheer relaxation, rightness, naturalness and 'likeness to live music performed in real spaces' of the Garrott P77 over the MCs seems to be a characteristic of MM cartridges. As all the equipment in our musical reproduction chain becomes more and more revealing, quieter, higher-resolving and in some ways more analytical, it seems prescient to step back and re-look and re-listen to the 'organic' transparent 'rightness' of the humble MM cartridge? |
Hi Raul, Halcro et al,
I am, by my inquisitive nature, still intrigued about this **'organic' transparent 'rightness' of the humble MM cartridge**...
I have floated one **hypothesis**: (from Greek ὑπόθεσις [iˈpoθesis]) consists either of a suggested explanation for an observable phenomenon or of a reasoned proposal predicting a possible causal correlation among multiple phenomena...) ... just to get that straight,
Or was it rather a: **theory** (in the general sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of observations. --- End of quote. This just, before I get accused of semantics etc.
You see, most of this sharing goes on about what these MMs do when compared to MCs and it would be of some use to have as more logical, never mind scientific explanation, why this should be so. Otherwise it's just a load of "he said she said"... It was 'Steen Duelund' I mentioned earlier that might just have got close to it i.e. more gentle treble roll-off = more natural listening experience...
"Duelund" the man with his special capacitors, resistors, driver (theories) etc. was chasing best possible **natural** sound after all, and a lot relating to cross-over behaviour also.
Is anyone willing to put some meat on this 'bone' or are we now just going on in some sort of self-congratulatory fashion telling each other how great MMs sound as compared to MCs, I wonder?
I have the idea, that most MC-ONLY folks would be moved out of their corner to get something more substancial then: hey, it sound just so great to my ears in my system, etc.
The phenomena we have heard, all of us MM listeners -- but after all there aught to be some logical explanation to help some MC-ONLY folks to take note what we are on about.
Raul, who's started this thread, is rather insistent not to make this some 'secret MM society' to be kept under the radar --- and be ridiculed for being nostalgic and backward oriented, away from the current most advanced MC developments now going for $20 000 'bleeding edge' technology... (SirSpeedy with his hi-end cost consciousness aught to like this one :-)
What do you think?
Greetings, Axel |
Hi all, in answer to why do MMs have a more 'natural sound' and all that good stuff, let me put forward some additional hypothesis -- facts even?
Some say, that NO MC will be able to bring forth the 'information density' of an MM, due to it's very low voltage output --- and just about all phono-stages work with voltage rather than current.
It is interesting to note that some top MC makers tell you, that their step-up transformer will be a 'requirement' to bring out the best in their carts --- even it they deliver a reasonably healthy ~0.5mV output. As an example take 'My Sonic Lab Eminent MC Cartridge' with their 'Stage XXX Step-Up Transformer(s)'. Lyra has their trannie but does not insist you have to have on. Also, Ortofon's ~ 0.2mV SPUs are asking for an SUT, even though it should have no problem with a 66 - 78dB phono-stages, or? The anti-SUT faction tells its all BS, and that an SUT will 'mess-up' things more than it helps, oh yes?
Now let's look at an MM --- the above is a non-issue in every respect since just about ALL MMs deliver the 'mean spec' voltage required by a phono-stage i.e. 4.7mV, some more some less. So what's my point - as we all seem to know all this in any case? My point is, that we are talking carts here, and VERY little about phono-stages. More specific, the ABILITY of a phono-stage to make 'ood sound' from e.g. ~ 0.3mV as compared to ~ 5.0mV! Some say, that e.g. op-amps have a VERY hard time to actually deliver the goods, in the context of information density i.e. harmonic completeness, --- micro info gets lost in the process of pumping up the signal by 66 - 78dB. Could well be, someone out there might know some more about that. Now still with phono-stages, let's look at the tube only ones. NO WAY can ANY tube stage do 66dB or even more, it just gets to noisy due to tube rush. So it's either going to be a hybrid or, lo and behold, we have some SUT inside (Manley, EAR, etc.) that's taking care of business for an MC. Jolly good I say, maybe that's why they sound so good with MCs in the first place!
So, can it be it's the phono-stage's work made easier, that the MM scores where the MC sound either too lean or skeletal by comparison? And putting an SUT being a NO-NO for so may purists?
Fact remains, even if you are OK with this SUT/MC thing it gets extraordinarily expensive. A good SUT will rival the MC cart in terms of $$$$.
And so it's at least worth a VERY GOOD try and listen to see what this 'old time rock&roll' MM cart can do for you.
Greetings, Axel PS: J.C., Lyra sells a trannie but far to few I should think :-) |
Dear Raul, what tonearms suit better for high compliance MM carts? Super light arms like SME series III, WT and other carbon fibres arms come to mind, but they do not look very good in vibrations damping department. I was lucky to get NOS Stanton 881S; I consider EPA-100 as a replacement for SME 3009 II - what do you think? I became exciting about MM carts after my humble Empire 999 SE/X (bougth used on e-bay for 50$) strapped for mono put in shame Ortofon SPU mono. Thank you for breaking MC inherent superiority myth! |
Dear Livemusic: More that we think there are many MM cartridges that have medium compliance between 10cu to 18cu and the high cmpliance one are very tolerant on tonearms. As a fact no one of my tonearms has a low effective mass and the cartridges that I already try works fine.
I like the EPA-100 and agree that will be a good match for MM cartridges with the advantage that you can try with different headshells that help a lot to match the cartridge with that tonearm, the 881S is very good performer lucky you are to own it in a new condition.
What you experienced with that Empire is almost repetitive between MM and MC samples: no contest.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
For those interested, I have written a review/comparison of the Garrott P77 MM cartridge compared to the top MCs I have heard. Garrott P77 |
Halcro! A mile stone of a review. Thank you, Axel |
Dear Halcro: I agree with Axel on your P-77 review. Thank you to bring it here.
Oh that " air "!!!!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Raul, thanks for this thread, perhaps you or one of the knowledgable A'goners can answer my question. I am impressed by the performance of the Shure M97xE, but it seems to lack that last bit of authority found in certain other MM cartridges. I recently installed a Jico SAS stylus in my favorite, a Shure V15-111, and was very pleased with the improvement. I have a stable of cartridges, AT, Goldring, AKG, Dynavector and several Shures and Ortofons. I haven't used a MC cart. for quite a while. I gave consideration to the potential of an upgrade for the M97xE and found that the insert for a V15xMR is identical. The two, when compared with the microridge installed, sound so similar I cannot immediately say the $500 cartridge is superior. Does anyone have any insight on the necessary modification to fit the M97ED stylus to either of these cartridges? Jico supplies a SAS for the 97ED, and this would potentially provide a serious upgrade for one and an equivelent or improved replacement for the other, which is now practically unobtainable. By the way, your comments led me to the purchase of a Grace F9-E, I'm considering a Soundsmith rebuild with the ruby cantilever for it, the cart. should arrive this week. |
Thanks Axel and Raul for your kind comments. It's gratifying for me to hear such positive feedback. By the way Axel, did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email? |
Halcro, you ask: >>> ... did you receive the photos and technical information I sent you on the Garrott P77 by way of Email? <<< Oh, yes! I did, and send you a reply also... was it lost in the mail?
In fact I'd asked you for a pic from the bottom of your P-77 so as to see the stylus and cantilever more clearly. Meanwhile I could ascertain that the cantilevers are of the same construction (as in the A&R) -- an 'Aluminium Dual Tube' something I had not come across this far. I've no idea if the stylus shapes are different. The A&R uses originally, styli made by Dr. Ernst Weinz in Idar Oberstein, Germany. When Dr. Weinz unexpectedly died, A&R were able to source UK made diamond styli from Expert Pickups in the UK. Any idea where the 'Brothers' sourced theirs?
Thanks again, Axel |
Dear Timeltel: I like the 97 and prefer over the V15 Type V but I don't have any experience on those different stylus you name it.
Here you can find and contact with people that loves Jico ones: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1241395046&read&keyw&zzjico+sas+
and I understand that Axelwahl is waiting for the Jico stylus for his Type III.
About the Grace, that is really nice, my advise is that you try it in original condition, its performance is very good. I own it along the Ruby and yes the this one is better performer that I understand is not only because the Ruby cantilever but a little different cartridge electrical design and fine tunning.
Toufu, who posted here, own a original Ruby that he has to send to rebuild to SS and it will be interesting that when he receive it which differences are between the original Ruby and the SS rebuild.
Of course that you can send your Grace to SS any time you want.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Raul, you stated: "I like the 97 and prefer over the V15 Type V". I too enjoy the 97xE, it is a permanent fixture on my stand-by turntable. The V15xMR continues to gather dust, in favor of the V15-111/SAS and the 97xE. With further listening with the xMR (microridge) stylus in the M97, voices are presented with a natural ease and highs are cleaner, with no evidence of shrillness. My overall impression is that the MR stylus is, well, faster and with a slight increase in volume. Research through other sources indicates that there is a tab of plastic with the Shure badge on it above the stylus which must be removed to fit the SAS M97(HE) to the 97xE cart, or to the V15xMR. Available through lp gear, the JICO site dosn't show it. I am eager to recieve the Grace F9, the stylus is described as showing no evidence of wear, the suspension good and the cartridge tested to spec. I will, as you suggest, enjoy it without the Soundsmith "upgrade" unless necessary. Thanks for your interest and good advice. |
Hi all, if we keep it coming like that, we might just beat that 'steam-cleaning thread' :-) Now, >>> The V15xMR continues to gather dust, in favour of the ***V15-111/SAS*** and the 97xE <<< This is some good news to my ears (eyes, so far). It'll be for a short while till I get that SAS I ordered for my V15 type III... But now! I got this "Empire S1000 ZE/X" on a roll, and let me tell you --- VERY NICE in deed! Raul, as I understand it, is having his cart still with the re-tipper. The original claims a 'hand polished' stylus, no less. Some of it's spec. sounds pretty far out, like better 35dB channel separation! and **0.25gm** - 1.25gm VTF... Well all I can tell this far: it sound really great and I shall be VERY interested to learn where it scores on Raul's scale of MMs. (I guess we'd need some sort of scale sooner or later, or does that sound to pretentious?) If my A&R P-77 is a 5 or 6 out of 10, I'd give the S1000 ZE/X an 8 or even a bit more. Saying this, I'd be little surprised if Raul will tell us that there's still plenty more till we hit a 9 or 9.5 (I'll keep it simple :-) Those MMs make single instruments come out so REAL, they like guitar, violin and what 'AIR' they produce these 'old' things is almost unbelievable. OK, I stop rambling now and get seriously back to the music. Cheers, Axel |
Axelwahl,
I have the Empire 1000 ZE/X and it is special. I think it is nearly in the same league as the Nagaoka MP50 with a completely contrasting presentation (richer or more pronounced midrange but weaker at the extremes). What arm are you using it with and what VTF? |
Most recently I've set up my Empire 1000 ZE/X for use with my Magnepan Unitrac arm, which in turn I've used on a couple of vintage 'tables--a Russco Mk V belt/idler hybrid and a Thorens TD 150 Mk II. I tend to track it at 1 gram, VTA very slightly nose down, just a touch of antiskate, and like it a lot. I agree wholeheartedly with the statements about a rich midrange and excellent all-around performance and I'll add "no listening fatigue, ever."
Gee three 1000ZE/X posts in a row, we ought to start a club :)
Jim |
Dear Axel: You already discover the " tip " of the iceberg and you can't eat the iceberg in " one day ".
Be patience and enjoy each step while you grow-up on the " fantastic " MM learning curve.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Regards, Axelwahl: You will make up your own mind about the Shure V15t3, but it has been my first choice for 20+ years. At first listen it will seem clinical, but after the first shock you'll notice detail most other MM carts. only hint at. There is no coloration, bad recordings sound really bad, but the good ones can be exciting. Pay attention to percussion and reed insturments. Cymbols are there in the room with you, piano sounds like piano. No bloom in the bass end, just very solid. Foot pedal on the organ compresses the air in the room, windows rattle. It loves anything by Vangelis. When I go to another cartridge, it usually sounds lacking somewhat in definition. I also think the V15-111 is an acquired taste, well balanced but totally absent of the usual Shure character described as "sweet". Since you pulled a quote from my last post, the Grace F9-E (thanks, Raul) arrived today, the cantilever seems stiff from storage but is loosening up, I like what I hear. At 9/10ths. gram tracking, the treble starts to really shine. Good luck and good listening! |
Hi Dgob in answer to your question: I'm using an SME V arm, practically no damping, 1g VTF and about the same for anti-skate. I have tried to go lower in VTF, just for interest, but than it starts to sound like some too little loaded MC i.e. a bit splashy...
Also agree with Dean_man about the sound, very alive and "no listening fatigue" type of treble, yet highly resolved. As to VTA I have it level as can be on a 150gr record, which equals a tad nose down on most thinner vinyl.
Axel |
Axelwahl and Dean_man,
Many thanks for your responses. I've spent some time trying to find other owners of the 1000 ZE/X with limited success. I'm currently using mine on a Morch DP6 red point and do enjoy it, especially its wide and deep soundstaging and its beautiful midrange). I'd just like a little better/firmer imaging but think a different arm might be the answer to what I'm achieving. Has anyone tried various arms with the Empire and found an improved or ultimate partner? |
Hi Dgob, I only have one arm, the SME V. I do know that Raul is having his ZE/X re-tipped and he has arms and decks a plenty. So with a bit of patience he might let us know his findings, also with regard to your arm question, when his re-tipping is done.
Next item: - Townshend EEI 500 MM, - Stylus type: shanked parabolic. Not a bad cart either, but quite a bit more 'dry' in comparison to the ZE/X. Maybe it will loosen up, I shall see. I have noted that it's impedance is a stack higher than e.g. the ZE/X, which I measured at ~ 480ohms. The "EEI 500" is 2.5k ohms and quite a different item.
Now, what I also notice with the ZE/X, it is the most 'alive' cart in terms of tonearm 'feedback'. Never had a cart as yet that lets me hear if I only as much a touch the tonearm, and I'm NOT talking about static! My SME V almost sounds like a micro! Now you take that more delicate Moerch arm of yours and you get some idea! I have a feeling the ZE/X really needs a very well damped arm --- but let's see what the experts have to say about it. Greetings, Axel |
Hi all, as Raul rightly suggests in sharing of all information MM, let me do this with regard to one apparently lesser known MM: the "Townshend EEI 500, parabolic". Raul hasn't heard of it, so I guess it must be 'under the radar' :-). Initially it sounded somewhat 'dry', I'd reported, and not much to write about. Upon further reading up on the required setup (thanks to Vinyengine see: http://www.vinylengine.com/library/townshend/eei-500.shtml) I stumbled on some interesting information --- i.e. parabolic styli like to be set-up 'heal down' or with negative VTA. So I tried, lo and behold, that did the trick! Listening to 'Missa (solemnis)' KV 139 >> Waisenhausmesse<< by W.A. Mozart (he was only 13 years old when he wrote it!) DG 2530 777, with a young Claudio Abbado conducting, Vienna Sate Opera Chorus, and Vienna Philharmonic --- I have 'goose bumps' no end... Next, 'Gloria Salve Regina' Vivaldi in San Marco (church Venice recorded)' Philips 6780 007, more of the same, wow! This cart is doing something none of my MCs managed to do. I have of course played these records before, more then once. Now one question remains, that is the negative VTA for 'parabolic' styli... I investigated this a bit further and found some very contradictory information for the oft mentioned 'Garrott P77' with a 'Micro Tracer' stylus, also quoted to be a 'parabolic' stylus. In the manual, kindly forwarded to me by HALCRO, the original Brothers' manual mentions to use (a LOT) of POSITIVE VTA i.e. 4-5 mm UP! from the arm being parallel. Now what? So I give my A&R P77 a try with negative VTA (I had run it with positive this far) Note: "The A&R P77 featured a Weinz Paroc (parabolic oval cone) stylus..." it also works fine, in fact better with negative VTA. Hm.. Now is this some well know information, that only I missed this far?! The "Townshend EEI 500" manual states, I quote: "It has been found that to achieve the best Vertical Tracking Angle for parabolic styli, the rear of the arm should be lowered. (as opposed to some elliptical designs, which need the arm raised at the rear).
Please let's have some of your expert findings on this one to share. Many thanks, Axel |
Interesting point Axel. I remember John and Brian Garrott strongly emphasising to me that the pivot point MUST be raised with their P77. They were so adamant that I must admit I have not dared to try it lower. Perhaps I'll give it a try? |
Hi All, I got another dose of anti-MM yesterday and it brings about my question: Has the better 'fit/sound/match/etc.' of these MMs to do with the 'inability' of 60dB plus phono-stages to 'truly' resolve the much smaller MC signals, than the one offered by an MM?
The argument is, that most 60dB plus stages use 'inadequate technology' to do MCs 'justice' i.e. using op-amps and even if discrete components --- not good enough also with most all of them MC stages... The problem (if it is such) is not present using only 40dB step-up stages, all of the 'tricky' 60-78dB step-up stuff is simply eliminated.
So, only some of the VERY TOP MC stages would actually qualify to do 'justice' to carts like 'Titan i', Orpheus, DV drt xv-1s/t, etc. etc.? Alan Wright's phono-stage seems to qualify I'm told, and it seems way 'under the radar' and is not even mentioned in the: "Stand out phono stages" thread! http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1195322402&openfrom&70&4
With 40dB for MMs we can happily use tubes only also, going higher starts to get VERY EXPENSIVE to do MCs any justice, or? Hybrid tube stages with almost unobtainable JFETs in the first stage... Is that why my (and most every one else's) MC stage sux, and why MM is the way to go --- IF you like to listen to music rather then 'over-contrasted' un-real Hi-End MC sound only? I really can't say, but I can say that my currently running S1000 ZE/X Empire sound CLEARLY better than the Orpheus I listened to... and what about Rauls PC-1 argument that comes to mind?
So is it, that if I do not spend >$10 000 on the phono-stage (you know all the contenders) I better stick with a top MM? Raul, has one pretty snazzy phono-stage/pre-amp as I know --- who else can shed some light on this argument?
Also, I 'dumped' my previous stage in favour of one integrated into my pre-amp, better power supply, no extra cables, no extra connectors, better screening, etc. etc. Have I gone the 'wrong way' like --- MM only now?
Not that I'm complaining, but I'd be very interested to hear some expert comments on this one, since I'm getting close to sell off my PW MC when ever I get it back. Lest I have another $10k plus to spend on a 'commensurate' phono-stage, which by DEFFINITION will NOT EVER be able to reside inside my or ANY pre-amp, as I understand it.
Greetings, Axel PS: To hell with all that misleading review MC stuff if the above said holds any truth. Eish! |