I think that Raul is an complex person who would rather die than not tell what he thinks is true. The problem is that what he believes to be true is actually true. I already mentioned many times my scepsis about his philosophical and logical convictions but, like Dover and other, trust for 100% his carts valuations. I own the Sony XA 5400 ES and many CD's and SACD's. However I need to consult the user manual when I occasionaly use the damn thing.
Regards, |
Is it possible we are back to "people hear different"? I know many audiophiles who can't tolerate the sound of digital reproduction for a period of time. I have also read the writings of many reviewers and contributors to Audio Forums who are similarly intolerant. I have never read nor heard of.........anyone who can't tolerate the sound of vinyl on a turntable (source material being adequate of course). For those who can hear it.......there is definitely an artifact of digital sound reproduction which is tantamount to 'distortion'? |
Dear Sarcher30: Your digital item was released in 2007 and starting the marketing in 2010 and has not the latest digital DACs and in the other hand Linn is supported by the DSD SACD and not directly the PCM DVDA this fact alter a little what we are hearing.
Now, in the same way that exist bad analog recordings exist bad digirtal ones, example the today Telarc 1812 DSD ( format DVDA ) that's terrible for say the least or Faith Hill " Cry " title or the 24/96 DAD Classic Records: Pictures at an Exhibition with the Saint Louis Symp. Orcht.
In the other side DVDA from: Artificial Intelligence ( from motion picture ) very good as the recording for: Jane Monheit " Dream with me ".
Btw, the Fagen recording I was refereing it is: Two against Nature.
Sarcher30, today digital source is extremely demanding to any audio system where you can hide nothing because the very low distoritons on the digital medium so many times what we don't like it is not the digital format but in reality what we don't like it is the " true "/naked real system quality performance level that through analog all those " system imperfections " are hiden and we can't aware of it due to the higher analog distortions. Please think a mom,ent on this with out any source alternative bias.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Halcro: Here you are again with nothing to win and all to lose,ok!
++++ " just as valid as his opinion on valves vs SS " ++++
I don't know your opinion but if you are for tube that's fine for me. The tube/SS subject is not a contest because for that we need two similars contenders and there both are way different ones. Those audiophiles that supports tube electronic technology IMHO do it because ignorance of what happen down there.
Btw, ignorance is the mother of all wars.
First, the Gladiator example is only that an example where a CD beats its analog/LP counterpart but: where I affirm that the Gladiator sounds as live event, don't put words in my mouth and please read what I posted before react with no sense as you did it.
Always that I talked ( in this trhread or other threads ) of the superior digital technology that puts us nearer to the recording and nearer to the live event I always talked of DVDA ( 24/192. ) digital format never on RBCD: GOT IT!!!!!!!
Now, for any one of you could refute my statements first than all has to own the latest digital technology on DACs and this means 32bits/192 and up DACs. Do you have it?, then close your mouth or shout with the right foundations.
Yes, IMHO your digital ignorance level is to high to try to argue something with out clear foundation because your player I think has not the latest digital technology. My entry level one has it and not only that Denon is perhaps the today pioneer on digital recording ( Denon PCM. ) and digital design and manufacturer PCM recording items and a very old audio analog/electronics manufactuer and that's why I choosed over the Oppo or other entry level digital manufacturerers.
Whom really are you speaking of digital?, it was not a surprise to me that you react for the "nt'h " time in exactly the same way as you did here: This was your latest post on digital this year, remember?:
+++++ " 01-26-13: Halcro When it comes to audio.....I don't let DACs, transports or computers enter my listening room. I am a strictly analogue (vinyl) buffoon. " +++++
Do you think that I can take you seriously on a digital source discussion?, certainly not. You are just unaware of what today means music digital source.
Pardon me but I don't want to start a " war " because the wide differences on our ignorance level on the digital source.
TK7Lca?, maybe not even on analog. I don't want to touch your heavy system distortions that you are unaware but this is not what you posted where accept you can't be aware of cartridge differences through top rated headphones ( AUDEZE LCD 2 ) ?:
++++ " I was interested in hearing the sound of my 'System'....with the room 'effect' taken out of the equation? A major disappointment! Not only did I not enjoy the 'music in my head' experience......but I found that my speakers....at even low volumes.....gave me more information about the recordings than the head-phones. I am able to distinguish the differences between cartridges, arms and turntables quite readily with my speakers.....yet am unable to via the headphones? " ++++++
I understand that in your 3-way speakers the woofer goes up to 950 hz to crossover the midrange. Do you know wich is the IMD and THD generated level sole by these woofers. Have you an idea? Please forget it, never mind and not important to any one but you.
These are some arguments why analog can't be a challenge to the today digital source, please let me know your arguments against it other than: " I like it or I don't like it":
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++ " ++++++ " that I heard what vinyl was really about: it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers. I had never heard anything quite like it. All of the digital I had, no matter how high the resolution, did not really come close to approaching that type of sound. " +++++
I agree, the digital can't approach that type of sound. IMHO : Why can't approach it?, because analog/LP is totally faulty.
The analog signal is heavily manipulated, let see it:
when recorded and to be cutted ( LP. ) the signal must be equalized according to the RIAA standard and this means and equalization that goes from 20hz to 20khz +,- 20dbs!!!!!!!this deemphasis means added distortions, phase chnages, non-linear anomalies, added noise, additional stages where the signal have to pass through. Then the signal is trasfered to vinyl with all imperfections where does not exist a perfect cutting system, here there is several kind of signal loses: certainly what is in the recording was not what was recorded before all that proccess.
When we want to hear the LP in our audio system that analog signal must be recovery through the phono stage for we can attain a flat frequency response ( just like exist ( with out RIAA eq. ) in a digital medium. ) so inside the phono stage that signal pass again for an additional RIAA eq. ( this time an inverse eq. ) with all the heavy degradation: distortions, phase problems, added noise, colorations, etc, etc, etc.
Inside that phono stage the very low output signal must be amplified ( sometimes 10K times!!! ) to a level where the preamp can handle it as it handle in "; natural"; way the digital signal that has a lot higher output level. Through the high gain proccess the signal pass through 3-5 additional stages that continue degrading the signal continue adding more distortions ( of every kind ), nothing of this happen with the digital medium. That very low output signal characteristic makes that the signal be extremely sensitive to be degraded by everykind of " pollulation " ( electrical/magnetic. ) where the higher digital output signal is a lot less suceptible of that kind of degradations.
All those is what happen to an electronics level now we have to add the worst of all the signal manipulation:
a cartridge to " read " the recorded information, a cartridge is a rudimentary " instrument " for say the least. Cartridge designers make some kind of " magic "/tremendous efforts for the cartridge can makes its critical/titanic job.
A cartridge is an " unstable " tool, everything affect its performance: kind of cantilever and cantilever build material, stylus shape and with which kind of quality was builded, room temperature, kind and quality of cartridge suspension, cartridge motor design, cartridge body resonances, cartridge ridiculous pin connectors, etc, etc, each part of the cartridge degraded the original signal with out exception.
After that the cartridge must be mounted in a tonearm for it can ride the LP and one of the first challenges that the signal has to deal with are the " stupid " tonearm wire connectors to the cartridge and then the in ternal tonearm wire and the the additional IC between the tonearm and the phono stage. In all those links the signal continue degrading, this does not happen in the digital alternative: so no signal degradation.
But the worst for the " end " ( sometimes I think the analog medium is: endless of problems. ):
now the stylus tip hit the LP grooves and at microscopic level that stylus tip start a heavy fight against the grooves/its compliance and tracking habilities to stay in the grooves to be in touch always and this happen almost never ( especialy with low compliance cartridges as the LOMC ones. ). The stylus tip is " jumping " generating distortions and harmonic distortions. All this " fight " is transmited through the cartridge body to the tonearm which start to resonate ( adding distorions, non.linear anomalies, atc, atc. ) according those cartridge self resonances and according the cartridge compliance/tonearm effective mass.
But all the information captured by the cartrdige has not only a doses of tracking distortions becuase non-perfect cartridge tracking habilities but distortions because the stylus tip never coincide with the grooves never coincide on how the grooves were cutted!!!!! not even in a linear tracking tonearms.
Why is that? for several reasons: the LPs comes all with waves that preclude a perfect alignement trhough all the LP tracks. There is no perfect tonearm/cartridge set up it doesw not matters which geometry alignment we choose: Baerwald, Lofgren, Stevenson, etc, etc, in all them there is tracking errors for a pivoted tonearm and that tracking errors means added distortions in the signal path. Btw and talking of set up there is no perfect cartridge set up_ VTA/SRA/azymuth, overhang/etc, load impedance, load capacitance, etc, etc. All these parameters all the playback time are changing because all the LP imperfections including different LP weights, excentricity LP " center " hole. Don't forget the TT speed unaccuracies, speed unstability, rumble, wow&fluter, platter resonances, TT bearing ones, tonearm/TT mount board feedback and of course system SPL feedback that affect every analog rig.
I can go on and on and on with all the " thousands " degradation links where the analog signal must pass but as an example I think is enough.
Gentlemans, IMHO it is a " miracle " that we all after all those kind of degradations we still can enjoy the analog sounds!
+++++ " it was the smoothest, most organic, and 3d sound that ever came out of my speakers... " +++++
these and other adjectives that we audiophiles used to use when refereing to LP quality performance experiences does not comes in the recording in the original recording , those " characteristics " are a result of the heavy degradation that suffer the analog signal, degradation that does not exist in the digital alternative so that's why both mediums sounds different. Of course that digital has its own trade-offs, well I prefer it: is truer to the recording.
That we like it the analog alternative does not confirms and does not means in any sense that is right, IMHO is wrong almost dead wrong.
I prefer digital HR for music sound reproduction at home because I 'm nearest to the original sound that passed through the recording microphones with lower " artefacts " than in the analog domain.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. " +++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Seems to me that when you hear the " word " digital you put in panic in the same way almost all of us analog guys were when appeared " the perfect sound for ever "/CD that fortunately in those old times that panic disappears very fast due to the starting digital technology imperfections but times changes and today things are really different. Please don't be in panic and like today Nandric and I enjoy both alternatives some day in your future.
Please stay calm, learn and then come back to a more serious discussion a non-biased discussion.
Regrads and enjoy the music, R. |
Is it possible we are back to "people hear different"? Some people's turntables are driving them crazy with speed errors that others cannot detect, while others are saying the pitch of a certain instrument was off, and another cannot detect that. Others are hung up on bass management. Oh, that's a different story. Sorry couldn't resist.
Is it possible that some hear problems with digital while others don't?Some are bothered by gaps in sound,they shouldn't be able to hear?
I developed my theory, when I thought back on my lifetime of listening to music. Like most of you, I listened to music all my life, all the time. On the radio and latter with vinyl, 8 track, and cassettes. When digital came out I bought into the hype, and purchased a CD player. Looking back, I also quit listening to music as much at the same time. I could not listen to digital very long and even though I thought it sounded better than my cheap record player something was not right. That went on for most of 20 years, buying all the new CD's, but not being able to really listen to them.
Then I purchased a turntable and I have been sitting and listening to music again. Can't seem to get much done at the house anymore, but enjoying music as I use to a long time ago.
Still listen to digital, but I rarely get though a CD without taking it out. Does something I hear in digital bother my brain? I personally think it sounds good, but just can't listen. |
Raul - whilst I regard your cartridge comparisons as invaluable, I do wonder how well your analogue is running. I have a friend with a Technics SP10 will all the mods being touted around this forum, $15k arm/cartridge, and another with bog standard Micro RX5000 ( with air bearing )/$10k arm/cart - the Micro is in another league - particularly in terms of high frequency purity and extension. There is no loss of drive compared to the Technics. I also have another friend with both the Acoustic Plan and an SME20 - again the SME20 is a significant step up from the Acoustic Plan. The Denon DP100 compared to my Final Audio auditioned in the same system compresses dynamics and overloads with complex music - its coloured. So in my experience the Micro should be the best of what you have, but obviously you disagree. |
Raul, I doubt that everyone will agree with your findings regarding DVD-A vs LP. I happen to prefer my Steely Dan and Donald Fagen LP's to their DVD-A counterparts. The LP's are more dimensional and more natural sounding to me in my system. |
My take is that digital mis a lot more accurate, " natural "/non-colored and lower distortion alternative where we are nearer to the recording and nearer to the live event. My take is......that this statement is one man's opinion. And perhaps just as valid as his opinion on valves vs SS? There has never been a digital playback that I have heard......which sounds remotely like the 'real' thing. Perhaps I am not putting that clearly?...........never, ever, ever...have I heard a digital playback which has 'fooled' me into thinking that's about as close to a 'live' performance as I can get. Yet many times......no.......hundreds of times.....I have heard vinyl sound so spookily close to the 'real' thing.....that I've gasped in wonderment. Raul speaks of the CD Gladiator. After less than 6 minutes of listening to this on my system......the 'Eject' button on the remote is just never close enough....... If this is what Raul thinks 'live' music sounds like......it perhaps explains a lot about his cartridge preferences? Raul can produce all the facts and figures he likes to 'prove' his claim about the superiority of digital.......but there are equally many facts and figures which prove the superiority of analogue. But who needs 'facts and figures' to prove this particular argument? It has been raging unabated for 30 years, and if Raul was right......vinyl would have died 20 years ago as we all feared it would? Instead...it is the CD which has 'died' whilst the vinyl disc is being produced in greater and greater numbers. Michael Fremer never wavered and nor did I and enough audiophiles who continued to carry the baton. There are more and better turntables available today than ever before....and also tonearms and cartridges the likes of which we couldn't imagine 25 years ago? So Raul.......you can claim whatever you want about the mythical 'superiority' of 'digital' over 'analogue'. You can also claim that 'black; is 'white' for all I care. It doesn't make it so.....and indeed it is NOT so. And this poppycock about changing the rest of our systems to 'accommodate' the horrors of digital?...........perhaps that is your problem? |
Digital verus analog; the scope of an question. Not to stay behind we all try the CD, the SACD and DVDA. But the first question or dilemma was: how many LP's I own and what am I supposed to do with them all if I chose or prefer digital? The SACD was not invented by accident. Nor the DVDA. But apart from the investment needed to at least approch the LP collection we already owned there was the disappointment with the improvement achived with the SACD and DVDA. In my case I only got a few SACD which were better while the most were indistinguishable fom CD's. Not to mention the price difference and more in particular the available choice. My feeling was that I was cheated. But the consequence of my choice was to try to get my analog gear as good as possible. That is why I own , among other, so many tonearms and carts.
Regards, |
Roscoeiii, It is the Signet TK-7LCa. Unfortunately.....as there were fewer than 999 samples ever produced and those that were are over thirty years old........it is almost impossible to find one with an original Signet Line Contact stylus in usable condition? The AT-155LC stylus is a workable transplant......but even these assemblies are now discontinued. One of the advantages of the MMs over the LOMCs I find......is the ability to fine-tune the synergy within your specific playback system via adjustments in the Loading and Capacitance. A disadvantage in these days of pretentious high-end 'wishful' phono stages......is the lack of attention to maximising the quality of the MM circuitry? This may explain the preference for LOMCs amongst many high-end users? |
the difference between RBCD via the Oppo and a top quality LP via a great cartridge, tonearm, and turntable, is not in bandwidth, distortion, noise floor. Obviously, digital kills vinyl on all of those measurable criteria. That statement is not correct 1. Digital is 20hz - 20khz, analogue has a wider bandwidth than this. 2. Distortion - well thats debatable. One could argue since all digital is a calculated approximation based on sampling that none of it is correct. This comes back to what is your definition of distortion. 3. Noise floor. There is an argument that you can hear into the noise floor with analogue, whereas digital just chops off below the noise floor. If this argument is accepted then analogue can have a wider dynamic range. What I find most perplexing about digital is that I have heard an Ipad blow off many 10-12k digital front ends. How can this be ? What message does this send about spending big money on digital. |
Dear Nandric, Raul & Lewm, I am happy to learn we are all youngsters.
Nikola, I heard that 60 is not very old today. You know I am far away from this and always questioning myself if it is no better jumping from a bridge when the time is right. But some people told me I am not allowed to do this...
Agree with Raul that Audio is an old business. I was "enlighted" (:-) when I was starting using my Western Electric SUT from the 40ies of last century in one of my phono chains - with the EMT R80. Some told me you will not hear really much as it cuts off at 12.500 Hz. Being very honest I like this sound very much. It is in no way a kind of vintage sound as many might bring into connection with bassy or smooth only. I had a similar experience when I got my Neumann cart some three years ago.
On the other hand I curruently experience that the audio arena is very active & creative regarding new inventions on headshells, arms and carts. Not so much on TTs. It will become an interesting year in Audio. Maybe the High End in Munich will give us some new insights, too. Also about new MMs? Let's see. I will keep my eyes open.
Raul, my proposal is "go on" , maybe concentrating a bit more on MIs, too. old Deccas (different versions, Mono), Soundsmith etc. Which are the differences etc.
Next question is: How much is enough? |
Dear Lewm: Last night I was " disecting " some analog/digital recordings and ( at least in the ones I heard. ) in all of them digital beats its analog counterpart.
Foreigner 4: I have the LP, CD and DVDA and both LP and CD are a caricature of the great DVDA recording: you really never heard Lou Graham at its best as in this DVDA, this guy voice really shine: some people said that Lou only knows shout but can't sing, well in Foreigner 4 DVDA I would like that those Lou's detractors try to " shout " as Graham did it: WOW!
Btw, this recording showed not if M.Jones is a great guyitarist because IMHO it's not but a great composer alond LG.
Take G.Benson Breezin that's a great Benson recording. I own the original pressing and the OMR from Mobile Fidelity and again the DVDA recording beats both LPs with " real life " sounds.
I have the Concord label original LP and re-release from analog masters LP of LA4 ( Just friends: Almeida, Brown, Hamilton and Shank. ): there is no analog contest, the DVDA is clearly a superior source.
REM: Losing my religion track, three formats: LP, CD and DVDA. Even that the recording in all formats is not the best out there the DVDA one still at the top.
Do you like or remember: Donald Fagen?, well Steely Dan LP,CD and DVDA and you know what the DVDA beats the other formats again.
I have some CD-like digital recordings made it by Classic Records Label advertized as: " master tape sound " 24/96 DAD. I took one of them that happen I have a today audiophile LP re-release: Rachmaninoff Symphonic Dances with the Dallas Symphony Orchestra. Both recordings: LP and DVDA are good ones but ( I think ) due to the bass content on the recording the >DVDA transmit in deepest way the music emotions. Here the LP recording is near the DAD one but still behind it.
I don't know if my Denon player is something especial because I have nop other digital today player at hand but even the DTS/HDS digital recording of Santana/Abraxas beats the LP recording.
What can I say with those overwhelming evidence clear evidence of the DVDA format against the LP one? and my Denon is a humble digital today entry level.
I will follow making analog/digital comparisons because I'm fortunate enough to have several recordings in both formats ( LP/DVDA ), even I don't knew I have it because for years I think don't touched. I never imagine to own those 24/96 CD-like DADs by Classis Records a nice discovery.
Of course I'm happy and enjoying digital better than ever thank's to that Denon universal digital player.
I hope you can have a chance to hear one of those DVDA I name it here and compare to its LP counterpart.
Have fun.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Lewm: If I remember the Oppo comes with the SABRE 32bit DA>C so it has to performs very good.
Now please buy the Gladiator LP and the old Gladiator CD and compare it and I'm sure you will understand in better way what I'm talking about because I'm talking too o0f " real life ": what if not?, I'm talking of " live music/even ".
Now, not all RBCD sounds good, probably more are mediocre than good ones recordings.
The OPPO as my Denon are universal players and maybe you could have the opportunity to test a DVDA, please do it because IMHO this format is supeior overall to the LP experience.
I like to compare digital/analog first than all not thinking on all the effort/work/money that I already put on my analog system and not thinking on all the analog software I own. I like to make digital/analog comparisons with out all those analog baggage that is so weighty that could interfer with my sane judgements.
I really try to be unbiased about, like some one that never heard it any of those two mediums but for the first time.
Some of you could think that I'm not hearing first rate analog quality performance but I can tell you that at least I'm hearing very good analog quality level performance tthrough my system and IMHO I'm sure of that because when I swtich to digital I hear the digital superiority changing/re-set nothing in the whole system set up when years ago I had to make some re-set in the system set up to " enjoy " digital, not today.
Now, it's my take that in a home audio system the main target is try to achieve the highest bass management on the source medium. I worked hard to acomplish it and still working on. Well, in this sole regards the analog source experience can't even the digital one. That " real life " you are refering when we talk on bass management the analog source is far away from the real life than its digital counterpart.
We are talking here of definition, transparency, pitch, dynamics, transients handling, power, quality and quantity of that bass and everything with lowest distortions that contaminate the less the audio overall signal than the analog experience.
Lewm, maybe you can try this now that you have the " latest " digital techynology. Let me explain: in that TW thread that you are participating I posted that to prove our each one reaction/sensitivity to tiny speed changes ( not fluctuations but different but constant speed changes, example: 33.37 to 33.39 rpm. ) we try for a week to listen not to 33.33 but 33.39 ( the ones with a pitch control TT can do it ) and after that week listen again to that 33.33 rpm and tell now what you liked more: after that week. Well, listen for a whole week to the best digital format you have access and after that week compare the same digital recording to the LP recording and then come back here and share your experience.
Please don't argue about but better than that some time in your future try it. The only thing you can lose is one week of your time but you really don't lose nothing but I'm sure you will learn " something ".
Don't misunderstood: I still support the analog experience but I support too the digital one for different well gained reasons.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Guess what. I don't hate digital, and I too just purchased a new device, an Oppo BDP105. I bought it to replace my highly tweaked Sony SCD777ES, which I have owned for a decade. But, alas, the Sony developed a fault that no one can fix. The Oppo was a "compromise" choice, because I could not figure out how to wade through all the baloney on the internet these days surrounding digital components. I figure that if I don't like it for audio, I still have one of the world's best DVD and BlueRay players for video. I've listened to it with standard RBCD, and so far I like it very much. It allows direct access to its very high quality internal DAC via USB, so I plan to connect to my Mac laptop and test hi-rez downloads, which should be fantastic. But, Raul, the difference between RBCD via the Oppo and a top quality LP via a great cartridge, tonearm, and turntable, is not in bandwidth, distortion, noise floor. Obviously, digital kills vinyl on all of those measurable criteria. But vinyl has an elusive quality of "real life", for want of a better phrase, that I have not so far heard from digital. Also, vinyl can transmit very low level ambient cues that are sometimes lost in digital. I may change my mind when I do get finally to hear hi-rez computer downloads into the Oppo DAC. One should always keep an open mind.
The Sony has been broken for so long that I cannot really say for sure that I remember how it sounded, but I venture to guess that the Oppo on RBCD is just as good if not better.
By the way, I am less than 80 years old. |
Dear friends: In the last weeks I was trying to give some time to the digital alternative source through my Denon DBP-2012UDCI ( DACs: 32bits/192khz. ).
This is a universal digital entry level ( I paid 700.00 for it. Last month appeared the 3313 that's almost the same unit. ) where maybe any one of you could have no great expectations on quality performance level against out beloved analog alternative.
Well, in the last few days I was and am listening different digital formats through it: CD, SACD and DVDA where in non of these formats the Denon disappoint me.
I have to say that in the last few years/months digital alternative advanced with high steps compared to analog alternative.
My take is that digital mis a lot more accurate, " natural "/non-colored and lower distortion alternative where we are nearer to the recording and nearer to the live event.
I compared CDs with its analog counterpart and simple as this: no analog contest, simple as that.
You can try it, for example take the LP Gladiator recording and compare it against not a DVDA/SACD but against a simple CD and this format beats in anyway to the LP recording.
Now, if we go up-scale digital format we encounter that DVDA is way above analog in any single way and you can talk of: frequency extremes, detail, transparency, soundstage, dynamics, timbre, pitch, balance and the like.
I could not find out where LP can beats the DVDA experience.
I know that many of you " hate " digital and I really wonder why other than your system needs to be re-set to digital needs. Something like when we pass from LOMC to MM ones or the other way around: we have to re-set somethings to fulfil the source needs.
Unfortunatelly there are not a wide choice of titles on DVDA/SACD or even CD of music performances we love and listen through LPs but if I could have the same music wide choice that I have on LP then with out doubt that the 100% of my listening will belonged to the digital medium.
It's clear fro me that the digital source is even better that what I'm listening at home because my player is a humble entry level but the top gear$$$ must be even better.
Yes, there are CDs that sounds awful but there are LPs that sounds awful too and this fact does not diminish either medium in any way.
IMHO a good digital recording is a lot lot better than a good analog recording.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Thuchan: ++++ " But to be honest, are we sometimes not behaving like old men? Talking about the same issues again and again. " +++++
well, what could say that ( between other things )?, MM/MI cartridges is a " new " technology for almost all of us: we are really discovering it and we are still learning about. MM/MI cartridges still have more to shows us.
In the time that we already learned all maybe we can talk on other subjects and not the " same " but I doubt we can do it either becuase: are you talking of TT/tonearms/phono stages/LOMC/etc etc? and what are you talking about? almost the same of the last 10 years: right?
In the other side could be that some of us already learned " nothing " and that's why we still talk of the " same ".
Audio is an old industry and have almost no " news ", I mean real new subjects/products.
I hope we can change on subject at least for fun. What do you propose?
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Eckart, In some parts of Europe wisdom is connected with the age. I am sorry to admit that I am below 80 years old. But when you reach 60 you will probable get the picture. BTW I am like you as some kind of a traitor; I also still prefer the LOMC's. Sorry my Aussie Slavic brother.
Regards, |
Halcro,
What is that current favorite MM cart? |
Dear Nandric, missed you and others. But to be honest, are we sometimes not behaving like old men? Talking about the same issues again and again. I know Raul is dreaming at night of Zero Distortion while we are favouring certain carts. Halcro has his favourite, you maybe and me, too. Unfortunately (at this place) mine is not a MM - while I am owning quite a lot and don't stop experimenting.
May I ask a question: Who in this thread is under 80 ? |
Iike Lew my limit for whatever cart was and still is +/-$2500. Probable unlike Lew before I join in this thread I had not a single MM cart. 'All' my carts ( I mean both) were of course LOMC's. After all I was a very good informed HIFI nuts with subscription to 4 HIFI Magazines. Approximately in the same time I started with my ebay adventure and because of both ; Raul and ebay I totally lost my mind. I am not even able to count my carts because I continuosly sell some and buy some more. Till I , thanks to my Aussie friend , installed my FR-64 I rarely changed my carts. Both my tonearms on my Kuzma have fast headshells while my Basis Exclusive need to be opened for any adjustment. Not to mention the cart adjustment with those fractions of a millimeter precision. Very frustrating experience I must say. Why then all those carts before the FR-64? There is, alas, not a single rational reason that I can invent. Except, of course, if infection can be counted as such. I never thought that 'mass psychology' existed but only the individual kind. However why should, say, Lew own more carts than I do? Why should he own better carts than I do? Those are of course reasons but don't ask me about their kind.
Regards, |
Unlike Lew.......I DID invest heavily in some of the top MC cartridges for 20 years. From the Symphonic Line (aka VdH Grasshopper) to the Koetsu Urishi 52nd Anniv to the Clearaudio Concerto to the Clearaudio Insider Gold to the Lyra Helikon to the Lyra Titan i to the ZYX UNIverse (3 of them) to the Dynavector XV1-s to the Fidelity Research FR-7f. I am still happily listening to the last three alongside 30+ MM cartridges which have been collected over the last 6 or 7 years. To my ears.....there is no distinctive difference in DNA between the best LOMCs and the best MMs. I enjoy them all equally......but what Raul and this Thread have demonstrated to us......is that great cartridges can be had for a few hundred dollars rather than the many thousands of dollars being asked for the best LOMCs. And if that wasn't enough........my favourite cartridge currently (and for the last few years) is a MM. |
I am exactly the opposite of Lewm and Mike. I rarely listen to the same cartridge for more than a week at a time. I am able to listen to music for about 4-5 hours a night, when my wife is in China, ( about 5-6 months a year) and about 2 hours a night when she is home, and I just decide to change it for some reason or another.
I'm glad I am not like that with my women. :) |
(I tend to settle down and listen to music, once I'm happy with any cartridge; I find it difficult to change cartridges just to find out what the next one sounds like.)
Exactly as I play it. No need to keep rolling cartridges while you discovered one that pleases and satisfys the soul. |
Dear Thuchan, We missed you and you missed us. I never heard about a guy stating: 'I will never marry you because of your mother'. This moderator issue is like appointment of an civil servant in order to cure the unemployment. To keep his job this guy NEED to do something. So it make no sense to ask the same guy for the arguments reg. his actions. I deed try but after a year of careful study of his arguments I still have no idea what he was talking about. So forget 'the mother' and come back to our loving community.
Regards, |
Dear Lew, The Achilles tendon of all AKG series after P 8 ES was the cantilever suspension. The iron tube on the back side of the cantilever need to move between 4 magnet rods. The suspension consist of a thin metal plate with a (thin) rubber ring which is supposed to 'regulate' compliance, balance and centering of the cantilever/stylus combo. Even an amateur like me can see how furnerable and inadequate this construction is. No wonder the most of them colapsed while AGK destroyed all their stocks in order to avoid liability. There is no such problem with the previous versions with the 'conventional suspension'. Those styli are still available. I assume that we all have had the frustration with some carts while my most frustrating experience was with those AKG carts.
Regards, |
So, dear Lew, your price limite should explain your preference for the one above the other Greek mythology: Proteus above Orpheus? |
Its always hard finding the right way in moderating a thread which came such a long way and comprises many old hands who may feel like a group. Besides of the topic we always touched other areas of interest. As I have and never had a negative feeling towards Audiogon I felt a little demotivated by the special moderation treatment in this and other threads. It is good that moderators are talking with audiogon members but it would be even better if they decide using a flexible and smart moderation process rather than leaving the posts in the clouds for so long time. looking for better weather... |
As for me, I have to admit candidly that I was never willing to spend more than $2500 or thereabouts for ANY cartridge. Thus I have never personally owned most of the top echelon contenders, based on price. I have owned a Koetsu Urushi for many years but only because I was able to purchase mine direct from a dealer in Tokyo, thanks to my bilingual son. I bought a Colibri from Mike Lavigne at a price within my stated range. I also bought an Ortofon MC7500, from none other than Raul. These are the three most expensive cartridges I've ever owned. Each was and is excellent in its own way; none is perfectly satisfying to me on all levels. I have been having fun with these MM and MI cartridges, but I think that I will not know exactly how to rate the best ones of them, until I can run a current state of the art MC in my system, for comparison. I have been targeting a ZYX UNIverse (0.24mV, copper), but even that is now eclipsed in the ZYX line by one or two other models. Still, I refuse to say that ALL those highest-priced MCs are falsely idolized, because I have not really tested the idea in my own system. It is clear, however, that the very best of the MM and MIs that I have listened to extensively, like the Grace Ruby and the Stanton 981LZS, both of which I currently have to rank ahead of the Acutex LPM320 (but not yet the M320) are in many ways preferable to the Urushi, MC7500, and Colibri. And of course I have a shelf full of other MM and MI types that I have not auditioned. (I tend to settle down and listen to music, once I'm happy with any cartridge; I find it difficult to change cartridges just to find out what the next one sounds like.)
Raul, Oddly enough the MC7500 sounded best of all in the crazy RS-A1 tonearm, better than it does in the Reed 2A, whereas I do very much like the Reed 2A with other cartridges. I need to remount it in the RS-A1.
As I think I once mentioned, if you factor in all the variations on the Colibri, there are really dozens of Colibri's, and each could sound different, depending upon its coil material, body structure, output voltage, etc. My particular Colibri was a high output one, and I think that's why it did not light my fire.
My cheapskate nature caused me to live with HOMC cartridges, several types, for more than a decade, because they could be had for reasonable prices and got rave reviews often (e.g., the Benz Glider). None of them gave me an iota of satisfaction, and I tended to blame it on my phono stage, rather than on the cartridges. I now know different. For even less money, I could have been listening to a good MM and been much happier. |
"I wont have anyone determine what sounds the best, that's my job. "
As always... |
"It seem to me that we've lived through "The Golden Age of Audio". It's not getting any better now, it's just getting more expensive. Thank you Raul, for relighting this flame. It is surprising just how much performance can be had for so little money. All because of you"
Don how wonderfully put and O so true.
I went through like most of us here the super expensive MC period. I have also let all of my subscriptions lapse to the audio press. I no longer need to be caught up in a rat race main reason i cant afford to play that game. I resisted this thread in its beginning being so full of the im going to use the word indoctrination, for the best sound this is the gear you need.
Thankfully Raul and this thread put me on the best track and being a old guy back to my roots in the hobby vintage. Im enjoying music as much or more now than at any other time in my life. To bad i had to take the long way around to have the light go on and make the move. I wont have anyone determine what sounds the best thats my job. Mike |
Hi Lewm,
I have the AKG P 8ES Super Nova VDh. It is an excellent cartridge and better than a lot of cartridges being used today, but it is not quite at at the level we are currently discussing. It deserves better than just a luke warm response though! The bar for excellence just keeps getting higher as we progess down this road of rediscovery. I did not know that the Acutex 320 has the titanium cantilever. It is becoming quite clear to me, cartridges that have this technology are rather hard to beat. They were S.O.T.A at one time yet are still quite hard to top. When I think about how many years has passed since some of these old cartridges were new I begin to wonder, with cartridges costing thousands of dollars, where's the progress? It seem like there are some of us in this hobby that are in it only for pride of ownership! I'm not referring to those of us that participate on this thread. The very fact that we still use the MM/MI form of cartridges speaks highly to the contrary. I have been allowing my magazines subscriptions (from this hobby), to lapse because I have lost interest in hearing someone spout about another latest and greatest $30,000 turntable or whatever. It seem to me that we've lived through "The Golden Age of Audio". It's not getting any better now, it's just getting more expensive. Thank you Raul, for relighting this flame. It is surprising just how much performance can be had for so little money. All because of you. Regards, Don |
Don, I am surprised no one else brought it up, but the Acutex 320 series also have titanium cantilevers, IIRC.
Nandric mentioned AKG. We all know that the unavailable P100LE is nectar of the gods, but what of the P8ES and its derivatives (vdH, etc)? These were touted at the outset of this thread, but opinions since then seem luke warm, at best. That is, if you have one with two good channels. Any thoughts on how the P8ES stacks up after all this time? |
Hi Nandric,
"am wondering if Dgob actually lives in GB"
For better or worse, I am still bound within these shores but have stopped looking for MI/MM gems. That's the only excuse I can offer for missing out on many of the more recent and local ones.
I suppose 'happiness' can be based on the wisdom to recognise achievement or the stupidity not to recognise inadequacy. I like to think that it's the former in my case!
As always... |
Hi Nandric,
:~)
As always... |
Dear Nandric: It is not a hard task to make recomendations on cartridge for me when there are so many good performers out there.
Btw, I know you will " catch " that JVC X-1. You deserve it.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Griffithds: The ART-1 has not a diamond cantilever, at least not mine, and was the first AT cartridge using Titanium as a body. The only cartridge I know and own coming from AT with diamond cantilever was the MC 1000.
The ART-1 is not on rotation due that is almost imposible for me to test so many cartridges and I concentrate on the promised ones. Not that the ART-1 is not a good LOMC performer but not at the same level of LOMC top performers I reviewed here or elsewhere.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Stltrains: +++++ " The best cartridge is the one that stays mounted and played most. " +++++
I think that your statement is almost a rule, whom can't argue against it?, comom sense dictated that.
Now, in my case best cartridge is the " next " one. Through these MM/MI thread years that's what my experiences tell me. Many times I proclamed that this or that was the best cartridge I heard and in a short time appeared a " new " candidate for that title. Right now the JVC X-1MK2 is in that place and waiting for the " next one ", well I'm waiting/looking for the next one.
Dgob said I'm a collector and no I'm not, I'm only an audiophile like you looking for " the best " but over time I learned that in the MM/MI land exist to many vintage unknow options waiting to be discovered for one of us. Which next?, I can't say it but certainly will be a " next ".
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear Dgob, 'My Frege' and 'your Kant' were both very fond of prescriptions. The first one about the logical rules , yours about the moral issues. I was always puzzled with his prescription never to lie. But the best argument I have ever seen was from the Danish philosopher F. Blaetter: ''this way I don't need to remember what I have stated earlier''.
As always... |
Griffithds,
I so loved my MP50 and only let it go because of the Glanz and Technics 100 Mk4: more inspired by my views and where hoarding sits within these. In fact, along with the Music Maker 3, the Nagaoka was Raul's first recommendation that pulled me into the world of moving magnets.
On the Glanz, I am still keen to hear more in the Glanz range and hope to have that opportunity in the years ahead. In the meantime, I look forward to the vicarious pleasures afforded by listening to your experiences.
As always... |
Nandric,
Humour always welcomed. "Raul's recommendations are the best." Complex, that old "best" but if substituted with "great", I could smile with ease. I wonder what Frege might make of that!
As always... |
The prejudice of knowledge. Wrestling with the nomenclature and ranking of some carts I was convinced to know much at least about AKG and Glanz. Dgob caused my interest in Glanz but in the sense of the opportunity to write 'funny' comments on his 'ownership' of the Glanz thread. Then I got the MFG 31 l and E and, at last, the Glanz 5. No more jokes about Glanz or Dgob since. By my MFG 31 L the user manual was included with the description of the whole series. From this manual I deduced the 'top line' : 71, 51 and 31 all with either line contact or elliptical stylus. So when my comrade Don asked about MFG 21 TL my advice was not to buy this one but to look for 'my top line'. BTW I just got the MFG 71 L. The strange thing is that I got nearly all my Glanz carts from ebay.uk (one from Italy)and am wondering if Dgob actually lives in GB. That is to say he missed them all. Ergo: don't listen to my advice. While we can dispute endless about the question which cart is the best there is no question about that Raul's recommendations are the best. Now I need only to find this damn JVC X 1...
Regards, |
Dgob,
There have been 3 cartridges in my life that absolutely stunned me because of their remarkable performance. The 1st was a Nagaoka MP50 Super. A Sapphire tube cantilever with a solid nude shank diamond stylus. The 2nd one was a Goldring G800 that Axel decided to installed a beryllium cantilever with a shibata tip. Shocked at the difference that one made. The 3rd is this Glanz MFG 21TL. Several of my well though of cartridges just took a giant step down the ladder! Regards, Don |
Stltrains,
Just reread my post. My reference to hoarding does not include the likes of Raul, who I consider to be a cartridge collector where his hobby demands hoarding - in the same way as an art, stamp or record collectors' hobby does.
As always... |
Griffithds,
Glanz (despite baffling expressions to the contrary) are S.O.T.A cartridges (at least their G series are when properly mounted) and I am pleased that their work has helped to bring you added listening pleasure.
Stltrains,
This raises a lot of questions indeed. Not least is the one about differing mentalities and hoarding. I suppose we have to accept that we are diverse in views and that any dislike of the hoarding attitude remains personal.
As always... |
Stltrains,
I like how you think. Raul, I do not recall you mentioning the ART-1 much in our cartridge discussions. Is there a reason why it stays out of rotation? I would think a cartridge with a titanium body and a solid diamond cantilever and stylus that is one piece would remain mounted and used to compare others to? Is it of the old school sound? The titanium really has me interested. I bought a (NOS) Glanz stylus assembly. It's a titanium cantilever with a Line Contact stylus. Yesterday I installed it on my Astatic MF100 body. I skipped dinner last night just so I didn't have to stop listening to it. I'm spellbound! I have not been able to convince myself to rotate into play, something else for comparison. I just want to spend every minute with this one! Lighting fast in transients. As good as my London "Decca" Jubilee in that regard. I know it's not settled in completely yet, but I'm still speechless! It just fills the room with sound. I just finished listening to Jean Michel Jarre (Oxygene). I can not get the smile off of my face. What a great combination this Glanz is with a titanium cantilever/Line Contact stylus. I remember one of our retippers has a titanium cantilever. I need to go back and check which one. I expected to hear metallic ringing like you get with titanium tweeters but that is not the case with this combo. Everything is just locked in position, but spread out all over the room with depth! I need to buy another Graham arm wand. This one is staying mounted!!!! |
The best cartridge is the one that stays mounted and played most. The rest are in the bullpen for good reason. Other discussion welcomed on this very thought. |
Don, There are so many "best cartridge(s) ever produced" that one could start a collection only consisting of them. I have several "second best cartridges ever produced", but none of the "best".
Tomorrow or Wednesday, I will have received my Grace Ruby with new LC stylus tip, by SS. Surely it will be "one of the best cartridges ever produced", or at least I promise to say that it is. |
Dear Griffithds: Yes, I own that ART-1 ( Audio Technica. ) that's a LOMC one with titanium body and time to time you can find out on ebay.
Regards and enjoy the music, R. |
Dear comrade, Such report from a comrade is supposed to be private not public . Besides I searched all over the planet without coming 'across' any AT 'ART -1'. Your info is like 'there is somewhere the AT ART-1 to get'.
With comrades greetings, |