Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?

Dear friends: who really needs an MM type phono cartridge?, well I will try to share/explain with you what are my experiences about and I hope too that many of you could enrich the topic/subject with your own experiences.

For some years ( in this forum ) and time to time I posted that the MM type cartridge quality sound is better than we know or that we think and like four months ago I start a thread about: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1173550723&openusid&zzRauliruegas&4&5#Rauliruegas where we analyse some MM type cartridges.

Well, in the last 10-12 months I buy something like 30+ different MM type phono cartridges ( you can read in my virtual system which ones. ) and I’m still doing it. The purpose of this fact ( “ buy it “ ) is for one way to confirm or not if really those MM type cartridges are good for us ( music lovers ) and at the same time learn about MM vs MC cartridges, as a fact I learn many things other than MM/MC cartridge subject.

If we take a look to the Agon analog members at least 90% of them use ( only ) MC phono cartridges, if we take a look to the “ professional reviewers “ ( TAS, Stereophile, Positive Feedback, Enjoy the Music, etc, etc, ) 95% ( at least ) of them use only MC cartridges ( well I know that for example: REG and NG of TAS and RJR of Stereophile use only MM type cartridges!!!!!!!! ) , if we take a look to the phono cartridge manufacturers more than 90% of them build/design for MC cartridges and if you speak with audio dealers almost all will tell you that the MC cartridges is the way to go.

So, who are wrong/right, the few ( like me ) that speak that the MM type is a very good alternative or the “ whole “ cartridge industry that think and support the MC cartridge only valid alternative?

IMHO I think that both groups are not totally wrong/right and that the subject is not who is wrong/right but that the subject is : KNOW-HOW or NON KNOW-HOW about.

Many years ago when I was introduced to the “ high end “ the cartridges were almost MM type ones: Shure, Stanton, Pickering, Empire, etc, etc. In those time I remember that one dealer told me that if I really want to be nearest to the music I have to buy the Empire 4000 D ( they say for 4-channel reproduction as well. ) and this was truly my first encounter with a “ high end cartridge “, I buy the 4000D I for 70.00 dls ( I can’t pay 150.00 for the D III. ), btw the specs of these Empire cartridges were impressive even today, look: frequency response: 5-50,000Hz, channel separation: 35db, tracking force range: 0.25grs to 1.25grs!!!!!!!!, just impressive, but there are some cartridges which frequency response goes to 100,000Hz!!!!!!!!!!

I start to learn about and I follow to buying other MM type cartridges ( in those times I never imagine nothing about MC cartridges: I don’t imagine of its existence!!!. ) like AKG, Micro Acoustics, ADC, B&O, Audio Technica, Sonus, etc, etc.

Years latter the same dealer told me about the MC marvelous cartridges and he introduce me to the Denon-103 following with the 103-D and the Fulton High performance, so I start to buy and hear MC cartridges. I start to read audio magazines about either cartridge type: MM and Mc ones.

I have to make changes in my audio system ( because of the low output of the MC cartridges and because I was learning how to improve the performance of my audio system ) and I follow what the reviewers/audio dealers “ speak “ about, I was un-experienced !!!!!!!, I was learning ( well I’m yet. ).

I can tell you many good/bad histories about but I don’t want that the thread was/is boring for you, so please let me tell you what I learn and where I’m standing today about:

over the years I invested thousands of dollars on several top “ high end “ MC cartridges, from the Sumiko Celebration passing for Lyras, Koetsu, Van denHul, to Allaerts ones ( just name it and I can tell that I own or owned. ), what I already invest on MC cartridges represent almost 70-80% price of my audio system.

Suddenly I stop buying MC cartridges and decide to start again with some of the MM type cartridges that I already own and what I heard motivate me to start the search for more of those “ hidden jewels “ that are ( here and now ) the MM phono cartridges and learn why are so good and how to obtain its best quality sound reproduction ( as a fact I learn many things other than MM cartridge about. ).

I don’t start this “ finding “ like a contest between MC and MM type cartridges.
The MC cartridges are as good as we already know and this is not the subject here, the subject is about MM type quality performance and how achieve the best with those cartridges.

First than all I try to identify and understand the most important characteristics ( and what they “ means “. ) of the MM type cartridges ( something that in part I already have it because our phonolinepreamp design needs. ) and its differences with the MC ones.

Well, first than all is that are high output cartridges, very high compliance ones ( 50cu is not rare. ), low or very low tracking force ones, likes 47kOhms and up, susceptible to some capacitance changes, user stylus replacement, sometimes we can use a different replacement stylus making an improvement with out the necessity to buy the next top model in the cartridge line , low and very low weight cartridges, almost all of them are build of plastic material with aluminum cantilever and with eliptical or “ old “ line contact stylus ( shibata ) ( here we don’t find: Jade/Coral/Titanium/etc, bodies or sophisticated build material cantilevers and sophisticated stylus shape. ), very very… what I say? Extremely low prices from 40.00 to 300.00 dls!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, well one of my cartridges I buy it for 8.99 dls ( one month ago ): WOW!!!!!!, so any one of you can/could have/buy ten to twenty MM cartridges for the price of one of the MC cartridge you own today and the good notice is that is a chance that those 10-20 MM type cartridges even the quality performance of your MC cartridge or beat it.

Other characteristics is that the builders show how proud they were/are on its MM type cartridges design, almost all those cartridges comes with a first rate box, comes with charts/diagrams of its frequency response and cartridge channel separation ( where they tell us which test recording use it, with which VTF, at which temperature, etc, etc. ), comes with a very wide explanation of the why’s and how’s of its design and the usual explanation to mount the cartridge along with a very wide list of specifications ( that were the envy of any of today MC ones where sometimes we really don’t know nothing about. ), comes with a set of screws/nuts, comes with a stylus brush and even with stylus cleaning fluid!!!!!!!!!, my GOD. Well, there are cartridges like the Supex SM 100MK2 that comes with two different stylus!!!! One with spherical and one with elliptical/shibata shape and dear friends all those in the same low low price!!!!!!!!!!!

Almost all the cartridges I own you can find it through Ebay and Agon and through cartridge dealers and don’t worry if you loose/broke the stylus cartridge or you find the cartridge but with out stylus, you always can/could find the stylus replacement, no problem about there are some stylus and cartridge sources.

When I’m talking about MM type cartridges I’m refer to different types: moving magnet, moving iron, moving flux, electret, variable reluctance, induced magnet, etc, etc. ( here is not the place to explain the differences on all those MM type cartridges. Maybe on other future thread. ).

I made all my very long ( time consuming ) cartridge tests using four different TT’s: Acoustic Signature Analog One MK2, Micro Seiki RX-5000, Luxman PD 310 and Technics SP-10 MK2, I use only removable headshell S and J shape tonearms with 15mm on overhang, I use different material build/ shape design /weight headshells. I test each cartridge in at least three different tonearms and some times in 3-4 different headshells till I find the “ right “ match where the cartridge perform the best, no I’m not saying that I already finish or that I already find the “ perfect “ match: cartridge/headshell/tonearm but I think I’m near that ideal target.

Through my testing experience I learn/ confirm that trying to find the right tonearm/headshell for any cartridge is well worth the effort and more important that be changing the TT. When I switch from a TT to another different one the changes on the quality cartridge performance were/are minimal in comparison to a change in the tonearm/headshell, this fact was consistent with any of those cartridges including MC ones.

So after the Phonolinepreamplifier IMHO the tonearm/headshell match for any cartridge is the more important subject, it is so important and complex that in the same tonearm ( with the same headshell wires ) but with different headshell ( even when the headshell weight were the same ) shape or build material headshell the quality cartridge performance can/could be way different.

All those experiences told me that chances are that the cartridge that you own ( MC or MM ) is not performing at its best because chances are that the tonearm you own is not the best match for that cartridge!!!!!!, so imagine what do you can/could hear when your cartridge is or will be on the right tonearm???!!!!!!!!, IMHO there are ( till today ) no single ( any type at any price ) perfect universal tonearm. IMHO there is no “ the best tonearm “, what exist or could exist is a “ best tonearm match for “ that “ cartridge “, but that’s all. Of course that are “ lucky “ tonearms that are very good match for more than one cartridge but don’t for every single cartridge.

I posted several times that I’m not a tonearm collector, that I own all those tonearms to have alternatives for my cartridges and with removable headshells my 15 tonearms are really like 100+ tonearms : a very wide options/alternatives for almost any cartridge!!!!!!

You can find several of these MM type cartridges new brand or NOS like: Ortofon, Nagaoka, Audio Technica, Astatic, B&O, Rega, Empire, Sonus Reson,Goldring,Clearaudio, Grado, Shelter, Garrot, etc. and all of them second hand in very good operational condition. As a fact I buy two and even three cartridges of the same model in some of the cartridges ( so right now I have some samples that I think I don’t use any more. ) to prevent that one of them arrive in non operational condition but I’m glad to say that all them arrive in very fine conditions. I buy one or two of the cartridges with no stylus or with the stylus out of work but I don’t have any trouble because I could find the stylus replacement on different sources and in some case the original new replacement.

All these buy/find cartridges was very time consuming and we have to have a lot of patience and a little lucky to obtain what we are looking for but I can asure you that is worth of it.

Ok, I think it is time to share my performance cartridge findings:

first we have to have a Phonolinepreamplifier with a very good MM phono stage ( at least at the same level that the MC stage. ). I’m lucky because my Phonolinepreamplifier has two independent phono stages, one for the MM and one for MC: both were designed for the specifics needs of each cartridge type, MM or MC that have different needs.

we need a decent TT and decent tonearm.

we have to load the MM cartridges not at 47K but at 100K ( at least 75K not less. ).

I find that using 47K ( a standard manufacture recommendation ) prevent to obtain the best quality performance, 100K make the difference. I try this with all those MM type cartridges and in all of them I achieve the best performance with 100K load impedance.

I find too that using the manufacturer capacitance advise not always is for the better, till “ the end of the day “ I find that between 100-150pf ( total capacitance including cable capacitance. ) all the cartridges performs at its best.

I start to change the load impedance on MM cartridges like a synonymous that what many of us made with MC cartridges where we try with different load impedance values, latter I read on the Empire 4000 DIII that the precise load impedance must be 100kOhms and in a white paper of some Grace F9 tests the used impedance value was 100kOhms, the same that I read on other operational MM cartridge manual and my ears tell/told me that 100kOhms is “ the value “.

Before I go on I want to remember you that several of those MM type cartridges ( almost all ) were build more than 30+ years ago!!!!!!!! and today performs at the same top quality level than today MC/MM top quality cartridges!!!!!, any brand at any price and in some ways beat it.

I use 4-5 recordings that I know very well and that give me the right answers to know that any cartridge is performing at its best or near it. Many times what I heard through those recordings were fine: everything were on target however the music don’t come “ alive “ don’t “ tell me “ nothing, I was not feeling the emotion that the music can communicate. In those cartridge cases I have to try it in other tonearm and/or with a different headshell till the “ feelings comes “ and only when this was achieved I then was satisfied.

All the tests were made with a volume level ( SPL ) where the recording “ shines “ and comes alive like in a live event. Sometimes changing the volume level by 1-1.5 db fixed everything.

Of course that the people that in a regular manner attend to hear/heard live music it will be more easy to know when something is right or wrong.

Well, Raul go on!!: one characteristic on the MM cartridges set-up was that almost all them likes to ride with a positive ( little/small ) VTA only the Grace Ruby and F9E and Sonus Gold Blue likes a negative VTA , on the other hand with the Nagaoka MP 50 Super and the Ortofon’s I use a flat VTA.

Regarding the VTF I use the manufacturer advise and sometimes 0.1+grs.
Of course that I made fine tuning through moderate changes in the Azymuth and for anti-skate I use between half/third VTF value.

I use different material build headshells: aluminum, composite aluminum, magnesium, composite magnesium, ceramic, wood and non magnetic stainless steel, these cartridges comes from Audio Technica, Denon, SAEC, Technics, Fidelity Research, Belldream, Grace, Nagaoka, Koetsu, Dynavector and Audiocraft.
All of them but the wood made ( the wood does not likes to any cartridge. ) very good job . It is here where a cartridge could seems good or very good depending of the headshell where is mounted and the tonearm.
Example, I have hard time with some of those cartridge like the Audio Technica AT 20SS where its performance was on the bright sound that sometimes was harsh till I find that the ceramic headshell was/is the right match now this cartridge perform beautiful, something similar happen with the Nagaoka ( Jeweltone in Japan ), Shelter , Grace, Garrot , AKG and B&O but when were mounted in the right headshell/tonearm all them performs great.

Other things that you have to know: I use two different cooper headshell wires, both very neutral and with similar “ sound “ and I use three different phono cables, all three very neutral too with some differences on the sound performance but nothing that “ makes the difference “ on the quality sound of any of my cartridges, either MM or MC, btw I know extremely well those phono cables: Analysis Plus, Harmonic Technologies and Kimber Kable ( all three the silver models. ), finally and don’t less important is that those phono cables were wired in balanced way to take advantage of my Phonolinepreamp fully balanced design.

What do you note the first time you put your MM cartridge on the record?, well a total absence of noise/hum or the like that you have through your MC cartridges ( and that is not a cartridge problem but a Phonolinepreamp problem due to the low output of the MC cartridges. ), a dead silent black ( beautiful ) soundstage where appear the MUSIC performance, this experience alone is worth it.

The second and maybe the most important MM cartridge characteristic is that you hear/heard the MUSIC flow/run extremely “ easy “ with no distracting sound distortions/artifacts ( I can’t explain exactly this very important subject but it is wonderful ) even you can hear/heard “ sounds/notes “ that you never before heard it and you even don’t know exist on the recording: what a experience!!!!!!!!!!!

IMHO I think that the MUSIC run so easily through a MM cartridge due ( between other facts ) to its very high compliance characteristic on almost any MM cartridge.

This very high compliance permit ( between other things like be less sensitive to out-center hole records. ) to these cartridges stay always in contact with the groove and never loose that groove contact not even on the grooves that were recorded at very high velocity, something that a low/medium cartridge compliance can’t achieve, due to this low/medium compliance characteristic the MC cartridges loose ( time to time and depending of the recorded velocity ) groove contact ( minute extremely minute loose contact, but exist. ) and the quality sound performance suffer about and we can hear it, the same pass with the MC cartridges when are playing the inner grooves on a record instead the very high compliance MM cartridges because has better tracking drive perform better than the MC ones at inner record grooves and here too we can hear it.

Btw, some Agoners ask very worried ( on more than one Agon thread ) that its cartridge can’t track ( clean ) the cannons on the 1812 Telarc recording and usually the answers that different people posted were something like this: “””” don’t worry about other than that Telarc recording no other commercial recording comes recorded at that so high velocity, if you don’t have trouble with other of your LP’s then stay calm. “””””

Well, this standard answer have some “ sense “ but the people ( like me ) that already has/have the experience to hear/heard a MM or MC ( like the Ortofon MC 2000 or the Denon DS1, high compliance Mc cartridges. ) cartridge that pass easily the 1812 Telarc test can tell us that those cartridges make a huge difference in the quality sound reproduction of any “ normal “ recording, so it is more important that what we think to have a better cartridge tracking groove drive!!!!

There are many facts around the MM cartridge subject but till we try it in the right set-up it will be ( for some people ) difficult to understand “ those beauties “. Something that I admire on the MM cartridges is how ( almost all of them ) they handle the frequency extremes: the low bass with the right pitch/heft/tight/vivid with no colorations of the kind “ organic !!” that many non know-how people speak about, the highs neutral/open/transparent/airy believable like the live music, these frequency extremes handle make that the MUSIC flow in our minds to wake up our feelings/emotions that at “ the end of the day “ is all what a music lover is looking for.
These not means that these cartridges don’t shine on the midrange because they do too and they have very good soundstage but here is more system/room dependent.

Well we have a very good alternative on the ( very low price ) MM type cartridges to achieve that music target and I’m not saying that you change your MC cartridge for a MM one: NO, what I’m trying to tell you is that it is worth to have ( as many you can buy/find ) the MM type cartridges along your MC ones

I want to tell you that I can live happy with any of those MM cartridges and I’m not saying with this that all of them perform at the same quality level NO!! what I’m saying is that all of them are very good performers, all of them approach you nearest to the music.

If you ask me which one is the best I can tell you that this will be a very hard “ call “ an almost impossible to decide, I think that I can make a difference between the very good ones and the stellar ones where IMHO the next cartridges belongs to this group:

Audio Technica ATML 170 and 180 OCC, Grado The Amber Tribute, Grace Ruby, Garrot P77, Nagaoka MP-50 Super, B&O MMC2 and MMC20CL, AKG P8ES SuperNova, Reson Reca ,Astatic MF-100 and Stanton LZS 981.

There are other ones that are really near this group: ADC Astrion, Supex MF-100 MK2, Micro Acoustics MA630/830, Empire 750 LTD and 600LAC, Sonus Dimension 5, Astatic MF-200 and 300 and the Acutex 320III.

The other ones are very good too but less refined ones.
I try too ( owned or borrowed for a friend ) the Shure IV and VMR, Music maker 2-3 and Clearaudio Virtuoso/Maestro, from these I could recommended only the Clearaudios the Shure’s and Music Maker are almost mediocre ones performers.
I forgot I try to the B&O Soundsmith versions, well this cartridges are good but are different from the original B&O ( that I prefer. ) due that the Sounsmith ones use ruby cantilevers instead the original B&O sapphire ones that for what I tested sounds more natural and less hi-fi like the ruby ones.

What I learn other that the importance on the quality sound reproduction through MM type cartridges?, well that unfortunately the advance in the design looking for a better quality cartridge performers advance almost nothing either on MM and MC cartridges.

Yes, today we have different/advanced body cartridge materials, different cantilever build materials, different stylus shape/profile, different, different,,,,different, but the quality sound reproduction is almost the same with cartridges build 30+ years ago and this is a fact. The same occur with TT’s and tonearms. Is sad to speak in this way but it is what we have today. Please, I’m not saying that some cartridges designs don’t grow up because they did it, example: Koetsu they today Koetsu’s are better performers that the old ones but against other cartridges the Koetsu ones don’t advance and many old and today cartridges MM/MC beat them easily.

Where I think the audio industry grow-up for the better are in electronic audio items ( like the Phonolinepreamps ), speakers and room treatment, but this is only my HO.

I know that there are many things that I forgot and many other things that we have to think about but what you can read here is IMHO a good point to start.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.

rauliruegas01-15-2008 8:57pm

13,665 responses Add your response

fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-20-2011 at 01:44am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Lewm, Fair in the sense of limited experience. Maybe sometimes it's best not to say anything at all. I've seen many of all kinds of tables in need of repair. I've only heard a 7D a couple of times. I was impressed, but by no means definitively. How could I be? Imo the suspension plinth etc of the Sapphire are not worth saving. It's old anyway and needs refurbishing. The oak base and lid will dress up another table. I like the platter, mat, clamp and main bearing. I might use part of the wood/lead subchassis. I haven't yet figured out exactly what I'm doing with the armboard and its mounting. That's where Lurne"s ideas are good to know. I've yet to hear Teres direct drive tables, but I have little doubt that they are the way. They start at $10K so I doubt if I'll be getting one soon. http://www.teresaudio.com/certus.html The problem with 30 yr old tables is the electronics start to go and sometimes small parts need replacements that are hard to find. I know a couple of techs but lugging everything is a hassle. I read about some guy on the net who used a DD table with video tape around the platter to drive another table. You have to be a little crazy to qualify as an audiophile. Maybe he had the drive table anyway and gave it something to do. Regards,
nandric Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 4,086 posts 06-20-2011 at 08:49am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Daniel, Thanks for the copmliment. My experience is that the most easy to translate is scientific work while literary works are nearly impossible to translate. However your 'what is legal...' should refer to some vague ideas about the 'subject matter' by this great German writer. As I pointed out : nobody reads Criminal law (smile). Glad to see you back btw. Kind regards,
nandric Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 4,086 posts 06-20-2011 at 09:12am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Fleib, To 'compensate' for Lew I agree with you regarding Lurne. I am an 'old admirer' (owned J1).You deed not mentioned Belladonna, his newest disign so assuming that you are not aware: www.tnt-audio.com Regards,
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-20-2011 at 01:17pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Regards David, The LC denotes line contact and ML is micro. There's no doubt that it's damping cantilever movement that causes phase nonlinearities. You are probably right regarding the ATN440ML vs the 7V. The 7V is intrinsically damped due to cu. I would think much less rubber is required. The donut on the 440 does seem substantial. A 152 or 155 is even more compliant than a 440. But beryllium vs aluminum seems to make all the difference. I think it might be a mistake to wait for more advanced square wave analysis. With good resolution you can see just about everything and calibrated right before your eyes. There should be an interpretive guide that came along with the program? If you need one I'm sure it can be found on the net. There's some question about a cart doing square waves anyway. Stereo Review type results seemed to reflect the sound of a cart. Do you think the signal has to go straight in? How can you subtract the phono pre when it's worse than the cart? I know you'll figure it out. Regarding out of band noise; Most of my electronics have bandwidth from DC to light. On one system I was getting high freq hash on everything. I made a zobel across the speaker terminals and cured it. That's a shunt, cap and resistor in series. Regards,
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-20-2011 at 01:36pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Fleib, you said you cannot listen to most heavy plattered belt driven tables. Which ones you had the chance to audition in a good system with what kind of motors? Of course it may be a risk to go for over 30 years old tables. You find electronic parts e.g. in the Nakamichi or in the EMT 927, not in the big Micros apart of the motor units which are built for eternity. In this case you need going for well preserved or maintained units or you take care of the electronics by yourself. Whatever you decide going for - vintage or modern designs - if you are ending up with a Topclass TT (not pointing neccessarily to the so named shop in HKK) you need spending time and money on improving everything. But then you finally have landed on a planet of great pleasure and exitement which I doubt you will reach with a plug & play machine of today. best & fun only - Thuchan
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-20-2011 at 02:10pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Nandric and Fleib, This here is a "chat" group. I am not a reviewer, and this is not Stereophile or TAS. There are so many unscientific, unsubstantiated, and "unfair" opinions stated on Audiogon discussion groups that we could throw out the website on that basis. All I said was that I had extensive listening experience with what might have been Lurne's very first design, many years ago, and I did not like it. IThe reason it failed as a design, IMO, may have been due to its apparently undamped spring suspension; pitch stability was poor. For all I know, Mr. Lurne' may now be the genius behind some of the greatest turntables available today. I have completely lost track of his work. Was not even aware that he is still in the business. It is often the case that flawed early efforts (if it is possible that I am correct about what I heard) are no indicator of future success or failure. Moreover, he may be an absolutely wonderful person whom I would be proud to know. Nothing personal was intended. But you're right, I should have stifled myself to avoid this brouhaha. Can you tell me what current products bear his stamp? Hi Tim, I sold my Hyperspace long ago and have no interest right now in converting any belt-drive to rim-drive. In fact, I am quite happy with what I've got and will probably go to the great beyond with one or another or all of them. (Well, actually I know I cannot take them with me. Perhaps I can work a deal and take a nice cartridge, in case there is audio on the other side.)
nandric Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 4,086 posts 06-20-2011 at 03:01pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Lew, For such a critical mind as you are I am suprised with your own sensitivity reg. comments on your own comments. But of course those comments are not scientific or based on Newton. As you put it yourself 'this is a chat group'. The most statement made in this 'group' are more made with the intention to convince our self then the others. We need, I think, to rationalize in some way our spending on all those components. BTW my 'compensate' was provided with quotation marks. Regards, Regards,
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-20-2011 at 03:48pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Lew, What brouhaha? I plead guilty of implying my Sota is a pos. For all I know they completely redesigned and the 4 springs no longer hang from a 1/2" piece of mdf plinth, which bends under the weight. Now I envision this as being steel with the armboard supporting structure completely redesigned to something other than the same layered stuff. This new Sota would require a complete re-evaluation. Alas, mine is an old one and it is what it is. Modding is too much work, and what about the motor and cheap power supply? I think I'll stick to plan A. Lurne's latest is designing a CD transport. It makes for some interesting reading. He is a physicist or studied physics if he didn't actually work as a physicist. You'll find interviews at TNT, Stereophile and 6 Moons, Enjoythe Music etc. Regards,
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-20-2011 at 04:44pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Tuchan, Tell you the truth, I'm no longer on the quest. I just like to play records sometimes. Most of my experience with comparative tables is from 20 yrs ago. I set up tables (among other things) for a living at a couple of different high end shops. Matter of fact I set up the first production TNT. There was no manual so I did it over the phone with HW. He's a great guy, BTW. Although I didn't relate to the sound of the TNT, I have a feeling that I could live with a Classic. I heard it a bit at a dealer and it seemed very nice w/o that ponderous feeling. Most of the platters weren't all that heavy but I was never partial to belt drive. I still feel it was/is always a default go-to for start-ups getting into biz with mostly desire. Later I was partnered with a friend who had a Reference. Now that was one heavy belt drive I could live with. It wasn't just the name on an impressive black throne. After all it looked more industrial than the Thorens whatever it was called. That one was fit for a queen. It was all cream and gold like the fixtures in a Hilton hotel. The Reference seemed neutral. It had the weight and the pace, quite a rare combo. I have no ax to grind, I'm long out of the biz. I'm sure my custom will be fine once I get it together. In the mean time I can listen w/o all the speed issues. Regards,
pryso Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,927 posts 06-20-2011 at 05:49pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Lew, with your stable of thoroughbreds I wouldn't be looking for any other turntable either. My comments to relate my friend's experiments were just to describe a different application of the very fine Teres motor and control unit.
geoch Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 354 posts 06-20-2011 at 10:07pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Fleib, the real excellence lies only inside the TD124 II. Anything else from this company is average in design & execution and considered by the new economy direction from Thorens. Of course we can live with something that works enough. But it is allways better if we admire the concept also. As I've own the J4/SL5 and the Goldmund ST4 at the same period, my DP80/SME IV was better than both. Then comes the ST4 and the best of 4 was the Simon York Zarathustra S4/Pluto 5A. Those parallel trackers was inferior of course, but it is true that the J4 was not an integrated concept concerning the foundation for the motor & chassis, and this makes speed instability despite the beautiful & inspired work of the metacrylate, delrin & lead in use and the very careful design of the platter, the inverted double "Π" chassis reinforced by a lead square section at the center of gravity and the symmetrical tention of the belt. Unfortunatelly the upper chassis with the platter's bearing was on springs, while the lower chassis with the motor was the stable base for these springs and for the whole TT. The ST4 has the half midbass body of the J4 maybe due to the light platter, but overall was more faithfull to the music in terms of pitch stability, transient response, attack & clear harmonics. Something has lost in the first step of validation of this TT and the outcome was not on the par of the Goldmund despite the extensive research on resonance in forms & materials.
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-21-2011 at 02:01am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete I really do enjoy all you guys, and I do apologize for over-apologizing AND for any unintended insults to Pierre Lurne'. We have been navigating a very delicate situation with our mentally-ill son. This may have caused me to over-post and to perseverate. Tonight I think we entered calmer waters, and I am very happy in fact. The minutiae we endlessly hash over is actually good therapy for me at times. Tim, Have you seen the Teres motor in person? My only question about it is that it seems to rely upon its own mass to provide a force to hold the idler wheel against the side of the platter. But thanks to Mr. Newton, that also means the platter is pushing on the motor assembly. I wondered who wins. Re my "thoroughbreds": Will someone please buy that friggin' L07D that's for sale on the 'gon? It bothers me that no one will pay that incredible bargain price. Or is this just an indication that the whole upper end audio market is in a shambles?
banquo363 Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 371 posts 06-21-2011 at 02:57am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Re my "thoroughbreds": Will someone please buy that friggin' L07D that's for sale on the 'gon? It bothers me that no one will pay that incredible bargain price. I was actually going to email you about that tt Lewm. I believe you have 2 of them (!) and therefore must think highly of them. Is it significantly better than a sp10 mkii? Had I not already just bought a tonearm for my sp10, I would have given buying the L07D serious consideration. That the latter does not really permit other tonearms is a bummer and a deterrent--even if the original tonearm is good. It's actually not listed anymore. Just as well; it'll save me from perusing that listing EVERY DAY.
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-21-2011 at 03:47am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Geoch, It's funny, I only saw the Thorens Reference. I never heard it. The dealer who owned it kept it in the back room under a blanket. Because I knew the guy for years and I was in the biz, I had the privilege of seeing the throne. The ST4 was the last regular Goldmund and had an integrated arm. I used a Zeta on mine. I had a Studietto. But I had extra springs of different stiffness so I could tune the suspension. I was also a qualified Linn set-up man so I knew how to do that. But it became popular to substitute sorbothane pucks for the springs and severely modify the design. Lurne eventually abandoned the linear arm. There's an interesting interview where he explains why. My buddy who had the Reference invented a set-up jig and got his sounding very good. He had a Grasshopper. Have you seen the pics of the new Reference? It's on Goldmund's site. It costs something like 1/2 a mil? and a set-up team comes to your house. I guess it costs more in the States. They're in Switzerland, LOL. www.goldmund.com/products/reference_ii Lew, The Teres motor uses it's own weight to keep it against the platter. It comes in 2 heights so you can design around those. This guy puts it in brass and angles the motor. www.trans-fi.com/orberus.htm Best wishes to your family. Here's hoping that your son will continue to do well.
dgob Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 848 posts 06-21-2011 at 06:22am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Lew, With direct appreciation of your circumstance, I wish you and your family easier passages. Not to rehash improprieties but, at the hardest of times, I find comfort in Heraclitus' saying: "Everything flows, nothing stands still" (τὰ πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) May happier streams flow soon
nandric Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 4,086 posts 06-21-2011 at 08:57am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Lew, As you know I have also two sons who are both very well but I always worry about what can happen. No way to avoid our psychology. I wish you and your family much strenght in your difficult battle. What you at least don't need to worry about is the value of your LO7D. One is just sold on the German ebay for 4000 Euro. This means 'mucho dollares Chonchicita'. But what about this rare provision for a second tonearm? I own the best (aka 'the') tonearm, Sumiko 800, which is 'as made' for all your MM carts. Curious? Regards,
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-21-2011 at 01:43pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Fleib, do understand. no problem with that. I had the Reference for two years in my system. Fine machine but in the end you have not so many possibilites changing cartridges on the tonearm due to the weight and the special linear tracking correction method. But believe me there a better TTs, also in the vintage field. Ken Kessler and some others did promote the Reference very much by their reviews in those times. Now it is a legend which the new Reference II will never become. best & fun only - Thuchan
timeltel Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 830 posts 06-21-2011 at 04:41pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Regards, Dlaloum: You asked the question (relating to the relevence of time since the Holman paper was written) about the probability of improvment in performance. I find some humor in that the "worst" findings were with a preamp that mysteriously transformed a signal consisting of third harmonics (exclusively) into one measured with second order harmonics at -22db (IIRC). It is unlikely this was by accident, some might think it "resonant" with the designer's intent, the philosoper: "The more things change, the more they remain the same". As to measurement devices, you might be interested in: http://www.zainea.com/multidimensionalaudio.htm Another of those informative papers presented before the AES, it begins: Multidimensional Audio by Henning Moller, Bruel & Kjaer 1 . Introduction What is Audio all about? Subjectively, the answer is easy. It is literally a question about good sound. In practice the human mind can tell, within seconds, if a sound picture is correct or not, just as quickly as it can tell whether a girl is beautiful or a house, a car or a landscape is impressive. Human beings consider things in a "global" fashion - everything is registered and perceived simultaneously, but no details are clear to begin with. However, when we measure, we do exactly the opposite we describe details with extreme accuracy. We concentrate on one parameter at a time in a "local" fashion. We could accurately measure how tall the girl is, what colour her hair is and so on, but that doesn't directly tell us how beautiful she is. Likewise, on a Hi-Fi system we could, for instance measure frequency response and harmonic distortion, but neither does that tell us whether the system is good or bad. David, I hope you find it useful as there is a good amount of "objective" scientific proceedure described and the specific equipment used (B & K, of course) is identified. Peace:
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-21-2011 at 06:56pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Timetel, very good description. I think I will take a stroll with a beautiful girl while others may measure on her... What do you think is better? Best & fun only - Thuchan
pryso Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,927 posts 06-21-2011 at 07:16pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Lew, as Fleib suggested, the Teres motor seems to have sufficient mass to maintain its position. I did not heft the one my friend owns but I've seen/heard it in playback several times. In the current set-up with the heavy Micro Seiki, he had a large 2" cutting board (purchased from a hard wood store) routed out for the Teres to provide the proper height. I'm not certain of the string material he uses to drive the MS platter but I think it may be a type of fish line leader. My friend is very sensitive to speed fluctuations since he played piano and has decades of experience recording classical and jazz performances.
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-21-2011 at 08:23pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete I think that Teres no longer offers belt drive motors. The Verus is the outer rim drive. www.teresaudio.com/verus-motor.html Regards,
pryso Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,927 posts 06-22-2011 at 12:46am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Fleib, if you were referring to the Teres used by my friend, it is a rim drive model, as I described initially. My friend adapted it using some sort of string to the Micro Seiki.
timeltel Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 830 posts 06-22-2011 at 03:55am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Regards, Thuchan: Measurement cannot be discounted. Peace,
halcro Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 2,664 posts 06-22-2011 at 07:13am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Measurement cannot be discounted Dear Professor, I assume you mean.....in relation to the beautiful woman? :^<
halcro Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 2,664 posts 06-22-2011 at 07:26am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Thuchan, It appears that you and I are hearing the same things with these wonderful Signet cartridges and the various styli options available? Even though we have totally different components, it appears that all our "distortions" are 'in alignment' and thus allow us to hear the beauty of analogue and in this case MM cartridges :^) And yes.....I fully agree with your conclusions that the FR-66S is remarkable with all these MMs in particular. Strange how science and measurements don't appear to explain much in audio reproduction?
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-22-2011 at 01:46pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete I agree with Raul in the sense that measurements are very revealing of performance and are completely dependant on that performance. It's not always easy or convenient to reconcile subjective results with measurements, but more thorough investigation will explain differences. How can a fast cart sound slower than one with worse transient response? One of the problems is that there are many aspects of performance that interact. It could well be that a combination of different parameters, some better, some worse, might sound wonderful in one system and be bettered in another. That is more likely than not. All most of us can do is use subjective results applied to scientific criteria for selecting candidates. But the evaluation is specific to your individual taste, equipment, set-up etc. How does that apply to me, with a totally different set-up? My AHT phono stage is different from anyone else posting here. I don't expect to get the same results if I use that pre. This is the same problem with all the BS reviews we get these days. The words and catch phrases have become so trite they are meaningless. If you don't have a black background you probably forgot to dim the lights. BTW, that dimmer is likely to be making noise in your phono. I always liked the Signet carts. The TK-5 or 7 were sweeter than my TK-10MLII. If Raul thinks another cart is better, what's the big deal? Everyone is hung up on owning the very best. I'm telling you there is no such thing. If you get that notion out of your mind you'll be able to see things for what they are and appreciate the good in what you have. Regards,
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-22-2011 at 03:28pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete FWIW, you can mount a second tonearm on the Kenwood L07D. There is a bolt-on platform at the rear for that. The L07D was sold with a blank platform that can be drilled to accommodate a wide variety of 9- or 10-inch tonearms. Plus, Kenwood made at least four different accessory platforms dedicated to one or another of the then popular Japanese tonearms. These accessory platforms are rare birds to find now. The second of the two L-07Ds that I own came with one of these special order platforms; after some research and with some help from T_bone, we think it is meant for an SAEC tonearm, cannot now remember which one. Plus, Vantage Audio in the UK will make a platform for anyone who is interested. Original Kenwood quality is higher, however. The L07J tonearm that comes standard on the L07D is very good, too. Looks like it might have been made for Kenwood by M-S, since it resembles the MAS237 but with a J-shaped arm tube. Its Achilles heel, if it has one, may be in its internal (Litz) wiring and in the connector they used at its base for the downstream wires to the preamp. (It's not a DIN plug, has big fat pins.) I plan to bypass the whole thing with Audio Note or Ikeda silver, one of these days, straight to the preamp. Consider that for the price of the L07D, you get a still state of the art 65-lb plinth that needs nothing, a first rate motor that is coreless and in that way may be superior to the SP10 Mk2 motor for audio (I make no judgement here), and a fine tonearm that is engineered to couple tightly to the plinth/bearing (for those of us who swing that way). How to make this post on-topic: the L07J is giving my Stanton 980LZS a great ride. Signet has dominated the last several weeks worth of posts; I need to get one, I guess.
dertonarm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,042 posts 06-22-2011 at 05:11pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Halcro, dear Thuchan, there is a technical explanation why the FR-66s handles the MM cartridges so well despite the obvious "high effective moving mass vs high compliance"-mismatch. If you are curious, I am happy to explain that technical background in "personal message" -mode. Prefer pm, - just to avoid raising any possible (and fruitless) "discussion" here....;-) .... Cheers, D.
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-22-2011 at 08:23pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Dertonearm, Is it the very low bearing friction of the FR tonearms? That might be a factor with high compliance MMs.
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-22-2011 at 08:27pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Siniy123: No I did not try the AT 24 again. Facts are that the B&O MMC2 and final tests on our tonearm design keep my time. My 24 is in mint condition and is a cartridge that I always " mantained " in a high appreciation level. Yes, as soon I can I will give a listening again. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-22-2011 at 09:31pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Halcro, you were so right on the Signets. ordered a TK3N and another AN155LC. i just received my Yamomoto Headshell and the Ortofon 10000. If I am not convinced of the Ortofon, which wasn't really cheap, I might ask Raul if he is dealing with me exchanging it with his tonearm, at least on a test bases with both sides having the chance to return the items. So we all learn by evidence. just got an e-mail with these famous words, like it: "He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery. ~Harold Wilson" best & fun only - Thuchan
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-23-2011 at 12:20am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Halcro: +++++ " Strange how science and measurements don't appear to explain much in audio reproduction? " +++++ I think you are refering to the tonearm/cartridge resonance frequency, if not then discard for you this post. Where did you see that measurements does not explain much....? For what I know, at least I'm never readed, there is no single scientific/measurements white papers where we can read that a high compliance cartridges can't works with a high effective mass tonearm as a fact I reported several times over several past years success with high effective mass tonearms mated with high compliance cartridges and you already knowed because you readed some of those posts and even you and me discussed about. I think the first time I readed on the subject was in Audio 1980 report on the Ortofon MC2000 where the measured ( not calculated. ) resonance frequency was 5.5 hz and the reviewer was a little on surprise about but even that resonance measure he reported a great performance, even that cartridge/tonearm combination tracked cleanly the Telarc 1812 recording. The point is that no one said it nothing against it. The resonance frequency calculation mainly tell us where is that frequency resonance figure that mainly tell us that if something resonate ( in the analog rig set up ) at the same frequency then we are in serious trouble. Over the years and over maybe hundred of different cartridge/tonearm set ups I never encounter any single trouble because the resonance frequency figure was out of the ideal 10hz, I reported resonance frequency as low as 4hz with no trouble on playback. Of course this is in my system where in other systems could be different. Btw Lewm, through a tonearms tests the FR bearing friction measured average ( a german Agoner name it Helmut brought here that old test results. ). Till today I don't know any non-unipivot pivoted tonearm that bettered the EPA-100MK2 on that regard ( less than 4.5 mgr.. Big diference with your Dyna for example. ). Anyway, as always my advise is to " forget " a little on that resonance frequency figure and test any kind of cartridge/tonearm couple hear it and decide. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-23-2011 at 01:07am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Dertonarm: Appreciated your " healthy " attitude on that FR subject. You always can email Lewm too. We don't want that a thread that was builded for Agoners and that belongs to the audio community could disappear because me and you put some " hot " here. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
halcro Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 2,664 posts 06-23-2011 at 01:54am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Raul, You're right that we have many times discussed this arm/ cartridge resonance issue and it's true that you have always reported the facts as you've stated above. I think it good that many of us are 'simple' enough to try all our cartridges in all of our arms to determine the 'truth' for ourselves yet there are still those who write in these Forums, advising that the arm/cartridge resonance frequency should always be the 'beginning' for determining a 'match' when our experiences are showing it may have little, if any relevance?
dlaloum Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 227 posts 06-23-2011 at 05:43am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Halcro, I don't think that is right.... I think that the resonance is definitely an issue, and a good starting point in terms of enabling effective tracking. The better engineered the arm the more it will facilitate and enable configurations that are further from the optimum - but that does not change what the optimum is likely to be. A good mid-heavy arm with fluid damping can easily handle many high compliance cartridges.... But would a light-mid arm with fluid damping do better? The problem is with absolutes - there aren't any! - these systems are highly complex and there are plentiful outriders on the statistical curves of effective combinations. But if one is talking about recommendations for the average user - rules of thumb, then in statistical terms one is talking about 2Sigma of the bell curve - 94% of the turntable users.... Those users will be using classic hand me down turntables, a random mix of various mass produced products, with little or no knowledge or experience to base decisions on. The rules of thumb very much apply to these people! If arm is light - use a high compliance cartridge If arm is heavy - use a low compliance cartridge Shure Damper brush cartriges are handy as they are flexible The outliers - which is where many if not most of the people on this thread reside - are/represent less than 6% of the TT users - in actual fact I would argue they represent less than 1%. An influential 1% as we get called on for advice... and sometimes that 1% can generate new trends, movements. (The great return of MM cartridge has begun.... ) But we do need those rules of thumb to help neophytes with. To reiterate - I sincerely doubt that the arms used by many of the contributors here, are representative of the marketplace and the average user - their tracking ability is far greater than the average. The rules of thumb used for most TT's/arms/cartridges therefore break down at this level.... this does not make them invalid. (it merely demonstrates that they are indeed "rules of thumb") bye for now David
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-23-2011 at 02:21pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Dlaloum: I agree that almost everything here ( cartridge/tonearm ) has a complex relationship and yes that resonance figure is important and I don't diminishs it, I always posted about that everything the same things could be better if we are on that 10hz ideal resonance frequency. Now, for the newcomers and due to all the analog imperfection and all what any one needs to know to achieve a decent cartridge/tonearm/TT/phono stage set up IMHO it is of some help that that newcomer don't worry about that subject because one way or the other that makes his cartridge and tonearm options/alternatives dificult to choose. The concept of resonance frequency on that couple for a newcomer could be to much. You have to look on this analog forums ( as Halcro posted. ) a lot of threads asking for advise about. I remember that several years ago when my ignorance level was really high I was not worried ( because I did not knew that I have to be worried. ) on the resonance frequency subject and I can asure you that I never need to know about for be " happy " enjoying the music and as a fact I can't remember bad experiences for that unknow subject. Over the time I learn and everything was more complicated from there. Anyway, this is only a point of view. regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-23-2011 at 08:19pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi David - you describe it very well and also "the problem is with absolutes". As we are a group of afficinados of a very special tribe we in the analogue corner are sometimes more intolerant on special topics as are other audio friends. Of course we seem to be also very special regarding the tonearms we use and we're talking about. I was always wondering when I got feedback that the FR-66s is not suitable for MMs - not only here. In this respect, also for instance for the SAEC 506/30 or for the Continuum arms - just to name some - Halcro's essence is absolutely true. And with the additional notes from Dertonearm we know now why! Best & Fun Only - Thuchan
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-23-2011 at 09:56pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete It would seem to me (without of course my having done any work to investigate it) that a resonant frequency higher than 10 Hz might be more problematic than a resonant frequency less than 10 Hz, for example the 4 and 5Hz figures that some mentioned above (but not lower), if the associated equipment is of very high quality (tonearm, turntable, turntable mount). Above 10Hz is likely to give an artificial boost to the bass response, or at least one is risking such a boost that could give a bloated indistinct bass. But it might also be beneficial in systems that are bass shy but where the added energy could be "handled". So, assuming good equipment that absorbs or otherwise dissipates the resonant energy, you could say that the "issue" of the calculated resonant frequency being too high or too low is over-stated. I've got to mount my FR64S on something to see whether I can agree with the FR-lovers on its goodness with high compliance cartridges. Raul, I think the Technics EPA500 has similar low bearing friction to the EPA100. Do you think this is about bearing friction? You once posted something to that effect, I think. Also, I gather from your response to Dertonearm that you are still not a fan of FR tonearms. Both of the Technics tonearms have trick spring-loaded counter-wts that are designed to spread the resonant frequency out, so that the peak energy is lower over a wider frequency range. Dynavector does something similar in a different way. (There is a weight on a spring mounted under the tonearm; resonant energy causes it to vibrate thereby dissipating energy of resonance. It is adjustable but no one knows how to adjust it and for what. The instructions in badly translated Japanese are quite opaque.)
dlaloum Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 227 posts 06-23-2011 at 11:27pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dertonearm... Please do not limit your explanation for the success of some high mass arms with high compliance cartridge to PM's... We are here a forum discussing specifically MM cartridges many if not most of which are high compliance - and in an environment where many (perhaps most?) arms are high (higher?) mass... this is very relevant and valued input. bye for now David
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-24-2011 at 01:14am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Thuchan: +++++ " I rather go for lively, emotional sound, no neutral or clinical clean waves or flat in terms of frequency response. " +++++ that's the key to understand each to other: Music per se is " lively and emotional " and I like you always look for that in any home audio system, so my targets on this regard is no different from yours: one " point " to both for agreement. " Neutral or Clinical clean waves ": IMHO Neutral means " something " and Clinical clean waves means " something different ". If we take Neutral let me say that something to be Neutral must be accurate. In theory the Music/sound that comes in the LP recording ( where the recording was made and is out of your/mine control. ) almost always came with that " lively and emotional " charge level ( different charge levels but came with. ). IMHO it is not the cartridge or the phono stage or the speakers or the room treatment or all these " factors " the ones that put that " lively and emotional " charge. These " factors " all and each one what can do is degrade, distort, put colorations, noises and the like to the the recording signal. My take here is what I promoted for several years in this forum: ADD AND LOSE THE LESS TO PRESERVE THE RECORDING SIGNAL INTEGRITY and now I can add: to preserve the " lively and emotional " recording charge level. That statement means ( between other things. More on this latter. ): accuracy and neutrality, with out these characteristics we can't achieve those overall targets. One stop I have to do is: that today almost any " decent " audio items designs IMHO are good enough ( they improvement over the last 10 years, especially on electronics/speakers. ) to be accurate, neutrals and with out any sign of " clinical, analitic or cold " performance, especially the SS designs. If a system sounds clinical/analitical something is wrong in that audio system chain and has to be fixed. IMHO Accuracy and Neutrality is no more a sinonimous of: clinical, analitical or cold performance, this was in the past and over the years the AHEE promoted it as a myth. Accuracy and neutrality not only not preclude that " lively and emotional " recording charge/content but enhance it, permit that you and me be nearer to the recording nearer to that " lively and emotional " content. Thuchan: why do you need or any one else to add a " ton " of distortions ( every kind ) to achieve that " lively and emotional " music enjoyment when that " lively and emotional " content is already " there " and does not needs " distortions " surrounded it?. Audio items specifications at least serve for we can know what we are adding and loosing to recorded signal. Following with my statement and trying to take decisions according with: that " simple " 1db RIAA eq. deviation in the EMT Phonolinepreamp preclude even to " see " it for more information, that RIAA deviation is IMHO unacceptable inside " excellence level standards ". Why ( everything the same. ) any one can choose that RIAA deviation over other unit with a 0.1db?, why? why? why ? Thuchan, please remember that the RIAA eq. is a curve and any single deviation affect not only that frequency but at least two octaves and this means that if we have a deviation say at 300hz we will have a " coloration/distortion " in the frequency range between: 300hz and 900hz. If the deviation came at 2khz this affect the frequency band all the way up to 6khz. You can take a look to that DM10 or the Dartzeel charts I linked before. So we are not talking here of " something " that we can diminish in anyway if the name of our targets is: EXCELLENCE, I asume this is your target too. If we take those Wavacs I would like to take its output impedance measure ( that you can't find it anywhere and for good reasons. ) that even that does not exist as an amplifier specification anywhere in the net and due that is a tube design I asume is a high output impedance, say over 0.1 ohm maybe over 0.5 ohm or even higher. But what this amplifier output impedance means? why is important to achieve our Excellence level target?, very simple: the Ohms Law where the amplifier output impedance is the one that " decide " how will be the response/sound when the amplifier " see " ( is in direct touch. ) the loudspeaker own electrical impedance and phase curve. Here are two examples of that electrical impedance and phase curves, one for the B&W 802D and the other for the MagicoQ5: http://www.stereophile.com/content/bw-802d-loudspeaker-measurements http://www.stereophile.com/content/magico-q5-loudspeaker-measurements we can see how the loudspeakers impedance/phase curve " moves " ( up and down ) over frequency range and this is what the amplifier " see " and has to handle with " aplomb ". If an amplifier ( like yours ) has a high output impedance its response will almost " mimic " that curve with its output level, so that amplifier is functioning as and additional equalizer with what you see on those charts. This is not what you or any one want it, what we want is that it does not matters the speaker electrical impedance and phase curves the response be flat with the same gain over the frequency range. Here either we can't IMHO diminish that fact. For years I used tube electronics till I learn. The incredible " fact " is that several today speaker designs were voiced with tube electronics and this is not because the speaker designers does not know Ohm's Laws but because Commercial$$$$ issue ( there are a lot of tube electronic users out there and growing up!. ) and on some cases because tubes hide bad speaker designs: yes the AHEE " write the rules ". These are only two examples ( RIAA and impedance. ) of many more that many of us are not taking in count because: " It's wrong but I like it " attitude. Lewm posted someting questioning my Velodyne's/speakers. I did not choosed the Velodyne's just for " fun " or at random, as in almost all my audio items/links there are " deep " reasons. There are a lot of subs out there and many of them very good too but till today and for a two channel system no other subwoofer has a THD so low like the Velodynes. The THD is in this audio item extremely important and almost no one cares when choosed their subs. Not only that, you can go to any subs manufacturer site and you can't find the sub THD specification and if you ask to the manufacturer he has no answer ( I know this because I did it. ). Is it to go down to 18hz-20hz ow whatever important? certainly it is but is more important how we achieve that low bass and with which THD level because our hears are sensitive ( quite sensitive ) to high distortions in this frequency range ( well if you can recognize that kind of distortion. I remember that no more than two years ago an Agoner in this forum was showing how good his system " performs " and if I remember well he stated that his system subwoofers had the capacity to performs over 138 db ( maybe more at 20hz ) on SPL, I posted a single and simple question about: please let me know with which THD levels at different SPL? and you know what: till today he never gives an answer. It is extremely dificult to have low distortions in a subwoofer that's why the THD figure is so important and the 0.5% on the Velodyne is a good standard.. Do you know which is the THD number on your subs at 120 db of SPL? no?, well try to measure it and you will be surprised about. Do you know the IMD figure in your main speakers at say 95 db continuous SPL?, you will be surprised here too when you take that measure. Btw, Halcro: ask Vanderstenn for that figure at different SPL, I have the answer. Thuchan, Why have we to accept " mediocrity " when we can choose the Excellence?, there is no reason for that. We all are surrounded by audio mediocrity that the AHEE promoted over the years and as Lewm said: we are almost traped there. This is not the way I like to live my audio life I decided to take a different " road ": is it that way what you want to live?, I don't think so: always is time to make the right changes. Don't think that I'm against the tube electronic designers, not at all I have a lot of respect for them because even all the tube technology limitations there are some guys like the Atmasphere /Ralph that really contribute to serious improvements on the tube world. I'm against the tube technology heavy limitations that goes against the MUSIC. When I brought the Dertonarm idea of that Common listening Approach my intention was to show you ( all of you ) how a specific listening process ( my process. ) can help any one first to understand what each one of you are hearing/listening, second to discern very precise about different kind of distortions ( example: cartridge microphony level, overhang vs SRA, tracking distortion levels, accuracy against distortions, neutrality against colored performance, etc, etc. ) and where it comes and to know where each one of us are " seated " in that Audio Learning Curve and how improve. Almost no one really shows interest about ( like the first time with Dertonarm thread. ) even no single one of you asked which recording/LPs tracks can show you about cartridge tracking distortion level or microphony cartridge level or other quality performance subjects. As I posted many of you are not prepared yet or simple as this: does not care about, what you want is: " It is wrong but I like it " against " IT IS RIGHT AND I LIKE IT ". Those Signets ( 3,5,7 ) are IMHO and as I posted an average performers with many troubles about distortions/colorations/resonances and the like againstother top cartridges performers. I can discern many things that you can't and not because I'm better than you but only because I'm trained to do it and you not or at least your test process can't tell you yet. Do you think that I discerned and posted about the RIAA errors on the Dartzeel or the SS strain gauge with out prior knowledge ( way before ) of its real RIAA deviations only because I have ears?, certainly not: NO ONE COULD DO IT WITH OUT A PREVIOUS SPECIFIC PROCESS TRAINING and this is what I have. I already left behind the tonearm FR experience where I was a fanatic of it till I learned, the SAEC 506 and 8000 episode, the Micro Seiki heavy BD TTs, the SUTs ( any kind . ), obviously tubes, TT clamps, electrical power ( conditioners ", the terrible Orsonics headshells, the big and comfortable couch on system seat position, the fancy cable and cable connectors, the non-removable headshell tonearm designs, the full range speakers, the LOMC cartridges ( any. ), the stand alone phono stages, the passive line stages, etc, etc. I left behind any audio alternative that increment distortions at an unacceptable level. Distortions are the Music enemy and we have to learn how detect it and how make dust/LOWER on it. Right now I'm preparing to change the three premium caps ( teflon between them. ) on my crossover's ( each side ) speakers for simple/plain cheap electrolitic caps in a special configuration that's a very promising alternative. I try always to be open to any orthodox or unorthodox audio alternative looking for lower distortions and improvements. I almost never say NO, first I tested and decide about. It is only attitude and this kind of attitude always gives me big rewards that no amount of money can buy. I have two samples of a " wrong " attitude, one comes from an Agoner friend that owns Avalon Ascents speakers and that in my subwoofer thread I asked him to try subs with those speakers because I thinked he will receive a good quality performance system improvement. Well this guy gives me any explanation you could think telling me why subs can't works in his system: from technical explanation to subjective explanations, all those explanations were pure theory that he can't prove that he can't duplicate " live " and for that explanations he lose the best opportunity to have a real great system improvement. Other one is Lewm ( only an example and nothing personal Lewm. ) against DD TT naked fashion and its improvements over plinthed alternatives: I give him exactly what to do only to test on the set up he already had with almost no investment and because he thinked ( in theory is right. ) that a stand alone tonearm is " wrong " solution and that the plinthed alternative is better than a naked one he refuse to try it with no single prove with no single sign that could tell him that he can duplicate his theories, even he had a second opportunity with his MK3 and he did nothing about only because on what he belive but that can't duplicate at least to find out if those theories are true. This kind of attitude IMHO goes against audio learning. A subjective explanation or thechnical explanation has almost no value if you can't duplicate " live " those " explanations ". There is one experience that I want to share with you. The tested experience came from an Agoner joke in one of mi threads: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1219677256. Things were that I posted the importance of what clothe we are wearing when listening the audio system: sintetic fibres or natural fibers, where with the natural fibers ( wool or cotton. ) exist an improvement in what we perceive through the audio system ( here we have to remember that we hear through our whole body and senses, including our eyes that's why I think that the people that listen to their audio systems with close-eyes are hearing something that's does not comes in the recording ( in the very first moment that we close the eyes the " imagination " take the " control ". ) in the same manner that the ones that listening with lights off: when was the last time you attend to a live concert where the hall was on black dark during the playback?, makes no sense . ). Well that Agoner posted: " Hey why not naked? ", everyone laughed but time latter I remember him and I said: " yes, why not? what can I lose? " and I run this fully naked listening test. You have to do it it is a glorious audio/listening test/experience that you can't even imagine or dream with till you experience first hand. I have to say is not easy because we are not accustom to be and seat fully naked to listen our home audio system, at first we suffer of some kind of " stress " because the naked condition but after we surpass that moment the rewards comes. Till now only Banquo63 understand ( I'm not saying he agree. ) my position or at least was the only person that express oneself in the subject. Anyway, I take you as an example and I confirm you that there is nothing personal other than try to help you: even that you did not asked for. Can I be wrong?, certainly yes but I need proofs ( external proofs. ) why I'm wrong. Whit out a specific process tests any kind iof improvements in our audio systems is at random: we need a specific path we need specific targets to have at least a comparison medium, if not how can we sure that a change in our system is a real improvement and no a side or back step?: only because our ears? only because we like those different and higher distortions?. IMHO we need some objectivity weight in our audio " ideas " along subjectivity weight. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-24-2011 at 01:39am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Lewm: The problem with the FR subject is that almost always never that discussion se a good end and at least twice ASgon owners decided to delete two different threads and I think we don't have to be in risk here. A good alternative could be that Dertonarm could start a new thread on that specific subject. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
halcro Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 2,664 posts 06-24-2011 at 01:56am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Raul, I really do love your contributions........and this one is amongst the very best :^) But if I have to lie here in the rehab hospital after having both knees replaced and imagine you sitting naked in a darkened room...............my doctors, nurses and physios will have valid reasons to come looking for you :^}
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-24-2011 at 03:21am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Raul, Spare me, please. I have not even had time to listen to music for a week, and you want me to spend my tiny amount of spare time re-fitting a dd turntable and building an outboard arm pod, so I can test YOUR theory to which I do not ascribe and anyway don't much care about? I am glad you're happy with your set-up. If it also makes you feel superior, that's an added benefit. Lets leave it at that. If you ever want to hear my SP10 Mk3 in a huge composite slate and cherry/baltic birch plinth, you are most welcome at my home. I won't be removing the Mk3 from its plinth, however. Also, I did not mean to question the goodness of your Velodyne subwoof; I only questioned the idea of using a subwoof with a full-range speaker in what looks to be a normal size listening room. And that was only to point out that in the end you, like all of us, have made some choices based on your personal taste, not by the scientific method.
thuchan Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,009 posts 06-24-2011 at 04:02am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Raul, as I stated in my last post to you I gave up discussing with you on the merits of equipment or technology. You may follow your philosophy, there is nothing wrong about in "your own world". At the moment I am pretty sure you need to listen to an "excellent tube system" but if this will have some impact on your learning experience I doubt. BTW I do not add distortions. Why should I? But again this is to be proofed by you or other audio friends "in a lively experience", not from single data taken from the manuals. best & fun only - Thuchan
timeltel Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 830 posts 06-24-2011 at 05:08am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Regards, Henry: Best of luck with your rehab. When you've begged your last sponge bath from that cute nurse (we all have our obsessions) and can find time for meaningful communication in your usual terse manner, please share your impressions of your newly arived Signet MR 5.0 LC, hopefully the Signet TK7ea you've found too.* *Henry wrote, he has found a NOS MR (Maximun Resolution) 5.0 LC. I must confess the other, a TK7ea, was due to a recommendation and garantee made. The TK7ea/TK7LCa is rewarding enough I'd offered to purchase the rare cart at cost if not satisfactory. Those who wish to enjoy music instead of dissecting it might consider obtaining one, if a TK7ea or TK7LCa should become available. Thuchan, the ATN155LC is very good on this cart. Have you tried the ebony headshell yet? Peace,
dertonarm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,042 posts 06-24-2011 at 10:43am Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Dlaloum, given my low enthusiasm in fighting windmills and little spare time, I restrict myself - and thus my comments - to the bare minimum. The good support some high mass tonearms do offer for many MMs performance, has little to do with their mismatch in terms of high moving mass + high compliance = problematic resonance frequency. The all apparent spring-mass-system is only one aspect - NOT the only one and certainly not the most important (if however the most widely known). The answer lies within the construction of a MM cartridge itself, - it's high moving mass and it's (most, if not all MMs) tendency to emit mechanical energy due to it's construction and "convenience" (hint: easy change of stylus .....). This is not an exclusive feature of the 1970/80ies steel tonearms by Isamu Ikeda, but points into the direction of any good, heavy (for obvious reasons following the above) and rigid tonearm. That's it. Cheers, D.
fleib Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 1,124 posts 06-24-2011 at 01:25pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Hi Lew, *It would seem to me (without of course my having done any work to investigate it) that a resonant frequency higher than 10 Hz might be more problematic than a resonant frequency less than 10 Hz, for example the 4 and 5Hz figures that some mentioned above (but not lower), if the associated equipment is of very high quality (tonearm, turntable, turntable mount)* I think you're right about the importance of a low freq res being too high. More or less important would depend on the particulars, I think. In investigating phase shift in phono cart performance, it became obvious that the high freq res peak was a major determining factor. The undamped peak looks like a loudspeaker low freq resonance on a freq resp graph - severe. The immediate effect of such a peak would be for an octave or two on either side of the peak. But I suspect that repercussions from low fr peak would actually effect the entire output. Tracking is the # 1 basic function of a cart. I don't think that statement needs qualification. While in theory I agree with Dlaloum, I think examples must be looked at on an individual basis. Perhaps some high quality carts of 20 to 30cu sound great on a FR arm. Perhaps one of 50cu or one known to have a weak suspension, isn't a great match. I'm not saying this as a statement of fact, just a suspicion. BTW, if anyone has access to AES paper #1866, convention 71, this might be helpful. Regards,
lewm Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 12,881 posts 06-24-2011 at 04:02pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Thanks, Fleib, The other factor, which I have mentioned before, is the accuracy of the data we are given for tonearm effective mass and for cartridge compliance. We never know how fastidious tonearm makers are about calculating the figures that they then publish. We also never know the actual compliance of the actual cartridge we are trying to implement, unless we actually measure it. One of the guys on VA posted a very novel way of doing that, if one has the expertise and either a 'scope or a laptop with the proper software. We have all agreed at one time or another that 30-year-old cartridges are quite likely to have lost some compliance in their suspensions. The reason some of the mentioned "high compliance" cartridges work well in FR tonearms and their like may be nothing more than that. Plus, of course, low bearing friction and good energy dissipation.
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-24-2011 at 04:15pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Lewm: I think that you forgot my specific email and post to you. I only told you that what you need to do it was ( in the same plinth with no change on tonearm base/mount other than an upper VTA. ) to take three tip-toes to seat the MK2 chasis on it and over the plinth. This is not a fully naked but very near it. Lewm, certainly the integration of subwoofers in my system was in no way based " on personal taste ", please read here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&27&4#27 and here: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1117893153&openflup&31&4#31 Lewm, every audio link in my system has a reason a good reason to be there. That " good reasons " are to be nearest to try to achieve the system targets, I'm focus on those targets that in my lattest post to Thuchan were mentioned. Btw, ++++ " If it also makes you feel superior, that's an added benefit. " +++++ a misunderstood from your part of who I'm: I'm a lot better with a better attitude that to think in that wrong subjective way, no I'm different than that. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.
rauliruegas OP Details Discussions Posts This discussion Message User 13,018 posts 06-24-2011 at 04:29pm Copy Comment URL Report Comment Edit Delete Dear Halcro: Well my " party " was and is a " private " one. My best wishes on your rehab hospital. Btw, Same for your family Lewm, I was unaware how close to you was that unhealthy person. Regards and enjoy the music, Raul.

Recent Activity

Unanswered

Related to You

Following

Insider Lobby

Start A New Discussion

Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?

More to discover

Naim Audio Solstice Turntable

Kuzma Stabi R

Kuzma 4 Point 14”

Audiogon

The world's largest high-end audio community.

Virtual Systems

Let the world see what you've built.

Bluebook

The right price. Every time.

Merch

Rep the community and hobby you love so much.

Audiogon

Virtual Systems

Bluebook

Merch

Rep the community and hobby you love so much.

Recent Activity

Unanswered

Related to You

Following

Insider Lobby

Start A New Discussion

Who needs a MM cartridge type when we have MC?

fleib

nandric

nandric

fleib

thuchan

lewm

nandric

fleib

fleib

pryso

geoch

lewm

banquo363

fleib

dgob

nandric

thuchan

timeltel

thuchan

pryso

fleib

pryso

timeltel

halcro

halcro

fleib

lewm

dertonarm

lewm

rauliruegas OP

thuchan

rauliruegas OP

rauliruegas OP

halcro

dlaloum

rauliruegas OP

thuchan

lewm

dlaloum

rauliruegas OP

rauliruegas OP

halcro

lewm

thuchan

timeltel

dertonarm

fleib

lewm

rauliruegas OP

rauliruegas OP

More to discover

Naim Audio Solstice Turntable

Kuzma Stabi R

Kuzma 4 Point 14”