Do I remember correctly, the AT24 has a finer stylus/less tip mass than the AT22 & 23?
Yes, but also most probably some other body difference, which AT usually doing to finally voice their cartridges. |
Dear Siniy123: IMHO you are right on the 24/25 and 22/23 differences.
There are some differences on specs and in other areas: while the frequency response in the 24/25 is 15 to 25khz in the 22/23 is 15 to 23khz; on channel balance/separation things are: 0.5db/35 db for the 24/25 and 0.75/30 db for the 22/23 even on tracking force range are different: 0.8-1.6grs for the 24/25 against 0.9-1.7grs for the 22/23.
Yes seems to me as you posted that there exist refinements on each model stylus and internaly too: the 24/25 stylus replacement price was 150.00 against only 100.00 for the 22/23 stylus replacement.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Well, this is a very good " surprise " to me: a source of original AT-24 cartridge ( not stylus replacement. ):
http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=4160
I can't believe it!!
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Very strange - they are claiming shibata tip?
I believe the ATN25 is an eliptical?
The (supposedly) ATN25 I have is definitely an eliptical (a very beautiful solid diamond naked eliptical - confirmed under the microscope)
I do have some ADC Magnesium shells - so I think the TK9E will have to shift...
To be seen what it does to the sound (maybe nothing given it is a servo damped arm...)
bye for now
David |
Hi Dlaloum, I am pretty sure the ATN 25 stylus is a real original. As you see it came in the original AT box I sent with it. I was certain the ATN 25 is an eliptical, according to what I have read on the net. The diamond on the AT 25 looks smaller than the AT 23 which I have. I had a balance issue with the AT 23 stylus when used with that TK9E body because it was defective, a weak magnet maybe.
A story of why I no longer had the original (less than 50 hours) TK9E stylus. I bought that AT 23 stylus from Bluz Broz because I thought (as they listed it) it was a TK10MLIII stylus so an upgrade for the TK9 body. The lier at Bluz Broz said it was a top quality shibata stylus on ths genuine (yea right) Signet TK10MLIII stylus. I complained about the balance issue I had and I was told to send the whole cartridge back with the original TK9 stylus installed and the new "fake" Tk10MLIII stylus with it so he could "test" it. Over a month later, he said the (fake) stylus is fine according to his "test". I receieved the cartridge with same defective fake TK10MLIII needle and my like new TK9E was in the fake TK10MLIII box not secured and trashed, completely missing the end of the cantilever and diamond, looked like it was cut off and no where to be found in the box.
I called and complained and the guy said it was UPS fault and he will file a claim to get me a new stylus. Over a year and never heard a peep from the Bluz BroZ a-hole.
Anyway, I hope you like the TK9/AT25.Sounded good to me even though I couldn't try different headshells then, and didn't try different loading, so you may have even better results. |
Sorry to learn of your terrible experience with Bluz Broz. They also are less than honest about the provenance of their Acutex styli. It seems it would be fair to say openly that none of us should do business with them in future. I wonder whether they know that to misrepresent items for sale via mail order can be prosecuted as "mail fraud"? I am not a lawyer; a lawyer told me this. You might want to remind them of this fact when seeking compensation for your trashed cartridge. Obviously, if it had been properly secured and packed there is virtually nothing that UPS could have done to damage it. |
As far as I can tell the AT-22 through 25 all had nude .2 x .7 elliptical on beryllium cantilevers, except the 23. The tip on the AT-23 is described as a .12mm prism elliptical on a beryllium cantilever. The Signet TK 9E and Ea had elliptical on a beryllium cantilever. The TK 9LCa had a nude line contact on a beryllium cantilever.
The ML designation is micro line not shibata. In cases of fraud such as this, cancel your credit card charge. Do thus before sending anything back. There's nothing the merchant can do. It becomes a game of who has the money. Regards, |
Dear friends: that Bluz Broz/Adelcom has a long dishonest history that was point out here two-three times but due that the thread is to long Travbrow unfortunately was unaware about but after his deal.
Yes, the 24/25 comes with elliptical stylus. One characteristic that tell us on this AT cartridge series if the stylus replacement is original or not ( something that in the Signet similar line has not. ) is that in the stylus hold metal body comes engraved the model number, example: 22/23 or 24/25. IMHO if this number does not comes in the stylus replacement then we could think is an after market one.
In theory this stylus replacement source has original AT replacements for either 22/23 or 24/25 at good prices:
http://www.stereoneedles.com/Merchant/audio-technica.html
the only caution before buy it is to ask for that mentioned engrave stylus number model.
In the other side I agree with Fleib, the top Signet are not Shibata type but Micro Linear.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I own several replacement ATN24/25 styli in original AT package. On the "24" or "25" is not stamped on the mounting block. I have the stylus, which is probably the one my AT24 was sold with - it has "24" stamped.
Cantilever, diamond cross-section and cut are visually identical on them, both stamped and not stamped.
I think that AT eliminated the stamping in later production runs of ATN24/25.
The AT22/23 replacement stylus in original AT package doesn't have the stamp either. But visual inspections reveals bigger diamond cross-section, as stated in AT specification.
I ordered AT24 replacement stylus from German source. Once received I will report how it compares to the originals.
Regarding Signet TK10MLII and III - unless somebody shows me the proof (ad, packaging, manual) I think that II and III version were purely invented by BluesBroz. |
Dear Acman3/Stltrains: How things goes with that Nagatron 9600? do you think been woth it?
I'm very pleased with especialy its " natural energy " that in some ways mimic live music the bass cartridge overall presentation is a very good characteristic too: seems to me very well balanced cartridge performer with very good layering resolution if not a " forgetable " cartridge when listening it, I think that with more playback time it will improve in this regards. Anyway a good performer and for 99.00 just " non-sense " bargain.
I'm not sure but I would like to try it in a way nearest to its original status ( boron catilever and linear contact stylus. ), maybe I will send it in the near future to VdH to " mimic " the original design. This is only by curiosity because as is right now I like it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear David, How are you measuring compliance? Thx. |
Dear Siniy123: Let me understand: even that you already own " several replacements " you ordered an additional, can I ask you why? In the other side: do you already tested ( bis a bis ) the stamped ones against the non-stamped? performs the same?
Btw, which one is that german source you stated?, thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hello Raul, The Nagatron is a top performer to my ears. It seemed to take a while for the bass to equal the mids and highs, but over the last 10 hours it has gotten much better. A clear look into the performance on all styles of music so far. I can even understand Mike Stripes mumbling.LOL. Very good layering and soundstage. I agree with you on its mimicking of live music which is one of the things I most enjoy.
Keep in mind I am listening at 47k not 100k. I seem to be able to tell a good cartridges strengths and weaknesses pretty consistently with those at 100k but it is not apples to apples.
I would have to really think long and hard about changing a cartridge of this caliber. If I had more than one, or they came up more often I would probably do it. However, boron cantilever with a line contact stylus. Mmmm.
Thanks, Danny |
Hello Ct1057(Chris), What did you think about the At7v ? Did you survive the first 10 hours? To me it is much better with the At155lc stylus, but that adds a lot to the overall cost.
Danny |
Travbrow - I was by no means making any negative comments.... the cartridge is superb, as is that stylus. I was making comments about the confusion out on the web with regards to what type of tip the ATn25 should have...
The cartridge is a corker - really fabulous sound.
Lewm - I calculated compliance by working backwards... 1) Calculate "real" effective mass of the arm by weighing the CW, Headshell, cartridge and fixings, as well as naked armtube at horizontal. - Then use the appropriate formulae (Luckydog made it easy for me by building his spreadsheet available at: www.luckydog.demon.co.uk/images/EMC.xls - I did do something similar in my own spreadsheet, but LD's effort was much slicker!) - and calculate the Total Effective Mass 2) Record the low frequency sweep from HFN Test record, and run it through an FFT RTA to identify and plot the peak response - peak was found to be 5.9Hz 3) Use the 5.9Hz + Tonearm mass in the relevant formulae to reverse calculate the (vertical) compliance.
I also noted that the damping on the JVC servo arm when enabled reduced the resonant peak from +4db to +1db - I could potentially increase the damping but I left it at that... a 3db improvement is not to be sneezed at! I will measure again when I experiment with headshells...
Given the level of sound I am getting from it, this is one that I would definitely look to retip in a future where the eliptical is worn out.... This baby deserves nothing but the best.
I will post more comments on its performance and comparisons in the near future - I have been doing some initial comparisons with my Shure 1000e-N97xE-SAS and the Shure is by no means shamed - in fact it shows its strength particularly with tonal presentation of the lower midrange - details for the Shure are mid stage, where for the TK9 they are front stage - the TK9 is "sweeter" with better seperation - both in terms of stereo effect/soundstage and space, but also in terms of identifying individual notes and harmonics in a mix - also the decay of notes seems more authentic. But with woodies, everything from Oboe/Clarinet, Double Bass to Piano - the lower midrange wood tones come through better on the Shure.... is the Shure accentuating them unrealistically? - Is the TK9 unrealistically depressing that frequency range? - Hard to tell, but the Piano in one piece sounded like a different piano... on the TK9e it sounded more "Japanese" (Yamaha) and on the Shure it sounded more "European". On critical listening I think the Shure was not tracking at its best and I may have to readjust it - perhaps also try it without the damping brush in use (it is theoretically redundant in any case given the arm damping)
Bye for now
David |
Hi Siniy123, Although I no longer have proof, I owned a Signet TK 10MLII in the '80s. I'm quite sure it was a MKII, although I can't tell you what the difference was from the original. Often changes like this are minor. For example, the difference between a AT-440ML OCC and a 440-MLa is the magnet strength. The OCC has slightly higher output. All other specs are identical. Regards, |
Hi Folks,
another update on my 1000e/SAS vs TK9E/ATN25 comparison...
When trying to compare the same tracks I listened to in the morning, but now in the evening, and through headphones - the differences are almost gone.
The (or rather... my) speakers are clearly more revealing than my headphones/headphone amp.
And both cartridges are sufficiently good and sufficiently similar (both were set up with custom cartridge loading... for optimum frequency response flatness through the midrange and low highs - sacrificing high extension on the Shure, and suffering high boost on the TK9.... typical of both families) The differences in the highs were audible through the speakers, and are effectively inaudible through the HP's.
The HP's I tried were my old Revox 3100 (Beyer DT880), Koss Pro4x, and Audio Technica ATHAD700.... A good sign for the two respective cartridges, a bad sign for my HP rig.... Any suggestions from the fraternity as to what HP's I should consider in my search for something as revealing as my speakers. (Stax is a bit too expensive at present...)
It means I can (currently) basically do critical listening only in the mornings - when I have the room to myself.
Putting the speakers on ends up with the other half putting her hands over her ears saying too loud, too loud. Her preferred volume is elevator music :-( .
bye for now
David
bye for now
David |
Fleib, I do believe you about mk II, but AT wasn't using this nomenclature till 90s-00s. This Signet might be an exception.
Raul, I ordered additional stylus fo my AT24 because I love it so much and William Thakker sells it now quite reasonable.
My original stamped ATN24 is less than perfect (it was bent and then straightened up by previous seller, therefore it resembles slight snake shape). I never tested it for playback. Visually styli look the same. Diamond shank cross section could be easily compared with 20x handheld magnification. For example I see that on my Denon DL-S1 the diamond cross-section is smaller than AT24, Highphonic MC-R5 is even smaller then Denon. |
Hi Danny – I did not want to be premature with my findings with the at7v. I think I tamed this “Bronkin” Billy”. My initial impressions were as yours – singers closer to u, big bass, nice midrange – treble a little too much at times. I “think” I made the mistake of starting around 1.5-6 vtf and going down from there instead of going up. So used to lower vtfs with these MM’s. After about 25 hours – I was a little frustrated but I am stubborn and lazy about changing cartridges. So I pulled out the manual which I couldn’t read – Japanese.
So I googled it and found 1.75 ++++
I set it at 1.8 and did everything just balance out. But it wasn't over. The treble would still come in stronger on certain listening sessions. It took another 10 or so hrs before it stayed consistent. So in my opinion set it with a higher vtf to break that suspension in then start lowering if at all.
I don’t have 50+ MM’s like some of you, and I like to keep the cartridge on there for a while to really get used to them. Pretty sure it would not take so long with the higher vtf to start. It is a good option for those not wanting to buy an older NOS cartridge and at $130 why not? Henry good call on it – and like you said “ receiving a brand new box and cartridge “priceless”.
Have you tried it at the higher VTF's yet Danny ? It is not plug and play like the Empire. How good is the At7V going to get – ?? – It is nice now – But I think it needs more hours and will get better/smoother. YMMV
Cheers Chris |
Dear Siniy123: This is the information I have on the Signet TK series top models:
TK9Ea appears in 1978 and continue on catalog till 1985 where the TK9LCa appears in 1981 and gone along the 9Ea.
In 1983 appear the new top of the line: TK10ML with at least two main different characteristics over the 9LCa: boron cantilever and Micro Line stylus shape against Line Contact in the 9LCa.
In 1985 appear the TK10ML SeriesII ( Signet name it in that way instead MK2. This is the one I own. ) with refinements on the stylus shape, its price in those years was 450.00. This model gones in 1989 and left its place to IMHO a lesser performers: the AM series.
I agree with you: no TK10ML Series III.
Btw, Signet had what seems to me two TK P-mount models too: TK6Ep and the TK8LCp.
In the other side Signet/AT build their statement MM cartridge, this came in 1980-81 and was the TK100LC ( ruby cantilever. ) with an " statement " price too: $ 1,200.00!!! In that time the higher price for any cartridge were $ 1,000.00 for the LOMC Koetsu and Dynavector 100D.
Siniy123, I can't be sure but that " 24 " 99.00 Euros stylus replacement seems to me a " good " after market one. Forget for a moment about the non-stamped 24 and just compare its price with other same stylus sources price and more important against other AT prices that are higher even for lesser AT cartridges. Certainly I can be wrong but my " instint " say: Raul be carefully.
Fleib, which your source where you read that the 23a has a different stylus tip than the 22?. I understand that the 22 and 23a are extrictly similar cartridges with the only difference that the 23a is an integrated headshell design, same for the 24 that's similar to the 25. Thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Dlaloum: Yes, hearing Shure's/Stanton's/Pikering's with out damping brush makes IMHO/experiences a difference for the better.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Raul, I'll report about about my ATN24 from William Thakker. the fact that the AT24 stylus is elliptical on albeit fine diamond may be prompted his suppliers to not charge too much for it.
Anyway, are you started to be influenced by the price tag? there is another well known source from Holland that sells it for 147 EUR. They only take wire transfer and I never bought anything from them. They have NOS AT24 and AT25 complete cartridges. |
the magazine ad I have raves about AT25 and AT24 and lists them for $300 and $250 respectively. this is circa 1979. |
Hi Raul, I remember from the old days that those Signets had beryllium cantilevers. The information about the prism stylus was from the cartridge database. I've found their info to be pretty accurate in the past. I have no personal recollection of these styli. To tell if a stylus is genuine, see if it's a nude square shank on a beryllium cantilever. Beryllium usually looks different from tapered aluminum. It usually looks like a very thin non-tapered shaft. Replacement styli are usually not nude square shank diamonds.
Ct0517, The AT7V is the lowest compliance cart being produced by AT, next to the AT-95. Cu is 7 @ 100Hz. Recommended VTF is 2g +/- .25g. www.lpgear.com/product/AT7V.html
Regards, |
Dear Siniy123: Yes, I appreciate your report on that 24 replacement. Btw, the Netherlands source is a trusty one I deal with them a couple of times cash way. I already posted this link on the complete 24 cartridge.
Yes, that were its prices.
Btw, great performer this AT-24. I'm just listening again and will report in the few days to comes.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Host of spreedsheets thanks Dlaloum
http://www.luckydog.demon.co.uk/images/ |
Hi Raul/Siniy123, I have a Signet TK10ml I bought with a bad stylus a while back. Just got it out to check which series I owned. It seems to be the earlier series from Rauls description. I too will be interested in the Thakker stylus.
How the heck do you get the old stylus out?
Thanks, Danny |
Hello Chris, I do not think I went above 1.7 and that was early on during break in. I was wanting to hear what the AT7v stylus could do and at the same time wanting to hear the excellent At155lc on the At7v's body. I may not have given the At7v enough time for break in, and best setup. I will do that at a latter date as I am currently listening to the Nagatron. The At7v is well worth the money and as you said may get much better.
I am definitely going to get a tonearm with a removable headshell. If I break the tonearm wire one more time during cartridge changing I am going to have to replace the wiring.
Danny |
Dear Acman3: With a lot of care, well you only need a very small screwdriver to release that tiny screw and then pull the stylus plate out.
My advise is to wait Siniy123 Thakker stylus experience but if I was you then I will go with out doubt for this one ( is the nearest to original TK10ML. ):
http://www.pickupnaald.nl/?page=shop/flypage&product_id=3322
in theory this is an original Signet stylus replacement: you have to ask to confirm it.
Other very good move could be to send your cartridge to VdH to fix it or here: http://www.schallplattennadeln.de/
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
A trick I learned from Timeltel for recalcitrant suspension/cantilevers, is to leave the cartridge on the record overnight (stationary) at a high VTF (2-3Gm depending on cartridge). This technique I have successfully used on a number of cartridges, the AT-7V amongst them. Cheers Henry |
Dear friends: Now that many of you put on the " table " the AT-24, TK10ML and 20SS I'm " running " a whole test/comparison between all the top of the line AT/Signet cartridges I own. I don't know how many days I will take ( I started yesterday. ) but when I complete it I will report on my findings. No, no fives, sevens or the like lesser performers only the best on that AT/S lines.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul, Would you please tip me off with your findings prior to your posting here................ |
In_shore: A " weird "/unique request. If you can please email me to explain why before, appreciated.
Normaly I never discuss any of my posts before post it with any one other than my " conscience ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
My dear Raul, It seams what is to be found good / great here jumps in price out there, that's all. |
Dear In_shore: I don't think that could happen because almost all the top of the line AT models already " raved/rated " alond the thread by different persons.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: Good opportunity at good price:
http://cgi.ebay.com/B-O-BANG-OLUFSEN-MMC2-HIGH-QUALITY-PHONO-CARTRIDGE-/150634257343?_trksid=p5197.m7&_trkparms=algo%3DLVI%26itu%3DUCI%26otn%3D3%26po%3DLVI%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D1456060574279456295#ht_1485wt_1031
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear friends: If in any way this post could help to put some " light " on the manufacturers cartridge " reasons " to have several models in its cartridge lines then good if not: well you will know which my take on that subject: +++++++ IMHO any market for almost any product has some kind of " distribution condition " where the different customers are or belong.
On statistics there is a " subject " name it " distribution normal curve " ( or something like this. I don't now if that is the used therminology. I'm a roockie on the statitics subject. ) where over a " poblation " ( in our case: audio customers. ) they have a very specific " distribution " over that curve ( and due to some factros/parameters under " test "/research. ) and normally the main overall " customers " are around the midle of that curve, maybe 80% of them with 10% at each extremes ( all this is only an example. ). Normally too product manufacturers want it to take the more from that 80% of customers on that specific market because is where there are the higher customer number on the whole " poblation ".
Normally this market is an " average " one on characteristics against both 10% extreme markets. Is in this average part of the curve where mediocrity belongs ( mediocrity means average means middle. It is not an insult but a fact. ). Well for a manufacturer could success in this market normally too exist many factors but two very important is to be competitive on quality and with competitive or lower price than the market asked.
In this average market the customers are not too discriminating on product quality, they looks for similar characteristics at the best price and maybe warranty. The vintage cartridge MM/MI market performs almost in the same way where the hardest/fierce market with the competition was that 80% average market.
The customers in this average market were: average knowledge/skills customers with average needs and average audio systems.
So what a cartridge manufacturer want to do it in this market, what product level design must put on the market to compete and take the customers attention? IMHO an average product whith the best quality that permit the market product price range. It can't compete ( in this market ) if the price is higher than competition, price is almost the name of the game in this average 80% of the market. So the cartridges from different manufacturers that were/are in this specific " average " market are average cartridge quality performers designed with a very specific price on mind to take as more customers they can. This price is the limitation that determine the cartridges average quality performance against " cost no object " same manufacturer cartridge designs. I'm not saying that these average cartridges sound bad no because if sounded bad then belongs to that 10% of low quality market it sound good but nothing more than that. The customers in this average market are not asking for more and the manufacturer can't gives any more for that price. Then there is that 10% top quality market where belongs customers with higher needs where customers have: higher knowledge level, skills, better and higher resolution audio systems, experience, better discerning level, better knowledge on music and audio subjects, with specific targets to improve and grow-up, better, better, better and better.....customer characteristics. Here the cartridge manufacturer has different targets with his cartridge designs, examples in no order: to tell the competition its real capacity level they have, use top " technology " and cartridge build materials through several in deep tests for quality performance, execution design and quality control made it not only " by hand " but step by step ( time consuming for say the least. ), specific an estrictly cartridge voicing and cartridge comparisons with and against own manufacturer lesser cartridge designs and top cartridges competition, put in the market his statement cartridge " sample " where for a customer be " proud " to been an owner of that kind of product, " hand select " hand calibrated " models, etc, etc. The customers in this 10% top quality market ask for nothing less than the best and " higher ". All cartridge manufacturers have different price/quality level models to fulfill different kind of customer markets that has different level of quality needs. We can take from those vintage designs, examples: Astatic top of the line is the MF-100 with a price according to that top level and below it comes a lot lower prices cartridges MF-200, 300 and 400. If we take ADC we have the top Astrion ( top price/quality ) and below the lesser and lower price QLM or XLM models. Sonus top Dimension Five model was surrounded for its little brothers as the Gold Blue or the Silver ones. Shure V15 was and is surrounded for a lot of lesser average and poor cartridge models, similar to Stanton or Empire or Ortofon or Denon that made it a more specific market share/division. Audio Technica 20SS or 180ML-OCC or AT-24 or AT-155LC or AT-ML 160 are surrounded for a lot of lesser cartridges as the 12S or 13-14S or 22 or 140LC or the sevens. Signet is no exeption the TK10ML Series two is surrounded for a big group of lesser models as the 3s-5s-7s and the like. Technics 100CMK4 is surrounded for 270s, 550s, 205s, etc, etc. AKG P100LE comes along the P7s,P8s,)24s and the like. For whatever direction we move the eyes we see the same " behavior ". Now, could we think that all those cartridge manufacturers are so stupid to left/leave that under almost any circumstances his " average or poor " cartridge models could not only been very close/near, even or outperform their " statement " cartridge designs? that the 270 could beats the 100CMK4, that the MF-300 outperform the MF-100 or that the 3s/5s//s/9/22/14SA/95 outperforms the TK10s or 20SSs or 24S or that the Shure 97Xe performs better than the 140HE or Ultra 500, or the OM5 in the Ortofon line beats the OM40, or the DL-103 beats the DL-1000A, etc, etc, etc?
IMHO certainly not, they are not so stupid. They are pro-manufacturers where we are amateur-audiophiles.
In the other side we have to think that the difference in price between the average market cartridge models against its top of the line brother surpass 100%-300%. Could you think that that high difference in price between different cartridge models quality performance comes " by free " with out offer nothing else ( on quality performance. ) to the customers other than a high price?, again: IMHO certainly not. There are several reasons why a top of the line cartridge has a way better quality performance level and higher price than the down-steps in the cartridge line: different motor design ( even if we think or see it as similar. ), different build material quality ( that in a down model we " read " that has an aluminum cantilever and the top of the line ( example ) has an aluminum cantilever does not means are the same aluminum " class "/same shape. Its different. ), different stylus and stylus shape and even if we could think that because on both cartridge specs we read: nude elliptical 0.2 x 0.7mil, both have the same stylus we are wrong because the top of the line comes with a better polished level and grain oriented or anything else, different cartridge body, different suspension quality level, different internal electric characteristics, different coil wire and even how is wired, different cartridge voicing care, different, different.....different and here is where the price goes in favor of better cartridge quality performance.
Almost all " average " cartridge models share the " WOW factor " characteristic. This characteristic is a must on that market because the customers there need to be impressed " immediatly " if they did not then goes to the next brand. The cartridges in this average market are: " alive, punchy, powerful, higher output, easy to set-up, mid bass/lower midrange oriented, on the bright side on HF range, etc, etc., the customers here are not asking for high quality performance at both frequency extremes or very low distortions elsewhere. They ask for a decent sound/noise and an easy cartridge set-up. The almost " plug&play " P-mount cartridge designs were developed for this specific market.
That WOW factor we can aware when we listen to these " average cartridges " and change to listen the top of the line: if we are hearing the Sonus Gold Blue and suddenly change to the top Dimension 5 the sound change from " alive " to an almost " dull " and maybe non-emotional one even ( with the same cartridges output level. ) we " feel " that the SPL goes down by 1db or the like but the same happen when we go from the sevens to the 24 or TK10ML Series II or from the MMC3-4 to the MMC2-1. This happen in almost any cartridge line when we go from an average higher cartridge distortion performance to a lower distortion top cartridge performance. Even with this kind of cartridge experience if we give the time to our ears/brain to switch to that top cartridge better quality performance then things goes on " the right place " puting each cartridge performance exactly where belongs.
The point here is not what we like it but what is wrong and what is right or better and why.
How can we know to which " market " each one of us belongs? where in the Learning Audio Curve are we seated?, because almost all of us think that we are at the top or very near the top, that we don't have to learn almost nothing and that's why we found out great high price audio systems brand names that performs " terrible " because even that all of us could think that that audio system is at the top its owner knowledge/skills levels belongs to " average ". The other side is common too where a top and high knowledge/skills level person owns an " average " system that puts limitations for him can be aware of many audio system performance subjects as different kind of distortions.
In one example the person has the level to be aware of distortion differences but his system limitations can't shows it, in the other example even than the system has the resolution the person has not the training/experience to be aware of those same audio items distortions or other audio subjects. To own and drive a Ferrari does not convert us in a Vettel, Alonso or Hamilton pilot's level in the same way that Hamilton driving a Honda Civic can't win a Formula One car-race.
I was speaking on specific about cartridges and distortion subjects but we can think in other audio items and other audio subjects too and the overall behavior is almost the same.
Several times these examples could explain people differences on opinion on the same subject related with quality performance level test/comparisons.
We can't think that because we can't hear in our system what other persons can ( and that is for example: a better quality performance or in other case a wrong /poor quality performance. ) in their systems then they are wrong ( when the one is wrong is him that can't hear it. ) or it can't be possible that happen that way.
I posted several time that money always help to improve an audio system but the main and most important and critical subject about is IMHO each one REAL knowlege/ignorance level we have, where are really seated on that Learning Audio Curve and no less important is to have a wide very wide open mind willing to LEARN from everywhere and from any one.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
An addition to the previous comment about Signet p-mounts
I have the TK6Ep and the TK4Ep - these are identical looking bodies from the AT102 family. They can host their original styli or any of the styli from the AT102 or AT120 families (including AT152/155/150)
I have not seen the TK8LCp
The TK4Ep measures 521/522mH and 687/676ohm The TK6Ep measures 565/567mH and 791/797ohm
as comparison from the same family
AT Realistic RX1500 507/515mH 630/632ohm AT SLT96 522/521mH and 673/671ohm (really nice this one) AT99sx 524/531mH and 660/559ohm AT142LP 571/568mH and 781/780ohm
The SLT96 and AT99sx appear to be the same as the TK4Ep, the realistic is close enough to potentially be the same as well (allowing for production variation)
The AT142LP seems the same as the TK6Ep
My testing of all these using a common ATN440MLa stylus seems to indicate identical performance - using variable cartridge loading to adjust Frequency Response to match very closely before comparing.
Raoul - I am not totally convinced about the argument with regards to differing cartridge "generators" at differing pricepoints / quality levels.
My own testing/listening to the p-mounts mentioned here, and also adding a AT440Mla and AT150ea cartridge body to the mix (still using the same stylus) - seemed to indicate the same.
There are perhaps very subtle variations caused by changing the vibrational behaviour of the tonearm due to differing materials used and therefore differing damping/transmission of vibration. But these can equally be generated simply by exchanging headshells and are not indicative of the quality of the individual cartridge.
Higher priced cartridges seem to have much better channel balance on average - but not necessarily... My AT150ea measures 346/370mH and 485/490ohm - that is quite an imbalance in % terms, where the economy SLT96 has 522/521mH and 673/671ohm.
How different would an AT14Sa fitted with a ATn20ss be from an AT20ss? - My guess is not at all. (I have not yet tried comparing my AT20 and my AT14 both with a common ATN14 stylus... and perhaps include the TK7 as well)
The other key to this comparison, is careful measurement of the frequency respons, and adjustment of the cartridge loading of the cartridges to be compared so that the F/R matches very closely (within +/-0.1db).
I strongly believe that much of the "differences" are to do with cartridge loading - and that the choices the manufacturers made in searching for that punchy main market sound with WOW factor - were based on what the average person could be expected to have in terms of cartridge loading: 220pf at the phono stage, + 250pf of cable/tonearm capacitance and 47k resistive loading... But the cartridges have much greater potential when fitted with the better styli, and with the cartridge loading adjusted for optimum results.
For those willing to invest the time and effort (and research and learning) to custom load their cartridges, there are real bargains to be had out there.
And the p-mounts are in no way inferior to their 1/2" mount cousins.
bye for now
David |
they are not so stupid. They are pro-manufacturers where we are amateur-audiophiles. Dear Raul, It seems to me that you have found the 'fool-proof' way to buy cartridges, speakers, amplifiers, arms, turntables and even records? Simply purchase the most expensive items available because these 'pro-manufacturers' are never wrong. They are so far above us lowly mere 'amateur-audiophiles' that we should be grateful for their expert 'ranking system' which makes our lives so easy? And of course, because they are so 'expert' and 'not stupid'......they have obviously listened to all their competitors' products so that their pricing strategy falls into a 'universal' ranking hierarchy which allows us 'amateur-audiophiles' to simply pay the higher prices for the guaranteed better products? As for your pronouncements that a 'better' cartridge can sound 'worse' because the audio system into which it's inserted "can't shows it" because of "his system limitations" .........this is a favourite claim by some incompetent reviewers attempting to explain the apparent shortcomings of some new expensive item under review. It is a 'furphy'....unable to be substatiated under any objective criteria and is simply an expose of a poor product IMHO. Every single new component of value which I have inserted into my system, has revealed benefits and sonic advantages. Those items which haven't, are simply not of value to my system and despite the fact that theoretically they should be superior to a similar cheaper item, there is no possible rationale to keeping them in my system and changing all the other items till I perhaps find a combination that 'works'? |
Regards, Raul: Nice post and there is much value in what you've written, but if I may?
First, please substitute the term "Average" for "Mediocre". The term has gained a derogatory meaning lately, starting in France sometime in the 16th century. Refering to Aristotles' Rule of the Golden Means as the Rule of the Golden Mediocrity just doesn't have the same connotations.
Second: TOTL is not always best. The Ford Edsel automobile is an example that comes immediately to mind. All the bells and whistles but after just a few years most were busted/rusted heaps of scrap metal and not even Juan Manuel "El Chueco" Fangio could have made a winner of that one.
Even though one can generally expect to get what one pays for there are those items that "punch above their weight". Neither were TOTL but both the Shure ML 140HE and Acutex LPM 315-111STR are overachievers and examples of the group which by your definition are thereby mediocre ("a top of the line cartridge has a way better quality performance level and higher price than the down-steps in the cartridge line"). That, my well intentioned friend, is the danger inherent in makeing blanket statements.
For some, it's finding these unrecognised treasures that stimulates all the experimentation and discussion. All, as you urge, with the goal of refining appreciation through experience. This is a good thing.
No intention to pick your post to peices. I like the flavor of your Koolaide but choose not to drink it all.
Hi, David. When you find the opportunity to compare the AT14 w/the AT20, please post.
Peace, |
Dear Timeltel: The 140 was at the top of Shure models on performance and price along the Ultra 500 and V15 V and the Acutex 315 was more on the top than on the down size models in Acutec line again in performance and price.
Anyway, if we take both cartridges as an exceptions well " an exception confirm the rule " and don't forget that nothing is perfect an anywhere we could find " errors ".
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Dlaloum: Very learning posts you posted. I'm followinig with interest: keep doing well!
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Hi Raul,
I believe the Shure range at the time had in order from Top of the line down:
Ultra500 (optimised V15V) Ultra400 (Oprimised ML140 with MR stylus) V15VMR Ultra300 (optimised ML140) ML140 ML120
And there is some debate about the rankings at the top of that listing - with some believing that the Ultra400 outperformed the Ultra500 and V15VMR.
The Ultra400/300/ML140/120 were designed to have the same level of performance as the V15V series but at a lower manufacturing price. - Possibly using manufacturing methods that had not been available when the V15V was designed some 10+ years earlier. The styli/cantilevers used the same technology I believe, it was only the bodies that differed in manufacturing methods.
The end result was apparently very successful - and the ML140/120 designer did post on that topic on one of the forums.... he believes he matched and in some ways surpassed the V15V series with his design.
I have an Ultra300/400 body wending its way to me at the moment - and also an original V15VHRP with good stylus. Once I get an Ultra400 stylus from LPGear, I will be able to compare these two as well. (another "round tuit" project)
bye for now
David |
Dear Dlaloum: Well, I owned the 500 and the V15VMR both good performers. Now I own the 140 and I like it a lot. Do you heard own or owned the 140HE?, if you have opportunity give a listen it.
Btw, could you share your audio system on " charge " ?, thank you in advance.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Timeltel: Please don't take my post " word by word ", it was only an overall example how things goes on in a market.
Btw, that 80% average market went divided by manufacturers on more small/sub-sets markets that owns unique needs and obviously that had a little differences in between and that's why in those time cartridge manufacturers not only have a wide range of models to cope theis market but even different models in different cartridge lines, examples:
Acutex had 13 models for that big average market and 1-2 for the remaining 10% top market, ADC has 15 models, Audio Technica 22 models, Empire 20 models, Ortofon 24 models, Pickering/Stanton 48 models, Shure 32 models, Signet 10 models, etc, etc. All these models to cope the whole average market with its sub-set of different average level needs.
Btw, accoprding to Richard ( author of the Stanton Handbook. ) this cartridge manufacturer had 130+ different cartridge stylus on his line/model designs.
IMHO the MM/MI cartridge manufacturers " works " very hard to take the biger market share they can on that 80% average market. 95% of their designs were designed for that specific market needs.
I know that other persons have different opinions or different experiences, good.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Regards, Henry: -Furphy? I had to look that one up. New word in the vocabulary, will be sure to use it the next time bumfuzzlement is called for!
Raul: I appreciate the body of your post, which if I understand correctly bears a relationship to former Sec. Def. D. Rumsfeld's infamous "unknown unknowns" speech in that there are events which need to be observed before they can be objectively defined.
Looking forward to your comparison of the TOTL AT family carts.
Peace, |
Dear Henry, Nice word, "furphy". But I think you defined it incorrectly, even though it is of Australian origin. The on-line dictionaries all define it as "an unsubstantiated rumor". You defined it as follows: " 'furphy'....unable to be substatiated under any objective criteria". There is a difference between "unsubstantiated" and "unable to be substantiated". More of a furphy is the idea that all direct-drive turntables sound best with no plinth. (Could not resist; fun intended.)
That's the scuttlebutt, and I'm stickin' to it. |
On the Shure lineage,
I had a dear friend who was wholly familiar with the entire range (meaning he owned and lived with...). He swore blind that the Ultra 500 out performed everything else that they ever produced.
I never found his opinion to have been too far off the mark. For what that's worth. |
Dear Timeltel: Well this was only a " stop " on that " boring AT " comparison " but things are " walking " I almost finish.
Regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Greetings Lew and Professor, I'm tickled that you like 'furphy'........I agree that its a bonza word especially here downunder. It always intrigues me when I read an audio review (mostly on cartridges, phono stages or pre-amps), where the Reviewer concludes that this component is so good and revealing, that it makes half your records sound bad!!? Don't buy this component they often warn, if you don't want to hear the weak links of your system? Say what??!! This component is SOOOO good....that it's bad?! Do these people think we are morons or is the world of audio circulating in a parallel universe where up is down and right is wrong? This is similar to the claim by Raul that a cartridge can sound so good (Wow) in our multiple systems.......but is really only 'average' because our systems have 'distortions'? Yet other cartridges which some of us find disappointing in our systems, are so good that they only sound bad because of these same unspecified 'distortions' in our systems? Huh?! Up is down.....right is wrong. A true furphy recognised as such by the official Australian Furphy Registration Board :-) |