Hi T-Bone' My Graham is the 2.2 and there was no problem mounting/setting up the 4000D in its jig. Most of the cartridges that I have sit towards the back of the arm slots. The 4000D is the 1st cartridge that I've had that had to be set more into the center of the slots to align properly. Still had room for more foward/backward positioning if it was needed. Concidering how much I like the 4000DIII, I quess their won't be a Graham Phantom arm in my future. Thanks for the heads up! |
Dear T_bone, I didn't say that MOI was the over riding issue for longer arm inferiority. I said it was a disadvantage. The cart not only moves constantly toward the center of the record, it also moves in response to the movements of the stylus/cantilever. That assembly has a certain springiness, but what is the "fixed" object the assembly pushes against on the back end? The cart body is attached firmly to the arm which must respond to vertical movements with warps and back and forth movements with off-center records. All these movements are actually angular because the cart is constantly moving inward. Regards, |
In_shore, The EPA-100Mk2 I had rebuilt/modded was in pretty terrible cosmetic condition, and the VTA ring had come unstuck, and it had cigarette smoke residue gumming up the bearings slightly. I had the arm completely overhauled/cleaned, some of the silk-screening redone, the ruby bearings replaced with higher quality (greater degree of roundness compared to the original rubies) silicon nitride bearings, and got it rewired from headshell collar to phono stage inputs with shielded solid-core silver air-cotton dielectric and silver Eichmanns. The original P3 arm can be brought up to EA-3 standards by using some kind of damping material on the armband. The 'dynamic resonance absorber' can be replicated with a thin strip of sponge wrapped semi-tightly by a piece of lead tape, with the bulk placed just in front of the place where the armwand plugs into the main pivot. On the EA-3-style arms, i have had a few (still do). One EA-3 (the newer one with built-in DRAs) and one original are as original. One original arm has been factory-rewired recently.
I will be trying the Empire/Yamamoto HS-3 combo later this weekend. It was discussed and I had never used one so I found one and snagged it. Looking forward to it. The boxwood is slightly heavier than the cherry it seems. |
Griffithds, you have to thank In_shore for the warning about the Phantom and the Empire. I have never tried the pair. |
T_bone, The very best arm I have found for very high-compliance cartridges is the Continuum Copperhead. This is out of the 10 or so vintage and modern arms I have mounted in my system. The Copperhead recommendation is academic though as it was re-wired with DaVinci Grandezza wiring due to RFI problems with the original unshielded Copperhead phono wiring. The second best arm I have found for high-compliance MM cartridges, strangely enough, is the high-mass Fidelity Research FR-66S. Go figure?
In_shore, I'm currently listening to the Empire 4000DIII in the Copperhead and it is quite luminescent although I agree with you that the MA-505S with a Yammy headshell punches above its weight.
Griffithds, do you have another arm for the MMs or are you only using the Graham 2.2 as I found the Phantom 2 to be a rather poor match with high-compliance MM cartridges? |
Hi T bone, I am enjoying the EPA 100MKII tonearm very much. Even with the stock cable and wiring I like it better than my rewired EPA 500. Both these tonearms are very user friendly and great designs.
Since the tonearm is new to me I am not sure how to tweak the damping adjustment for best sound, I have been just mostly setting it at recommended amount dependant on cartridge compliance. Any tips for adjusting damping on the EPA 100 tonearm?
About bearing friction, low bearing friction allows the cartridge do its job easier, track the record grooves accurately without needing to "fight" the arm drag? Or am I wrong on this assumption? |
Hi Halcro,
My primary table is the VPI Aries with the Graham 2.2 arm. I have 4 wands, one of which is his ceramic wand. The other 3 are his standard wands, alum I think. Believe me, I have no problem with MM cartridgs on the rig. Before I started reading this thread, I was using primarily MC cartridges. The Benz Micro Ruby III, Blue Oasis by Win Sau, Denon 103R with Expert Stylus ruby cantilever and a Paratrace stylus, and my MM's were the Clearaudio Vituroso Wood and a Otofron M20FL. Due to this thread, I purchased a Audio Technics AT15sa and installed a AT20ss stylus. This has become my favorite cartridge, as good as the RubyIII. I have not used it long enough to state it's better, so leave it just as good as. Years ago, some outfit in Japan were making these thin lead shims that were to be used (sandwidged), between the cartridge and the headshell, arm wand in the case of the Graham. They were for resonace control on the plastic bodied cartridges that were coming out at that time. I quickly discovered they also add weight the the front of the tone arm. At that time I was using a SOTA Saphire table with a Alphason HR arm. The lead wedge vastly improved the compliance issues I was having with various cartridges (Denons), at that time. During that era, the term compliance was not banterned around. You were just told you needed to use a lighter/heavier arm when certain cartridge were installed.I have continued using those same lead shims as needed to this day. When I install any cartridge, I expect it to sound great. If it doesn't, I try the shim. I have been susprised more thatn once doing this. |
Hi In_shore,
Sorry I confused your threat with T_bones. Thank you for your imput about the Phantom. I have considered selling my 2.2 and buying the new Phantom. I would of had to give up all the multiple arm wands I use, and buy additional phantom wands. We are talking big $$$ hear. Because of your comment about the 4000D setup issues on the Phantom, I will just keep what I have. Thank you again. |
Halco,
I have been thinking about your comment comparing the issues of the Phantom arm with the 2.2 arm. I wish the Pantom was intended to be a upgraded 2.2 but it wasn't. Bob designed a completely different arm when he built the Phantom. Parts are not interchangable. I tried to order from Bob, the Phantom wands for my 2.2 and was told by Bob that I might be able to swap a few screws B/T the two arms but that is about all. Each arm seems to have issues, but they are not the same issues. The needs of a MM cartridges did not seem to be on Bob's mind when he designed his latest creation |
A silly thought (perhaps) - MM went through its fall into shadow around the same time that the big (Japanese) LT manufacturers pulled out of the market.
Was Linear Tracking a logical development associated with high compliance MM? The two do coincide, and the disappearance of mainstream LT also appears to coincide with the fall from grace of MM cartridges.
Is T_Bones comment about LT being an ideal solution to High compliance a marker to why LT rose to prominence.... and also perhaps to why it fell from favour when MC's became dominant (along with low compliance)?
Are the inherent compromises with pivoted arms least evident with low compliance, and the inherent compromises of LT's least evident with high compliance?
In particular I am thinking of short arm LT's with tracking happening directly over the record... Long arm LT's may be quite different beasts - my LT experience so far is with the Revox.
bye for now
David |
Dear Griffthds: 1) that cartridge ranking was a little old and maybe not useful today where not only I heard a lot more different cartridges but where I made some system ( important. ) changes/improvements to my audio system. All in all those Ortofon are very good and in those times I prefer by a " hair " the E over the FL but I can't say today.
2) you already have answers. 3) I can do it after you send your cartridges as a present to me!! 3') I own that Clearaudio that I really don't test it yet. I had same information on its performance as you experienced. The cartridge ( I understand ) is made it by AT for Clearaudio. I will give a listening and report about. 4) No, Azden designed and manufactured standard mount models like these ones: http://www.vinylengine.com/cartridge_database.php?m=Azden&t=mm&mod=&sort=1&Search=Search&sty=&ovlo=&ovhi=&can=&dclo=&dchi=&stid=&masslo=&masshi=¬es=&prlo=&prhi=
even you can buy one of these here: http://www.adelcom.net/AzdenCart1.htm , only have caution with this cartridge source because almost all experiences that persons in this forum had were dissapointing ones for say the least.
5) I can see that you are really " armed " to run the great analog LP road!!!
Thank to you to remember my birthday, appreciated.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Travbrow: Thanks to bring the Supex cartridge here.
The one I tested is the SM-100MK2 that even that comes with two different stylus: 38E ( elliptical. ) and the 5 ( conical. ) my tests were with the 38E. The cartridge was designed for 4ch. too so it takes advantage with the 100kohms on load impedance.
No WOW factor here at first glance, it take me some time to made a near perfect cartridge set up on VTA/SRA and capacitance loading ( 350pf added. ). VTF set up at 1.40grs and Supex recommend Grace tonearms for it so I mounted in my Grace G-945 in an AT-D 8.5grs aluminum headshell.
After set-up and settle down playback hours the word that came to my mind about its quality performance level is: just great performer.
The music flows freely with out any added tiny rough as the nagatron. The cartridge lets the music goes into your ears with no single obstacle, it never tell you: I'm here.
Beautiful natural tonal balance with very good performance top to bottom. If you don't have nothing on hand to compare it you can swear there is nothing that can beat it. Well, I compare it against the AT 180 ML-OCC and I was really surprised that can compete at this very high top quality. The main differences are as almost always at both frequency extremes especially in the bass where the Supex has a little more rounded response than the AT that has the rigthness in this frequency range at the 100CMK4 quality level, so we are talking here of the best of the best in the comparison for the very very humble Supex. IMHO a winner with very low distortions either from tracking abilities and cartridge body/stylus assembly resonances.
Only for the records: the Supex is very good tracker an almost pass all my tests on the subject, as an example the cartridge is abble to pass all 16 cannon shots on the Telarc but the first and the last one.
Yes, it can compete and gives a good challenge to any cartridge I know.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
T_Bone and Halcro with all of your experience your comments on your top choice of tone arms is highly valued. No doubt there are others here , so please join.
|
Hi Raul,
Hope you had a wonderful birthday. I had to laugh to your answer to (3). You have a good since of humor. In reply to your comment about this paticular Clearaudio being made by AT answers a lot of questions I've had about Clearaudio in general. If it was not for this cartridge, I would say I didn't like anything Clearaudio had to offer. I have heard a lot of them and they all sound thin to me. I have a reply sent to me from Wyndham Hodgson of Expert Stylus in the UK. I had inquired about a retip and this was his reply. I have tried to attack it here but no luck, so I wil retype for you to read. I quote what he has written____"I should point out that we have never been impressed with Clearaudio cartridges, they are very expensive and one can purchase very much cheaper cartridges sounding equally as good if not better".___end of quote. I decided not to retip it. |
Dear Travbrow: The Supex ( after set up " right ". ) has an immediate WOW factor free of distortions against other WOWs full of distortions.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
I have just recieved in the mail today, a cartridge body that I bought on eBay. I think I got ripped off. It is a Empire 4000DIII. This identification, on my other 4000D cartridges, has been stenciled/painted on. This one has a decal? Also my other 4000D's had the pin locations color coded. This one does not. The pins are also rough like sloppy soldering. Also the gold body has forming stretch marks in it. My other 4000D bodies are very smooth. Any one out there have simillar 4000D's as I have described? To look at it, it sure looks like a 4000D, removal mounting bracket and all. Any chance the Empire QA went down hill at the end of their run? I did mount it with a know DIII stylus. It does sound like an Empire, but just not a good one. Before I contact the seller I thought I would get some backup to my question as stated above. Thanks for your input in advance. |
Hi guys- I think mentioning the most basic aspects of the tonearm and cartridge relationship will clarify some thoughts above:
Above ~10Hz, the tonearm must remain motionless. This includes any vibrations of the tonearm structure and any 'chatter' or 'looseness' in its bearings.
Below ~10 Hz, the tonearm must move in any direction unhindered by friction, so that the stylus and cantilever do NOT move.
Why ~10 Hz? Because it lays between the most common warp frequencies and the lowest tones of music.
That transition between the motionless and freely-moving condition is a 'mechanical crossover', governed by four factors: -- The arm's effective moving mass (its moment of inertia) -- The compliance (softness) of the cartridge's suspension -- Any damping in the arm and in a cartridge's suspension (and any Pickering, Stanton or Shure type of brush) -- The friction in the arm's bearings (also = damping)
One aspect of any crossover, mechanical or electronic, including any subsonic filter, is that they all create phase shift on the way down to that 10Hz. Phase shifts are also time delays in the signals.
While all of us could care less what happens down at 10 or even 20Hz, that phase shift begins in the middle bass. The only way to minimize it up there is to get that 'crossover frequency' even lower, far below 10Hz, which means we then must play very-flat records.
The increased phase shift at 40-80Hz from using a low-mass arm with a low-compliance (stiff) cartridge adds more time-delay to the bass. One then hears less-distinct bass, which can sound like sluggish rhythm, less 'propulsion' to the song, for example. Also, the generator at the end of the cantilever spends more time off-center, which affects many other aspects of reproduction, including tracking ability.
Increased tonearm-bearing friction also makes the generator-end spend more time off-center via record warps and off-center pressings, and from that slow inward-spiral velocity.
Increased effective VERTICAL moment of inertia (vertical effective moving mass) lowers the transition frequency.
Increased HORIZONTAL effective moving mass only hurts on warps that 'tilt' while going up and down. Very high horizontal effective moving mass, as in Dynavector's DV-505 tonearm, reduces phase shift in that 40-80Hz range by lowering that ~10Hz transition frequency in the HORIZONTAL direction. This seems worthwhile since low bass is often a mono signal, a L-R motion only.
Finally, it is much easier to visualize many aspects of analog reproduction when all dimensions are magnified by a factor of 500. A fully-modulated L-R (mono) bass groove would then appear about one inch wide, peak to peak, with the pivot of the tonearm nearly 400 feet away.
I must add that changes in electrical loading also affect the phase shift beginning in the low-treble, something as audible as any broadband change in frequency response.
Hope this helps!
Best regards, Roy Green Mountain Audio |
Thanks Roy, Your summary of the forces and relationships makes perfect sense (at least to me). And from that, I can see that formulae may be derived to calculate and prove all that you say.....after all, it's not rocket science?.......or with the calculations of forces on moving masses and their reactions.....perhaps it IS rocket science :-) |
Roy, What a nice, clear explanation - an excellent contribution to this thread and to understanding of tonearm/cart interactions. I agree it makes perfect sense (again, to me). I had certainly left out the aspect of sub-10Hz resonance, partly because I was specifically trying to limit the discussion to flat, perfectly-centered records (I don't think talking about ideal tonearm design should be centered around the problem of dealing with warps). Your comment about too-low MOI (vs. compliance) effecting a higher range for phase shift was especially interesting. Thinking about it in physical terms certainly brings the concept of 'phase shift' to the fore.
In_shore, There are any number of arms which do admirably well with high compliance carts. Many date from the same era as the relatively inexpensive MMs discussed on this thread, and many of those are now relatively inexpensive too. The Micro Seiki MA-505, the Victor 7045/7082, the original EPA-100, the Audiocraft AC-3000/4000 were all made to be able to deal with the carts which were popular at the time in Japan, and there was, as Dlaloum pointed out, an era when high compliance was King (but I will point out also that the era did not last forever... The King is Dead! Long Live the King!).
Dlaloum, I am not sure I said LT would be the 'ideal solution' but it certainly has it's place. I might agree with you about making the distinction between short arm LT and long-arm LT, but I think i'd have to think about it some more. A friend reminded me earlier today of some of Teragaki's efforts in linear trackers (which required flat, centered records in order to work). I have never seen one in person but the concepts seem valid. |
Dear Travbrow: Could you share your experiences with your Supex SM-100MK3? and one question: its stylus has the SMM/38E ID?, thank you.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Royj: How I wish to have in home a fully laboratory with the right tools to make this extremely interesant cartridge/tonearm in motion relationship research and the why's of the perceived quality sound and determine which are the precise trade-offs with different cartridge and tonearm choices designs.
I was trying to remember any experience I had with a low compliance cartridge mounted in a low effective mass tonearm but I can't remember of any, maybe is time to confirm ( comparing. ) what you stated about. I have to give me the time to test it.
Good to hear from you again.
regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Griffithds: Interesting what Expert people said because I like the Clearaudio LOMC cartridge designs.
This week I will try to give a listen to my MM Clearaudio and see what I hear.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Raul, Do you really like the sound of Clearaudio MC cartridges, or is it their "design" and construction? I ask because I have disliked the sound of every single Clearaudio MC that I ever heard, and this includes the Insider Gold (in a Walker Proscenium tt), etc. They all sound thin and steely to me. None portray the harmonics and richness of real music, IMO. Also, I think of their sound as the antithesis of what I like about these vintage MM and MI cartridges. |
A fact of lighter tracking MM cartridges would be lps that are not flat. My 4000d tracking at 1g has no problems on relatively flat lps. Records that are more than slightly warped it will skip. I have a idea using the hot Louisiana sun and some12X12 marble floor tiles to flatten a warped test lp out. My previous MC tracking at 2g had no problems tracking these lps |
Hi Stltrains,
Shure discusses the issues of tracking in their technical seminar paper from 1978...
They resolved it with the introduction of the damping brush...
ie: to at least some degree the solution was found to be damping...
Also where the arm/cartridge resonance is a mismatch - mistracking is a likely consequence as the resonance not only shifts in frequency but also (apparently) increases in magnitude. (I have not measured this aspect - so it is hearsay)
But it is clear that a high compliance cart. in a heavier arm will place the resonance close to the critical warp frequencies, and if that resonance and the warp frequency get close to coinciding.... then your stylus starts to take ski-jump lessons....
If the resonance is damped... this goes away - if the arm/cartridge are well matched (f=10Hz or thereabouts) the frequency is far enough away for the stylus suspension to handle it on its own. (although damping the resonance can still improve things)
I've seen a Shure V15VMR track spectacular warps on a light arm with the brush down.... On the other hand many cartridges have a reputation of requiring flat records to track properly on the ultra light revox linear tracking arm. (I will be checking this shortly with several cartridges.... with an without damping brush...)
My gut feeling from my own previous experience is that it is a matching and damping issue...
bye for now
David |
Hi Raul,
Seeking some advice please.
I have tried both Grace F9 Ruby and Garrott Brothers P77 at 100 setting and the results are quiet, dull and lifeless compared to 47 - am I doing something wrong?
Kind regards John |
Lewm, Your description of the Clearaudio cartridges surprises me."Thin and steely" is certainly not a characteristic I would use after having the Clearaudio Insider Gold and Concerto in my system over several years. Lush and coloured would be more like the sound I heard from them ...especially the Insider. This is not to say that this describes the sound of the good MM cartridges but rather that the Clearaudios, unlike most of the other LOMCs I had heard, were more akin to that quality of 'presence'. |
Regards, Stltrains (T_bone, are you still there?): Stltrains, is there evidence the Empire's suspension is bottoming out on these extreme warps? Resonance is the usual suspect but the recently discussed MOI in the vertical plane could be a factor, too. Just wondering if your arm is static or dynamically balanced and if you can damp it. VPI?
T_bone: I've three arms. No, I've three TONEarms. EPA-250, EPA-500H and a Black Widow. Low med, low and low low mass, statically balanced and never (Stltrains) a tracking issue with any high compl. cart. Anyway, I'm lusting after a gorgeous DD Pio. Exclusive PL-70L 11, the P3's little bro. It's equipped with the carbon-fiber "S" arm, not the straight pipe. Although the low-mass CF straight pipe (or ceramic) is available I prefer the removable headshell option: Enjoyed four cartridges today, an ADC XLM-11 improved cart, an AT20SS, a Signet TK7LCa and also a TK7SU with a fresh AT14 Shibata stylus recently transplanted into an OEM Signet grip, an unanticipated treat for the ears.
So the intention is to replace the second-system Tech. SP-25/Black Widow, an old compadre from the late '70's which would then go to my son's basement rig. I like the prospect, he already has my SX-980 and four even older original Large Advents, all rebuilt and with the SP-25/BW would be a reunion of my 1978 rig. (Raul would cringe) :).
I'm fairly sure the AT20SS at 10x6cm/dyne-100Hz (about as low compl. as any I run) will be OK on the PL 70L arm, not so sure about the other carts. Any thoughts? Lateral improvement? Poor match for the above carts? Keep the bullet-proof SP-25/BW?
I suspect you know the PL-70L 11 so your thoughts (and of course any others' opinions) are welcome.
Peace, |
Dear Professor, I love the looks of the Pioneer PL-70L......particularly that cool ebony lush veneer. I'm sure T_bone will have some pertinent experience to pass on? Good luck. Henry |
Please forgive the off-topic wanderings... I have had the PL70LII, the PL-50L, PL-7L, the P10, and the P3. I think there is excellent bang for buck in the whole line of Stable Hanging Rotor tables if you can abide the strong yen and shipping costs, both of which make them less attractive in USD terms than just a few years ago (but in yen terms, prices haven't moved).
As a general rule, I would not buy a TT with two removable armwands as standard unless I could get both with it. With the PL-70LII and higher, the straight arm is the one suitable for high-compliance carts.
An issue with these tables is that motors are less easily transplantable to other plinths, and in the case of the P3, a plinth change, while not absolutely impossible, would require some CAD work, and multiple pieces fit around the structure in order to make it work. You'd also have to be careful not to overload the springs too much as it would change the resonant frequency of the under-structure. An arm change on any of them in stock form is not likely to be easy outside the possibility of the AC4000/4400, for which there is an adaptor which works with the P3, and could probably be made to work on the PL70 and above.
The motors are generally nice. I think the P3 is a stonking bargain.
And now back to your regularly-scheduled program.... |
Stltrains, as The Good Professor suggested, I'd bet you need more MOI but that will get me in trouble around here :^) so instead I'd suggest checking the resonant frequency and trying to get a better match at the other end of the range... :^). (phew) |
Stltrain's comment on 8-14-11 about MM tracking forces I feel is the main reason the MC became the desired cartridge to have . I remember the horable QA contol issues that were present back in the 70's and 80's pertaining to record albums. Not just warps, bet some so were thin you could almost hear what was on the other side. As MM's touted how low they could track, most at less than 1 gram, they were shooting themselves in the foot. The only thing at the time that could track this crap was the MC's. With their rising high frequency responce and demands they put on the phono stages at the time, is it not a wonder that CD's were able to step in and damn near kill analog! Records are no longer mass produced in large quainties, therefore QA has improved. Materials are better. This thread has revitilzied the use of our beloved MM cartridges. I don't think it could have happened if all we had to listen to was the warped, thin noisy crap of the past. I have records in which I have placed a red dot on the plastic sleeves that I use. It means can't play with MM's. Thankfully I have multiple arm wands (Graham), and can quickly switch to a MC when I want to play these. |
Dear Justjb: No I don't think you are doing something wrong. Any cartridge set up to achieve top performance depend on the tonearm match and what the audio system " has to say ", so it is dependable on that.
In my system both cartridges performs very good at 47 but a little better at 100k. Other factor that has influence is loading capacitance where you need to " play " a little as with VTA/SRA. Both cartridges are very good and not lifeless at 100k but if you are achieving good performance at 47k then left in that way and enjoy it.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Thanks, T-bone. Have found a source (Japan) for the PL-70L's C-F straight pipe, ceramic version too. Reading btwn the lines, the curved wand is massy? Info. on these decks is scarce unless one reads Japaneese so I appreciate your experience and willingness to share it.
Peace, |
Hi Stltrains, According to the cart database the 4000D/I has a max VTF of 1.75g. The others max at 1.25g. Why 1g? They all have a dynamic cu of 30. I'd think you could probably go a little higher than 1.25 if necessary. I don't have one of these so I'm just going by the VE info.
FWIW, MOI generally goes up or down with eff mass. Regards, |
Timeltel , Just for price and condition comparisons regarding your interest with the Pioneer line. Tommy Cheuk of Top Class Audio out of Hong Kong has a few Pioneer tables up for sale, PL-70, PL-70LII, Exclusive including a separate sale of a Pioneer Alumina ceramic wand.
T_Bone would certainly know better then me regarding going street prices however Cheuk does have a Exclusive P-10 with the EA-10 arm overall in 9 out of 10 condition for $4.200.00 bucks which maybe quite reasonable. I would of snapped it up but I have other expenses going on in my system now.
A breif mention of the AT 20SS, it does not like wood shell heads, well the only two woodys that I have at least. The Yamamoto boxwood and a Koetsu rosewood head shell. I sense the music wants to burst out but it can't.
Further about wood head shells I mentioned above that I removed the finger lift from the Yamamoto for reasons that I did not do a forensic analysis why,just that something was bothersome. It turned out I can hear the thing vibrate also the head shell itself without the finger lift, you will hear it.
This was confirmed using the head phone jack of a active Placette preamp with the stunning Sony mdr ryos headphones. .....Good Lord I have problems I need to address with my speakers and room.
|
Dear Stltrains: For happened what you posted with yiur 4000D3 IMHO or there is a severe mistmatch between tonearm/cartridge combination or that cartridge came with a big suspension problem or that tonearm has a bearing trouble.
Here you can read about that subject: http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1275323834
where I normally run at 1.0grs but even at 0.5grs there is no problems with this Empire cartridge.
I have to add that in all my years of audio experiences I never had that kind of trouble with any cartridge either MM/MI or LOMC.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear griffithds: I never had that kind of trouble with any cartridge and I own too many LPs from the 70-80's.
Now, the higher or lower VTF value is not what determine the cartridge tracking ability. IMHO any LP that a MC cartridge can " read " any MM/MI can read it too and if not then there is a mistmatch down there on the cartridge/tonearm set-up.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Dear Henry, Perhaps my language was a little too strong in describing my feelings about the Clearaudio, but suffice to say I would not buy one based on what I heard more than once in my friend's very expensive system, which includes an all-Walker front end, tube amplifiers, von Schweikert spkrs. But obviously ancillary components, no matter how expensive or carefully selected, can sometimes have a very large positive or negative effect on the "sound" we perceive to be inherent to a phono cartridge. I am still wondering about Raul's opinion. |
Dear In_shore: Aluminum headshells as the AT LS-12 makes a very good match with the 20SS. This cartridge is very sensitive on what is mounted but when already is like it like it it is a great performer.
regards and enjoy the music, raul. |
Hi Raul,
I didn't mean to inply that this is a MM/MC comparrision tracking issue. My Clearaudio Virtroso Woods which is a MM, tracks ever record I've ever played it on. But then it tracks at, and I have it set at, 2 grams. If you don't have records that skip (tracking at the recommended 1 gram or less),on the lead-in groove pinch warps, great. I do have records that skip when tracking at 1 gram or less on the lead-in groove warps. Not a problem at 1.5, 1.75, 2.0, or even in case of my Denon 103R, 2.5 grams settings. By the way, I long ago stopped looking at the red dots and just played my records. It wasn't until resently, I had a skip on a lead-in groove. The cartridge was tracking at 1 gram. It just happened to be a MM. Lately, because of this thread, I have been having a steady diet of the MM's. But perhaps your right Raul. Perhaps it is a set-up issue. My Adzen should be arriving soon. I'll tear down the 4000DIII and pay extra carfull attention to the Azden set-up. |
Dear Lewm: I almost concur with you on the Dyscovery model that's is a little on the analytical side and not an easy cartridge with tonearms on choice.
In the other side my experiences with my Insider Gold is different and if not the best cartridge for accuracy I can tell you that in my system I can't detected a thinh/steely or cold " color ". I had a two days experience with the Reference ( a model in between the Insider and Dyscovery. ) in a Rockport TT and if I detected something on the steely side was only that because the cartridge was not fully settled-down I remember it as a little on the bright side but this and the Insider are good performers in the bass and mid.bass frequency range where the Discovery is more analytical.
Now, the Clearaudio are a little jelaously on the tonearm and phono cable and asked for very precise VTA/SRA set-up. Maybe the Walker tonearm is not the best match for the Clearaudio cartridges and you have to remember that even with tubes those speakers are alittle" agressive " on the highs.
Yes, I agree with you that those Clearaudios did not match the richness of the MM/MI but all we know: which LOMC can do it?
Last Clearaudio I listened in my system was the Stradivari and I did not found out with a thin sound but all we know that in this quality performance cartridge behavior things are system/set-up dependent, with the Clearaudios load impedance can be an issue.
Anyway, I posted that I like it but that does not means that I prefer over top MM/MI cartridges.
Regards and enjoy the music, Raul. |
Regards, In_shore: The P-10 is reputed to be second only to the P3 in Pioneer's Japan only offerings. I thank you for your interest. If the not quite mega-table PL-70L 11 offers a real improvement over the SP-25/BW (I suspect it will), then an upgrade to the main rig may be considered but would first need to compare the Pio. to the versitile EPA-250 or alternate high compliance friendly EPA-500H arm. Perhaps, like Henry with his eight arms, I should consider becoming an octopod?
Interesting comments about the AT20SS, finger lifts and headshells. The 20SS was tried on both a Jeweltone 8.5 gm headshell and one of my "go-to" ADC 7.5gm magnesium shells. With both, midrange resonance was unacceptable but settled down with the boxwood Yammie. Dynamics at the extremes were retained but the stylus was then still in the break-in process. Over 50 hours on it now, it's probably time to revisit options. It's not inconcievable it'll be found overly damped now but at the time I did like what the Yammie HS3 did in bringing coherence to the mids.
Raul, thanks for the input. Now my curiosity is up. Will try the 20SS with a 12gm AT shell that should be coming in soon, an AT15XE cart as part of the package, but 20+ total grams pushes the 250 arm to it's max. If I understand T_bone correctly, the PL-70L should handle that load without breaking stride. Elements of varying tonearm/headshell mass, material and how resonance is distributed or contained make set recommendations difficult but the sharing of information is always valuable and for me, welcome. Two carts, two styli, two headshells, eight variations possible there. Aha! An experiment!
Peace, |
All thanks for your very informative responses I should have described the mistracking better. Of all the lps played in the 70 or so hours I have on 4000d3 only 2 or 3 have jumped on nicely warped lps. The suspension is fine and the sound is wonderful. I have played with vta and prefer 1g. Like was mentioned marking the severey warped seems the answer. Thanks to all of you again and believe this I am not looking back when it comes to MM cartridges. |
Raul, Thank you for your advise with the AT 20SS,.. you made out o.k. on your birthday? I understand you Mexicans are similar to the Italians when it comes to celebrations, great food and drink, no doubt it was memorable.
Timeltel , If you get your hands on a PL-70L II I hope it turns out to be a fabulous step up in performance for you, very handsome looking too.
|
Regards, In_shore: Thanks. The loyal SP25/Black Widow is otherwise adequate for the purpose but in the small home office it's in and with the 170 yr. old pine board floors, both acoustic and mechanical resonance is causing woofer-pumping and feedback distortion. A servicable "plug & play" deck with a fluid damped arm is an attractive proposition and I do appreciate all the input.
AT15XE/headshell arrived today. For those who'd like to know: Fine tapered alu. alloy cantilever & nude .2 x .7 ellipt. Two hours in, this is a nice sound. Soundstage is starting to tighten up as channel balance improves. Hopefully leading edge attack will pick up definition as the suspension loosens up, a cart with this pedigree has no business sounding so, ummm, romantic.
Raul, the 15XE will stay mounted on the 12gm AT HS until run in but I'm looking forward to trying your suggestion, the 20SS on what seems like a good headshell matchup for the EPA-250.
Peace, |
Raul, Thanks for taking the time to respond. I agree with the logic. The whole system was brand new, including the Insider Gold, when I listened to it, surely that could have been a factor in the sound. However, Lloyd Walker himself came my friend's home to set everything up, so I doubt there was any issue around improper adjustments of the turntable or tonearm. Did not much care for those von Schweikert speakers, however. (They would now be 6-8 years old.) Every several years von Schweikert undergoes a sea change in their design philosophy, and this was not one of their better efforts. So what I was hearing that made my ears bleed could largely have been a function of the speakers per se. Still, "lush" is not a word that I have heard frequently as a descriptor of Clearaudio MCs. |
Banquo.363: I want to personelly thank you for refurring me to the audiogon ad for the Azden YM-P50Vl. Being NOS it came with the mounting adapter. This is an absolutely amazing 3 demensional cartridge. My smaller system which I listen to in the near field, is a 3 pc. The sound stage literally fill the entire room. Depth, height, absolute magic. It sounds so real it's almost scarry. And to think this cartridge has been out of production for years. Sad really. |
You're welcome, Griffithds. I'm happy to hear you're enjoying it so much. It's a great cart. |
Hello Raul, I picked up a ADC XLM3 the other day and noticed during internet homework that you owned one. The cartridge arrived in a baggy with no protection of stylus. It seems and sounds OK but I would like to replace the stylus. Have you are anyone else heard this cartridge with the XLM 2 Super with the Shibata stylus from Thakker?
Hello Timeltel, Good luck with the PL-7OL.
I finally found a Signet 7ea body and will use the AT155lc while looking for the legendary 7lca stylus. |